This is worth reading!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandsty...ience-analysis

Graham

On 6/23/2013 11:40 AM, graham wrote:
> This is worth reading!
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandsty...ience-analysis
>
> Graham
>
>
It's hard to keep track of the various rating agencies. Wine merchants
are good at posting things like "91 Points" without saying whether that
is from Wine Spectator or whatever. One does get a bit suspicious when a
91 point wine costs $10.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

graham wrote:
> This is worth reading!
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandsty...ience-analysis

This article, which contains little in the way of new information, is
really taking swipes at a straw man. How many people, beyond the
readership of the Wine Spec perhaps, really hold to the notion of
intrinsic "quality" in wine or the myth of objectivity in tasting.
Unless one is a trained "technical" taster, the tasting of wine is
inherently subjective and influenced by myriad extraneous factors. This
is one reason why I no longer do much blind tasting or even large-scale
tastings: they bear no resemblance to the way in which I actually
consume wine, which is with food over the course of an hour-or-more dinner.

Mark Lipton

"Mark Lipton" > wrote in message
...
> graham wrote:
>> This is worth reading!
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandsty...ience-analysis
>
> This article, which contains little in the way of new information, is
> really taking swipes at a straw man. How many people, beyond the
> readership of the Wine Spec perhaps, really hold to the notion of
> intrinsic "quality" in wine or the myth of objectivity in tasting. Unless
> one is a trained "technical" taster, the tasting of wine is inherently
> subjective and influenced by myriad extraneous factors. This is one
> reason why I no longer do much blind tasting or even large-scale tastings:
> they bear no resemblance to the way in which I actually consume wine,
> which is with food over the course of an hour-or-more dinner.

Well stated for many of us. However numerous straw men and their clones
wander into retail wine outlets every day, aggressively clutching their
latest
Parker or WS printouts of The Good Wines, and insist on seeing and perhaps
buying *only* wines that have scored 90 or better. The function of those who
actually taste wines and evaluate their store inclusion is trivialized and
is
indeed becoming more so. The Scoresheet Clutchers know exactly what
scores they want and insist on them, having trouble considering or buying
wines not on the Sheets. I remember when a Jancis Robinson or Steven
Tanzer review was ignored because they were not well enough known.
I wouldn't mind seeing a condensation of the Guardian article placed in
every serious retail wine shop. It wouldn't work, but it would be fun.

pavane

On 23/06/2013 23:09, Mark Lipton wrote:

> This article, which contains little in the way of new information, is
> really taking swipes at a straw man. How many people, beyond the
> readership of the Wine Spec perhaps, really hold to the notion of
> intrinsic "quality" in wine or the myth of objectivity in tasting.

Certainly not me. I had heard of all these studies before, and more!.

But a lot of people have not. And given how some experts like to
project their image, I think people in general have a reasonable
expectations that they should be able to perform better than they can.

--
www.winenous.co.uk