Great timing on this topic. I finally watched Mondovino last night, a documentary that looks into the dynamics between winemakers who play to Wine Spectator's ratings and those who don't. I'm assuming that in the question, you're asking specifically about Robert Parker's numerical ratings. Bottom line is, if you like the same kind of wine that he does, then the ones he rates highly will taste good to you. All the highly rated wines are similar to one another, no matter the grape or progeny. Wine consultants will come to your vineyard and show you the chemical processes to take, and how many Wine Spectator 'points' each step will get you, with a high degree of accuracy.

So, it's all about your own taste buds. If you like what they like, then it's accurate. If you don't, then it's not. You'll pay more for higher ratings, obviously.

Tom

 

quote:Originally posted by tiger02

Great timing on this topic. I finally watched Mondovino last night, a documentary that looks into the dynamics between winemakers who play to Wine Spectator's ratings and those who don't. I'm assuming that in the question, you're asking specifically about Robert Parker's numerical ratings.

RP's publication is the Wine Advocate, not the Wine Spectator. Though, they do use the same hundred points scale.

!luc

 

Now, on topic: they are rarely wrong, which means a 95 points will be better than a 85 points.
Will you be able to taste the difference? Likely not if you are not a regular wine taster. And if you are a regular wine taster, you don't need a magazine to tell you what is good and what is bad for your taste.

!luc

 

My concern is that I see magazines anymore as nothing more than glorified catalogues for advertisers. Magazines are fun, but when you critically evaluate them they seem nothing more than whores to the highest advertising dollar.

So does wine spectator play this political game, never bad mouthing a well paying advertising, yet never giving credit to unknowns. I don't actually see this as they do pick out some really unknown wines.

But, I am no master sommelier.


Constantly Improving my Sartorial Style

 

quote:Originally posted by Luc

RP's publication is the Wine Advocate, not the Wine Spectator. Though, they do use the same hundred points scale.

!luc

[:I] Oops
Point still stands though, as the raters almost never disagree.

As for finding 'hidden gems,' oftentimes a maker will re-lable one wine in a way that will sell better in a different region. Or, two otherwise unaffiliated vineyards will employ the same consultant and make nearly identical wines.

My advice, find a merchant whom you trust, and tell him what you like. After a few bottles he'll be able to pin your tastes down and make other recommendations.

Another possibility is to find an importer whose tastes match your own, and keep an eye out for wines that he imports. This will give you an enormously wide variety. You are right to be suspicious of the magazines; and again, a 95 is only better than an 85 if it is more to your taste.

Tom

 

I wine friend of mine, whose knowledge of wine is incredibly vast and he can wax poetic about producers of $10 through $500 wines, once asked me a question. I was telling him how I found a great 92 point (WS) wine for about $25. He reminded me that he had recommended to me another producer of the same grape, in the same region, for less money, which I really, really liked. I told him, yeah but this is a 92 point wine and your wine was only rated 85. He asked, "What does a point taste like?"

 

I agree 100% with the last two posts!

Wine Spectator is a waste of time, there are so many great wines out there and who knows what's influencing their reviews.

Find a merchant who can adapt to your preferences and spending habbits, then patronize them as much as possible. Who knows what delicious perks may crop up down the road!

-spence

 

Read the reviews of better writers such as Jancis Robinson / www.Jancisrobinson.com
and then taste and taste and taste..........

K.A. Adams

 

I subscribe to Parker's service, and he has a more discerning palate than the WS.They overrate wines,accept too many "classic" style vintages as being age worthy, and they have a fetish for the "boutiqueifaction" of California.I have enjoyed old special issues, namely on Paris and Diningg In France, and yet, like many critics, they underestimate the pleasures of fine service, and overemphasize need to experience the 'wow' factor.I will take the elegantly conservative Auberge Du L'Ill over the pyrotechniques of a Pierre Gagnaire, any day.They may get bored eating salmon souffle, but not me.

Parker is a great consumer advocate, and he clearly outshines the WS when it comes to discovering low priced available wines from more obscure varietals and regions.Parker is less snobby and he pushes the vinters much harder to make more accessible, pleasurablle wines.

 

I like Wine Spectator, but less and less for its wine ratings and more for the articles. I am growing particularly negative about John Laube, the California reviewer. I mean, 82 points for the 2003 Kongsgaard syrah??? WS has good articles about wine regions, wine-friendly restaurants, wine generally, etc., which Parker and Tanzer's publications don't have to the same extent.

