modern classification of left bank red Bordeaux

WINE TALK
21

We also have plenty of the 2016 and should get to it in about another decade.

22

Sometime ago I was fascinated with the same question and deep dived into it carrying out my own research.
I have already published my findings here.
Check out my article below

The Best Wines of the Left Bank of Bordeaux

2 Likes
23

For Stas Medvedev: I read your article some time ago, and consider there is much of value in it. Unlike me, you know how to write. RTPL

24

Thank you for your kind words! I did similar exercise for the right bank as well. Now I am working on the complete study which will include both banks, 2nd wines, Cru Bourgeois and unclassified producers altogether. It is getting very tricky, to be honest as there is plenty of ambiguity on the way. And you are raising fair questions in your reasoning. Thank you for sharing your line of thought as well.

25

For Stas Medvedev: Many thanks for your kind email. Your project is far greater and much more time-consuming than mine. I admire your dedication. RTPL

26

This may be my last post to this forum. though I doubt it.
In case anyone but me is interested in how much before taxes and shipping I would pay for a left bank red Bordeaux wine that I rated between 85 and 100
points, the figures are as follows (in practice I did not pay as much as $85 for any such wine in our cellar, and the ratings by me are all between 90.5 and 96.5): 100 points $170, 99.5 points $161.54, 99 points 153.43. 98.5 points $145.71, 98 points $138.48, 97.5 points $131.58, 97 points $124.98, 96.5 points $118.76, 96 points $112.80, 95.5 points $107.18, 95 points $101.83. 94.5 points $96.74, 94 points $91.92, 93.5 points $87.31, 93 points $82.96, 92.5 points $78,80, 92 points $74.87, 91.5 points $71.12, 91 points $67.58,90.5 points $64.17, 90 points $60.99, 89.5 points $57.93, 89 points $55.05, 88.5 points $52.99, 88 points $49.68,87.5 points $47.19,87 points $44.84,86.5 pts. $42.50,86 pts. $40.47,85.5 pts. $38.44, 85 pts.$36.52 RTPL

27

I knew it: I had to edit my last post.
Of course it is far easier to find “conforming” wines at the lower end than at the higher end. RTPL

28

I would posit that a ranking system based on a magazine-based reviewers ratings is no longer “modern” but perhaps a little bit retro.

29

I think the lack of discussion stems from the fact that this thread is TLDR. The OP is doing the entire discussion by himself.

30

Being somewhat new to fine wine (started accumulating in 2015), I’ve never paid attention to Wine Advocate. I get most of my info from Cellartracker and Winesearcher.
To keep me out of trouble I don’t buy en premeur. I only buy wines after release so there is some track record (other than barrel scores) to go by.
That may prevent me from getting the best price but it also lessens the likelihood of ending up with duds in my cellar.
For left bank Bordeaux I use a sorting system within Cellartracker to decide which wines meet my value requirements. Then I use Winesearcher to find out if those wines are available within my other buying restrictions (distance, shipping cost, etc).

31

To Mattstolz: Actually, I agree with you. I now go by the vinous of Neal Martin and particularly Antonio Galloni in deciding which wines to try, and then I go by my own taste buds.

To Ian S: Please, what is TLDR ? I agree that I have made far too many posts, but I wanted to cover several different subjects, and I am bad with computers.

To Chris Foley: I don’t see why you should not go with whatever source you like. I also use Wine Searcher a lot.













































































































;

32

Richard, your highly-technical posts in this thread, for me, pretty much elicit the reaction, “Okay.”

There just doesn’t seem to be much room for discussion here.

Furthermore, I think most people here do not base their buying decisions on critics’ scores, let alone the scores of one publication, let alone Wine Advocate (which used to be routinely skewered on this forum; now it’s just ignored). There are many folks on here who would disagree that your method, Richard, “should be reasonably accurate on average.”

1 Like
33

To Brian Grafstrom: My method uses Wine Advocate Vintage Ratings. Scores are my own.

