To: WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 02:57:50 -0400 Subject: [WSFA] Re: Wine-tasting: it's junk science From: <ronkean at juno.com> Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net> On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:55:50 -0400 mark <whitroth at 5-cent.us> writes: ... Over > the > years he has shown again and again that even trained, professional > palates > are terrible at judging wine. > ... "Only > about 10% > of judges are consistent and those judges who were consistent one > year were > ordinary the next year. > > "Chance has a great deal to do with the awards that wines win." > --- end excerpt --- The notion that wine experts are terrible at judging wine doesn't square with the observation that ordinary non-expert wine drinkers usually have little difficulty deciding for themselves that some wines are better than others, and some much better than others. Retail wine prices can vary from about $4 for a 750ml bottle, up to 20 times that price, for widely sold wines, and it just would not make sense that the buying public pays, say, $50 for a given wine, over, say, $10 for some other wine, unless the $50 wine really is thought to be better than the $10 wine, at least by those who buy the $50 wine. Even those who buy the $10 wine might well agree that the $50 wine is better, and the reason they don't buy the $50 wine is because of the cost. The 'terrible' job done by the experts at the California State Fair wine competition is probably only 'terrible' if one applies a high expectation of consistency. The +/- 4 point difference between judges tasting the same wine blind, and the similar difference between the same judge tasting the same wine more than once, and even at the same sitting, is hardly worse than the consistency achieved by the professional tasters employed by the three major wine rating publications. If one wine in the competition edges out another by just one point, then the higher rated wine may win an award in the competition, and the lower rated one will be a runner-up, and given the underlying variance, of course the winners versus the near-winners will be largely a matter of chance. But at least the winners are very probably among the best wines in the running, as would be the near-winners. If there were only 3 or 4 different wines on the market, it would be easy enough for a wine drinker to taste each of them, and decide which they like best. But, according to one of the wine publications, there are some 120,000 different wines, counting regions, wineries, varietals and available vintages, at any given time on current sale in the US, including active imports, and they have rated that many wines. Another of the wine publications has ratings on file for some 273,000 wines worldwide. So for a wine drinker who wants to sample different wines, having wine ratings and tasting notes, as imprecise as they may be, can help narrow the field. Before the 1970s, wines, and vintages, had reputations, not ratings. Wine ratings were invented in the 1970s, largely to help guide otherwise bewildered Americans who were just beginning the explore the world of wine beyond the often unremarkable American wines of the time. But in some ways the ratings phenomenon turned into a monster, because once ratings came into widespread use, sellers would automatically bump up the posted prices of high rated wines. One perverse effect was that vintners started tweaking their wines to appeal to what they thought to be the taste preferences of the rating panels, to imitate the taste of existing high rated wines, so sameness and big taste came to encroach on subtlety and individuality. There was rating inflation, driven by retailers posting on shelves only the highest rating of the three ratings available for any given wine, which in turn drives the raters to issue yet higher ratings in pursuit of greater visibility and prestige for their publication. At the same time, there is some sense that wines have generally improved over the past 30 years or more, and that may in part have been a result of ratings promoting quality consciousness, driving vintners to compete more on quality. Also, an expanding middle class around much of the world is creating unprecedented demand for good wine, which is probably good news for American wineries, if they can remain competitive. Now, there is something of a backlash emerging against wine ratings, and the Hodgson study makes good fodder for the wine drinker who has decided to pay no attention to ratings. . . ____________________________________________________________ 30-second trick for a flat belly This daily 30-second trick BOOSTS your body's #1 fat-burning hormone http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/51d3cbcb4a4a44bcb226bst04vuc