IT HAPPENS at least once a year that a few wine producers and/or critics whinge on one or other topic relating to wine ratings and awards: about the pros and cons of ‘sighted’ versus ‘blind’ tastings (with or without the labels in view); or the merits and demerits of wines being reviewed by an individual critic versus a panel of judges; about how the findings of one panel can differ from those of another when supposedly evaluating the same wines; or which panels’ or individuals’ opinions count most; and even the notion of whether winemaking is an art and wine appreciation subjective to the extent that any form of wine rating by anybody other than the purchaser is pointless…

Another good wine, so
many to choose from!

To condemn wine rating outright is ridiculous! It’s a luxury beverage, an indulgence – a myriad different characteristics and nuances appealing to our senses and vying for our affection at prices that range tremendously. It’s a commodity, traded in by the bottle, by the case, by the pallet, by the container… You get those poor souls who argue that people have such different tastes that the only palates people can trust are their own, that their opinions are sacrosanct, and then there are those producers of sub-standard or over-priced bottlings who might benefit from a ban on independent reviews. Everybody else appreciates the opinions of the experts, be they people simply looking for tips, wine lovers wishing to explore something new or different, or fellow experts who enjoy comparing notes with their peers. Given the tens of thousands of wines and every year a new vintage, even if it was possible for mere mortals to sample them all in person, the concept of saving us time and money and of being pointed in the right direction at least, is a good thing, surely!

Winemakers differentiate between various vineyards and select from different tanks and barrels in making quality and style judgements even before the wines are finished and put on sale. And it’s not just a marketing whim or gut feel that distinguishes the flagships and standard bearers from second- and third-tier ranges – sometimes the quality or character at the top end can vary to the point that a vintner may choose not to bottle a reserve wine in some years or to ‘declassify’ altogether. It is our wont to make comparisons, come up with rankings of one kind or another and gauge the value of things in just about every sphere of life – even in the case of art.

Perhaps sometime in the future it will be possible to conduct a lab test or use a machine of some sort to accurately calibrate the quality and describe the smell and taste of a wine. Maybe one day science and technology will facilitate a reliable evaluation of the style and interest value of a wine, too. But for a long time to come, fine wine assessment will remain something that people can only entrust to noses, palates and brains. What a pity that there will always be a few folk who can’t understand or won’t accept the variables and limitations when it comes to the scoring of wines – presuming of course that the bleaters don’t have ulterior motives.

Blind tastings in which the identity of the wines and the cellars are withheld from those doing the assessments are the way to go in order to avoid bias or prejudice in favour or to the detriment of wines on the basis of brand image, track record or price tag. Sighted tastings with full knowledge of where and how the wine was made, climatic and weather conditions relevant to the vintage and the history as regards longevity, for instance, make for a more detailed evaluation and a less hazy crystal ball to gaze into if attempting to forecast development or investment potential. But blind tastings are the fairest method of scoring wines and determining a pecking order at any given point in time.

There are some individuals whose wine critique ability and memory is much better than others, but no matter how good these critics are they can have off days… Even on good days, human beings can make mistakes, miss things, fall victim to preconceptions, etc. As members of a team, panellists often have the opportunity for discussion, to work together in arriving at a more considered, balanced conclusion. Some might argue against the averaging effect that a voting process can entail, but then it’s all the more compelling when a panel awards a good score relative to the ‘high five’ from a single critic. Some of the greatest palates with big followings in their own right are supportive of and participate in certain panel tastings, competitions and wine shows – dependent on the reputation of the organisers and the calibre of the panel chairs.

Naturally, key to authoritative wine ratings and awards are honesty and integrity. There should be no hidden agendas and nothing underhand about the proceedings. The tasters need to guard against personal bias and be as open-minded as possible. The methodology must be sound. And of course the critics’ skill and talent in assessing wine quality and style, their knowledge and experience, plus their stamina in being able to evaluate a large number of wines at a sitting and for several days in succession are all critical for the realisation of sound judgements in the context of professional wine tastings.

The wines can vary too… Though ostensibly the same, going by the labels, it’s sometimes possible for differences to occur when the wine is being produced (e.g. different batches, maturation variances, different bottling runs), after the wine is bottled (e.g. different storage conditions or issues to do with the closures), or when the wine is tasted (e.g. different temperatures or different periods of aeration after the bottles are opened). Such differences are unheard of in some places and par for the course in others, and when there are variations, albeit that they might only be tiny, things can add up.

Some wines are submitted for almost every tasting, competition or publication that they are eligible for, whereas certain producers are very selective. Some will only enter their current releases or vintages that will only go onto the market after the scores are made public, whereas others are happy for critics to review what’s already sold out. And not all of the taste-offs are conducted at the same time of the year. So it’s unrealistic to expect the same names and vintages to always come first in the class.

Despite all of the above, however, the cream of the crop tends to come out on top more often than not. The best wines tend to take turns in winning the trophies, and invariably, if they’re among the contenders, they’ll usually be among the leaders when the votes are tallied at the finish. The best wine producers impress on a consistent basis over a number of vintages – the best track records focus on the ‘thoroughbreds’, the ‘pedigreed’, the ones that are there or thereabouts when contemplating the finest wines over a period of time, established as well as up-and-coming.

There are numerous competitions and publications or guides that accomplish credible results from their panel tastings. The ones that don’t are typically flawed on the grounds of methodology or the conditions of entry, lack of transparency or ‘pie in the sky’ objectives and outcomes that deter producers and marketers from participating. For all of the top SA wine ratings this year and last, see here, and for those with the best track records, see here. The panels followed on Top Wine SA are detailed here.