34

Richard, you have clearly put a great deal of thought into this. Calling me a ‘numbers guy’ might be a bit of a stretch, but I do appreciate the insights that I can get from advanced analysis. I still marvel at how far some of the metrics have come in in professional sports. And in my profession I do a fair bit of number crunching to help make better, more objective decisions.

And yet despite that I find that with wine, I’ve never been terribly interested in looking this hobby objectively. A big part of that is because I feel like (for me, anyway) so much of this hobby is just subjective. What I taste, what I perceive, and how that informs what I like. I do look at how much I’m spending on/consuming by region/grape/producer. But little beyond that.

If you find this sort of analysis helpful to you, then it’s worth it for you. I’ve read it all and I struggle to find how I’d put it to use. One part of that comes back to the objective bit - that scores can be the basis of an ‘objective’ system. There’s a few areas where I have a hard time with this: 1) There’s bound to be deviation between my palate and that of the few critics I pay attention to. Enough variance to negate an analysis this fine. 2) the notion of vintage scores. I suppose at the extremes they are worthwhile, or at the extreme bottom (like, absolutely do not buy this vintage). But outside of that should we rely on them?

Just in the last few weeks there’s been a discussion here about how many nice wines were made in Napa in 2011, despite the fears of many (including critics). And in other cases vintages thought to be legendary (2008 Oregon) haven’t yet realised that potential. If that was objectively factored into my purchasing decisions based on vintage scores I might be sitting on cases of 2008 that may never come around - or I may have missed out on some fantastic 2011s. I guess the models could be updated somehow to factor this in?

But similar to what others have said, I just don’t make decisions based on points - not even for critics I follow. But a glowing review, in words, goes a long way. And that’s not just for critics but for folks on this board whose palates I respect. If Alfert, Adrian, Otto etc swoon over a wine, I’m going to pay attention. But whether it’s 93 points (or 93 points [wow.gif]), it’s the impressions translated to words that matter (to me).

2 Likes
35

I know.

and “Kinda.” The scores are your “own” only because you run Wine Advocate’s vintage score and Wine Advocate’s wine scores through an arbitrary, if not also convoluted, if not also improperly written (are you missing some parentheses somewhere?), formula. Adding confusion to the situation is your term “Grundeken period.” — only if folks make it to your third post in this thread will they understand that otherwise non-sensical and senile-sounding term.

Then, you arbitrarily depart from your “system” for “W.A.V.R.s below 90,” which makes your system that much more confusing and meaningless. Additionally, the “estimated bottom scores” for each growth level do not increase in any apparent sensical fashion: the difference between first and second is 2.5, the difference between second and third is 2.0, between third and fourth is 1.5, and between fourth and fifth is 1.5. You never explain where these “estimated top scores” or “estimated bottom scores” come from.

Finally, it’s just confusing as all hell, which makes it extremely difficult to discuss. Furthermore, the fact that your scores are mix of arbitrarily figures chosen by yourself and figures that are completely derived from Wine Advocate data means someone could much more easily just look at the wines’ scores to get at the conclusions I believe you’re trying to figure out — that is, unless you have figured-out some sort of magical insight, and that insight is reflected in the arbitrary portions of your system… A “98” on a wine in one vintage is supposed to be the same quality (or whatever term you want to use) as a “98” in another vintage, so I think the whole consideration of Vintage Rating is faulty and needlessly convoluted. But, hey, if it works for you, then great. [cheers.gif]

2 Likes
36

Sorry, Brian Grafstrom. RTPL

To your latest post, which I would not call polite, it is obvious to me that you either did not read or did not understand all of my many posts. I did
explain in detail how I derived my ranges for various classifications. The reason for W.A.V.R. being given a minimum rating of 90 is explained, though
you do have a point there. I use Vinous rather than the Wine Advocate for picking wines to try now, and I get lots of pleasure from the wines I choose
after tasting them. RTPL

37

For Jason T: You make many good points, but I am very happy with my “method”. RTPL

38

That’s what matters - it works for you!

39

So TLDR = too long didn’t read (understandable as a comment). If I was better with computers I would have done things differently.
I think I will probably be leaving wine berserkers soon, though I am not sure.

40

Try Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts. The atmosphere there may be more to your liking