The zenith of score inflation?

The top 22 wines in James Suckling’s Top 100 Wines of 2020 are 100 pointers. There are more 100 pointers in the list but I didn’t have the patience to go through the entire list.

James who?

1 Like

Only 22? Damn he must be tightening up.

1 Like

So… if there were more than 22 100 pointers, how did he select the top 22?

You got me there. I just noticed the wine in 100th place was a 98 pointer.

I’m going to start a wine rating service. Send me two bottles of any wine you make and/or sell and I’ll open one and rate it and you can publish the rating however you like to help move your product. For your trouble, I guarantee all wines will be rated at least 99 points!

  • All wines will be scored to the nearest .01 points…
1 Like

Typically these lists consider value, availability, and possible even an “x factor,” in addition to quality.

How many points did Suckling give Neil Young?

I´m not sure, but the 1st red wine from France is 61st place? (ridiculous)
A German wine is 2nd (not that I´m sad about that …)

I never did care much about JS - but when friends served me a wine with xxx Suckling points I have to say:
usually they were not bad - but usually not exciting either … so what?
I would never give anything about S-points …

He gave 98 points or more to 100 wines:
And all the children are above average

Without going back to the article, I seem to remember a comment that the wines had to score at least 98pts to make the Top 100.

The only thing I can tell from a Suckling score is the degree to which he thought it was to his advantage to like the wine.

If he likes a young Argentina Pinot all of 100 points, I wonder what he’d think of a mature Red Burg that’s showing particularly well.

Here on WB and any other place you find oenophiles, Suckling is pretty much a running joke. I am somewhat surprised that we even waste mindshare discussing him anymore - but we do. That being said, if his goal is self-enrichment (as opposed to being a respected reviewer of wines), then his approach is pure genius. Just like the ratings agencies that found they got a lot more business by being generous reviewers of bonds (and hence were able to make more money and helped to crash the economy in the aughts ), JS likely has an endless stream of winemakers seeking out his scores. You and I and pretty much everyone else here on WB knows that his numbers are inflated and useless, it becomes a positive feedback loop for him. The more often casual wine drinkers see his name, the stronger his brand becomes. And because the little wine ratings tags at the supermarket and local wine store matter and really do help move wine, the more wine he helps to move which gives winemakers more incentive to seek out a JS score. If I lacked shame but had a flair for self promotion, I would absolutely take JS’s approach.

1 Like

What did Luca and Wilfred give them?

1 Like

Reading Michael Lewis’ book, I understood that the ratings agencies weren’t kind to boost income, but too damned stupid to understand what was going on.

I am sorry to say that Suckling has completely crapped on his brand. He is the critic’s equivalent of Crying Wolf.

Usually if James gives a wine 92 points I might buy it. The wine will be more balanced and lower than 14% alcohol.

I’m going to start a wine rating service. Send me two bottles of any wine you make and/or sell and I’ll open one and rate it and you can publish the rating however you like to help move your product. For your trouble, I guarantee all wines will be rated at least 99 points!

I will cover Bordeaux and Burgundy for you!

Suckling is simply playing the game. High scores get him mentions and in the good books of producers. I’m sure he can milk it for a few years yet and presumably already has himself a comfortable lifestyle.

Yeah, But don’t under estimate the number of people who buy $100 a bottle wine and don’t know or care a damn thing about wine or critics.