How many more articles do we need like this that cite the exact same “studies”? “Another blog says it’s bull shit so it’s bull shit.” That’s a new one, though.
I will say that with many wines, my reaction after the first “taste” is much different than drinking through the entire bottle (or half, some nights). Meaning, that for me, the taste of the wine changes after the first sip. It’s had time to work it’s way into and coat my mouth, continue to decant in the glass, change temp, etc., all of which can make a wine, often times, more enjoyable than after just a single tasting. If I were to judge wine just after one sip and spit, I think there would be many wines I’d unfortunately pass on.
I am of the mind that wine doesn’t really change as much with time, as we do. As humans, we tend to think of everything around us as subject to change, rather than explore the possibility that perhaps it is more likely that we are adjusting to the wine more than the wine is changing with temp, air, etc. I am not suggesting that wine doesn’t change at all, rather that we underestimate how much our mood, our temperature, our relative tiredness or alertness, et al. affects our experience of a wine in a given moment.
I’ll also add that “rating” a wine based on a professional, semi-professional or even amateur set of criteria IS indeed bullshit. The only criterion that should be considered is: Is this wine WORTH drinking?
Very true. But that’s quite different from saying “wine tasting is BS”. In fact, your experience says quite the opposite to me. It suggests to me that your palate is evolved to the point where you can recognize the evolution of wine in the glass/decanter over time. The “half bottle” effect referenced above notwithstanding
I posted the article somewhat tongue-in-cheek (double entendre very much intentional). Anyway, certainly there is the issue of scoring wine, but there’s also the issue of trying to accurately describe the aromas and flavors in wine. And, of course, the obvious problems with label bias.