On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 23:59:07 -0800, "Max Hauser"
> wrote:

>Good info, CW [I don't know how to address you, by the way, with a signature
>like that]. Thanks for posting the pointer.
>
>"cwdjrxyz" in oups.com:
>> . . . The panel found 2 outstanding ...13 very good to excellent (highly
>> recommended), 106 good (recommended), 62 fair and 14 poor wines.
>
>As a point of historical information, similar coarse but useful categories
>were the standard of practice of US wine newsletters in the past, but were
>displaced when the newer, "100-point" scales became popular in the 1980s.
>(Strangely, 5-grade scales were popular,* 100-point scales were popular, but
>the 20-point "Davis" scale, intermediate in resolution and heavily marketed
>in the 1970s, never caught on.)
>
>-- Max

I suspect that the Decanter rankings will appeal to the predominantly
British audience and consequently drive the prices of the highlighted
wines out of sight. (I gave up my subscription to Decanter a few years
ago when I reaffirmed that America and Britain were two peoples
separated by a common language.)

And, let me comment on the beauty of that "100-point" scale--that's
the one in which only the fifteen points between 80 and 95 are ever
used to rate wines....;-)



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com