Scoring based on color: My debate with James Suckling

James Suckling claims to set aside 15 points for a wine’s color in his scoring. He has also demonstrated that he scores wines in all manner of lighting, and sometimes not very good lighting. And then in a recent free video, titled “Why the Best Brunello Have Color,” he says, “Sunlight is the most natural light and (in it) you can really see color.”

I decided to ask him about it on Twitter, and he responded. Here’s our conversation:

Evan Dawson
If sunlight is best way to view color, why judge color indoors like you do?

James Suckling
Isn’t that sort of a dumb question? Tasting outdoors doesn’t work. You know that.

Evan Dawson
Right. But 15% of the wine’s score is color, and you admit you judge the color in sub-optimal conditions.

James Suckling
What do you do? Do you have anything better to do today…or is it a slow news day?

Evan Dawson
Just honestly curious. If a wine’s color is 15% of its score, why judge in conditions that don’t let you see it optimally?

James Suckling
May be you use your daylight flashlight when you visit cellars to taste? Can _get one?

Evan Dawson
Ha! That would be great. But perhaps another reminder that assessing color for points is questionable.

Evan Dawson
And yes, I confess that I think it’s strange to put so much weight on a wine’s color. But your mileage may vary!

James Suckling
But just to be polite and answer your question. I have been tasting for 29 years. I know how to judge color.

Evan Dawson
A wine can go from 92 to 89 pretty easily all because you judged the score in artificial/lesser lighting. That matters!

James Suckling
Giving points for color works for me, UC Davis and lots of people.
\

Given how easily color is manipulated, I’m surprised it’s still evaluated for score at all. Am I wrong?

My thanks to writer and critic Thor Iverson for stacking up the conversation.

oenoLogic: Color me surprised" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;_

Forgot to include the link to free video on the color of Brunello.

http://jamessuckling.com/why-the-best-brunellos-have-color.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

man you really don’t like Suckling. lol

I feel bad. It’s like I’m the Suckling scourge. But there’s so much material! And really, you won’t see me take cheap shots at him. I appreciate his willingness to chat on various media sources. These are substantive issues that deserve discussion, is all.

Ouch. I don’t even know what to say. I’m 100 on that? Evan, quit asking James such dumb questions!

The irony is that James presumably shot that ‘component scoring’ free video to try to give more credibility to his scores.

but he’s absolutely right, lots of people put “color” as a factor in their scoring. UC davis has it as 10% of their rating , parker uses color, almost everyone who has an explanation for their rating puts in color. Why target him?

Why does he just deflect the question instead of answering it?

sunlight good
but taste indoors

so… why not address the issue?

Note: I don’t know the history of the people involved…

Color is very complex. If you’ve ever bought or considered buying gemstones, it is a big issue in that field because apparent color changes dramatically based upon conditions . In particular, daylight is much bluer than incandescent light, which is very-red shifted. This is an oversimplifcation, but not only will wines show “redder” in incandescent light, but redder wines will have a more vibrant color in incandescent light. Similarly, wines will show more “blue” (in the case of wine, purple) in daylight color temps and wines with more blue will appear more vividly colored in daylight.

Florescent light, like you find in offices, has a color temp that’s closer to daylight than incandescent, but the intensity of light indoors is much, much less than outdoors, which will make dark colored wines appear opaque under florescent while they might look vividly colored outdoors.

You can, in fact, buy portable lamps with specific color temperatures and light intensity. They are used for consistent evaluration of colored gemstones. Suckling should invest in one (they’re not hugely expensive) if he’s grading wines for color.

Charlie - He posted that video link on twitter and I asked the question several days ago. Tonight he was on and responded, to my surprise, and kept the dialog going.

Great stuff. Very informative. Thanks.

can you imagine him in a cellar with a big ol heavy metal lamp looking for a plug?

ah the image makes me laugh

Color 15% of the final score? Yikes.

Of course, I’d probably give pinot noir fewer points for being dark, but that’s just me.

Charlie - Perhaps because Davis has little impact on the market whereas Suckling has had in the past and is trying to establish himself as someone to listen to as an independent critic? Asking the question isn’t hectoring… but if Suckling has a good take on it why not answer directly? I like the “who are you?” question - as if only some people are allowed to question him.

I note color when I look at a wine because it’s information about how the wine seems to be evolving… but if scores are supposed to reflect how a wine tastes it’s silly incorporate the color as that has zero impact on the taste.

Evan - this is a broader issue than just color of course. What about serving temp both of the wine and the room? If someone tastes a wine in a 45degree cellar flavors will be suppressed. Likewise if the wine is at 72deg, it’s going to be out of balance perhaps. What about glassware? Are there other aromas in the air (i.e. is there cooking nearby)?

IIRC Parker gives 5 points for color, but has said that almost every wine that isn’t obviously defective gets 4 or 5 points for color.

15 points is a lot more. Recall that 50 points is automatic, so it’s really a 50-point scale. That means that for Parker, color is 10% of his real score, while for Suckling color is 30% of his real score.

And what difference does color make in quality? Of course, some times you can tell a wine is defective because the color is wrong, but in most cases how do you score color? More points for darker? That would be a silly way to score Barolo.

That is essentially James’ argument regarding Brunello.

Next time please ask him what happens if a wine has a half point in the score, like 89.5. Does it get bumped up or down?

Personally I can’t imagine he actually uses that system - the dude sniffs, slurps and spits and “I’m 92 on that”, boom. dc.

If one must use points to communicate what they think of a wine I see no reason to set aside some portion of it for appearance. Unless it looks truly nauseating then what difference does it make in the final value of how the wine tastes? I note color in my notes for things like how advanced it might be in relation to its real age or possibly how extracted it might be when it comes to reds but there is no value in that whether the wine tastes phenomenal or horrid.

This is funny stuff, but unearthing lack of internal self consistency in Suckling’s methodology is a bit like looking for holes in Swiss cheese. I mean, what do you expect from a guy who says in his teaser video he’s getting there before everyone else, then rolls off a list of historic estates?

Well, ask yourself what you would score the best wine you’ve ever tasted if it was the most disgusting color your could imagine (i.e. 0 points for color). For me, at least, it would significantly affect my overall enjoyment of the wine. But this is kind of a moot point since it “never happens”, a really horrific color is always indicative of some other grievous flaw.

When he says color, does that mean appearance? When I used to break down my points (pre-cellar tracker), I scored five for appearance which included color, depth, brightness (or dullness) and other similar factors. I certainly matters to me when I look into a wine.

If 15 points is just for color, how does he factor in the other visual qualities. If it is all inclusive, it seems high, but if he is a very visual person, not outside the realm of reasonableness for me.

FWIW, I once scored a wine 99 points with one point off for the visuals. It just wasn’t a perfect wine.