Robert Parker's Wine Advocate and Stephen Tanzer's International Wine Guide (Review? I forget the name) are both better in terms of reviews. More consistent. Especially when it comes to California.

 

I like the reccomendations from the WSJ's Tastings column. At least, they seem to have a similar taste to my own.

CT

 

I think they are a good source to use as a guideline. There is a certain amount of subjectivety in wine tasting, so you still have to first please your own palate regardless of what someone else might think.

I don't use any one person's opinion on such matters as a definitive source.

 

Parker is less snobby? Give me a break. He's one the snobbiest critics out there, on any subject. It's also a little strange to compare his palate to an entire magazine since Wine Spectator has a number of different reviewers. Most of the rest of Bespokelovers post I'll agree with. Except for more "accessible pleasurable" wines bit. That's cleary subjective. (Parker pushes them to make wines he will like. If you don't like Parker's tastes, and many don't, he's not doing anyone any favors by pushing vinters.) Which gets me to my main point: if you're going to utilize a wine reviewer, focus on what they focus on. Find the varietals and styles you like and then compare them to what the reviewer likes among those varietals and styles. For example, if you try a few 90 point rated by Parker northern Rhone reds and really like them, and can find the same components in them that he does, you'll probably find it worthwhile to drop the cash on a 97 point Rhone red as a splure. I find Parker, Tanzer, and WS useful, but only if you use them properly.

 

the only way to determine how good a wine is (read: how much YOU like it) is to taste the wine. that is why the best way to purchase wine is to attend tastings, which many quality wine shops regularly offer, and to buy the wine you like. however, there are many cases where it is not possible to taste the wine(s) you are interested in purchasing. in these instances, the magazine/online ratings are a useful guide. (at the same price, why not purchase the 96 point wine instead of the 88 point one?). but again, the best wine ratings are your own...

 

There are some wines that Parker gets, and some that he doesn't. He doesn't really get a lot of Burgundy, for example, and has made some embarrassing misjudgments about certain vintages there. Elsewhere, there are some really good wines that he lavishes praise on, and others where you really wonder if he ever plans to drink wine with food.

One interesting thing to follow up on--- Parker has been an unabashed partisan of the Garagistes, those vintners on Bordeaux' right bank making very concentrated wines from orphaned or neglected vineyards. Monbousquet, for example, has fallen into his orbit, as has Pavie. Clive Coates, on the other hand, has specifically panned Pavie saying that it won't last, is over-oaked, and so on. So, we will have an interesting proof statement in about 10 years when some brave soul pops a cork on the 2000 or 2003 Pavie. Is it going to go with duck or roast beef, or be better suited to cleaning grout?

A useful corrective to the "point" mania is one of the better wine-tasting jokes:

"You ever sleep with a '10'?"
"No, but one night I did two 4s and a 2."

 

the local wine superstore pushes wine, when i get home usually when i get home i don't care for their selection. i now use the wine spectator ratings- noted on some of the bins. generally the wine spectator wines are drinkable, sometimes even very good. thank god for a rating system. i wish andy had a rating system for clothes

 

My poseur brother subscribes. Last time we broke bread,followed shortly by his nose, I was offered some vino with a PRICE SICKER still on it. My brother couldn't even tell the cork had been compromised. [xx(]You have to have a basic wine education. Otherwise it's just so much Trader Joe's 3.99 Merlot. I just came home, tired and hungry. I'm having a nice Chianti with stew, bread and no fava beans. FT Ft Ft I doubt it will make any review, but the bottles a keeper for those drip candles.

 

Dont let anybody tell you what you should drink. Go to a wine merchant, ask for a selection, pay attention to what you drink and taste a lot.
RP wines will make it for some, but for others it will be côtes du rhône or Chinon. One should drink wine everyday ideally.
Give up sodas and the rest and drink little but lots of different things!

 

You must mean the "wine speculator?"

Robert Parker is much more accurate if you like big full forward wines.

The best method, of course, is spending lots of time in California, France and Germany tasting your own. I did that for years and built quite a sizable cellar, but after deciding I had more wine than 2 more livers could stand, I gave that obsession up for cars and clothes.

And I had not realized how that pursuit consumes you until I stopped. My vacations and dinners were all planned around wine. Now my restaurant choices are much broader (so long as you can dress up and wear all the new clothes this forum has suggested....<g&gt.

Perry