The zenith of score inflation?

[Arv_R]

[Keith_Levenberg]

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.

[larry_schaffer]

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.

An interesting opinion, but I’m not sure it rings true.

You DO understand that the majority of folks on this site at any one time are online anonymously - and may not share your opinions.

And the more folks on here ‘look down’ upon wines and people that they feel are ‘lesser’, the more they will remain ‘anonymous’ . . .

Just another way of looking at things.

Cheers!

[Jayson_Cohen]

“I try not to be pretentious about wine but . . . .”

James Suckling Teaches Wine Appreciation | Official Trailer | MasterClass

[Arjan_Stavast]

I think I read somewhere that he rates some 15,000 wines a year, so arguably less than 1% at his highest score isn’t even that inflated? And Stuart Pigott (whom I like) has rated Germany in 2019 for him, so it can’t all be attributed to James Suckling himself.

Imho, the argument should be more focused on this rating system of 100 points where pretty much everything is 85 points and higher. I still fail to comprehend the logic behind that. I just don’t get how you can have a scale of which 85% is never even used. But maybe that’s something best reserved for another discussion…

[Reginald_Wheeler]

People on this board love to hate on this guy. But I bet 98% of y’all secretly wish to be him.

He’s internationally known, respected in some circles (not here though, bunch of haters), most likely does well financially, travels the world, drinks amazing wines. Has a much better life than probably 98% of the folks on here.

If you think he’s a shitty reviewer, don’t read his reviews. If you think he inflates his scores to land lucrative business deals, don’t read his reviews. If you think he sucks up to winemakers for access, don’t read his reviews.

But some of the comments suggest there’s envy, jealousy, etc involved. It’s not a good look.

I totally agree with you. Luckily everyone is free to follow or listen to as they want. The rest is just whining.

[Mark_Golodetz]

Yes, he is doing very well. He is drinking well, has access to great wines. He is living a life which most of us dream of, yet there is a nagging problem here.


I’m going into a wine shop without knowing much, and seeing a Suckling 100 point wine. I decide it must not be just excellent but perfect. I drink it; it’s one of those goopy messes which Suckling adores. I conclude I really don’t like wine, because who am I to argue you with the “expert”.

The man has caused a huge amount of damage.

[larry_schaffer]

Yes, he is doing very well. He is drinking well, has access to great wines. He is living a life which most of us dream of, yet there is a nagging problem here.


I’m going into a wine shop without knowing much, and seeing a Suckling 100 point wine. I decide it must not be just excellent but perfect. I drink it; it’s one of those goopy messes which Suckling adores. I conclude I really don’t like wine, because who am I to argue you with the “expert”.

The man has caused a huge amount of damage.

Or . . . .

As with most things subjective, a person purchases a 100 pt JS wine, doesn’t like it, and just thinks ‘I don’t get it’ and wants to learne more . . .

Different strokes, my friend.

[Sean_Devaney]

As much as I dislike Suckling’s scores, there’s some validity to the approach in terms of aiding the consumer. But only if it’s clear how he’s doing his scoring, which it is not. He should really issue two scores if he’s going to take this approach… the first being an absolute score and the second being a QPR score

85/92?

Ha yes exactly… to be clear. I don’t mean to defend JS. He’s clearly off base. I just think his system could actually be useful if he made it known how he approaches scoring.

This is not a new concept. The late wine writer and critic Jerry Mead used this method transparently on his score up until his death in 2000.

[Tom_G_l_a_s_g_o_w]

I think I read somewhere that he rates some 15,000 wines a year, so arguably less than 1% at his highest score isn’t even that inflated? And Stuart Pigott (whom I like) has rated Germany in 2019 for him, so it can’t all be attributed to James Suckling himself.

Imho, the argument should be more focused on this rating system of 100 points where pretty much everything is 85 points and higher. I still fail to comprehend the logic behind that. I just don’t get how you can have a scale of which 85% is never even used. But maybe that’s something best reserved for another discussion…

Graduate School?

[Tom_G_l_a_s_g_o_w]

People on this board love to hate on this guy. But I bet 98% of y’all secretly wish to be him.

He’s internationally known, respected in some circles (not here though, bunch of haters), most likely does well financially, travels the world, drinks amazing wines. Has a much better life than probably 98% of the folks on here.

If you think he’s a shitty reviewer, don’t read his reviews. If you think he inflates his scores to land lucrative business deals, don’t read his reviews. If you think he sucks up to winemakers for access, don’t read his reviews.

But some of the comments suggest there’s envy, jealousy, etc involved. It’s not a good look.

I totally agree with you. Luckily everyone is free to follow or listen to as they want. The rest is just whining.

So whining about whining.

[dsimmons]

IMHO, even though Suckling may be the worst, I believe wine ratings across the universe of ratters have crept up over the years. Partly because wines overall have improved and partly because of score inflation. They are what they are and to me the key is to find raters with palates similar to your own.

[Eric_Egan]

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.

Top 100 World Wines 2020 and Wine of the Year - JamesSuckling.com

This isn’t score inflation. It’s pure fiction concocted in the mind of someone with a penchant for mundane adjectives and a medium [-] palate.

[Mike_Kuller]

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.

Top 100 World Wines 2020 and Wine of the Year - JamesSuckling.com

This isn’t score inflation. It’s pure fiction concocted in the mind of someone with a penchant for mundane adjectives and a medium [-] palate.

And the lowest score I saw was 98.

Makes Wine Enthusiast ratings look positively stingy.

[Andrew_Hall]

Lol. I appear to be the only other person who has tasted his WotY.

[A.Altman]

James Suckling has the palate of a potato.

[Joseph_Grassa]

85/92?

Ha yes exactly… to be clear. I don’t mean to defend JS. He’s clearly off base. I just think his system could actually be useful if he made it known how he approaches scoring.

This is not a new concept. The late wine writer and critic Jerry Mead used this method transparently on his score up until his death in 2000.

I think the intention is to have the highest score in the market of critics, because most stores use the highest score, making his name more visible. I don’t think he has any intention of being transparent.

My heuristics are that if he rated it highly, I avoid it and also when a store markets his ratings to me, I generally try to buy elsewhere. Just little heuristics and certainly not the end all for my decisions, but little guides when I don’t know more information that would force my hand. I have found it very useful.

[Chris_Seiber]

Cable sports networks, cable news/politics networks and the internet are full of people who do some exaggerated and/or deliberately polarizing schtick as a shortcut to getting ratings and clicks.

I think it’s right to criticize the practitioners of that stuff, including (especially) when they speak for your side. And I don’t think it’s ironic or hypocritical to do so.

Suckling is very small potatoes and pretty harmless when it comes to that broader trend, but we are on Wine Berserkers, so he’s fair game.

[Mont_Stern]

I have mentioned to more than one wine merchant that an email from them with a high Suckling score is an instant delete. Obviously I am in the minority because they still do it.

[Rich_K0rz_nk0]

I think its easy to not like him for a variety of reasons that speculate on his integrity, ethics, and altruism, especially if you don’t see eye to eye with him. He might be the the most interesting man in the world but then again I don’t know him personally. To me he’s just a source of info on wine like many others. I weigh him like anyone I’d find making a statement on CT. I hope to find a pattern if I can; find something that aligns with my tastes; bump that up against everything else available; build a composite personal opinion. Its not a level playing field and I don’t know anyone that follows anyone absolutely. I use the sources at my disposal to make informed decisions and sometimes he has something to offer. For him specifically, I discount his scores in varying (many) circumstances and scan the impressions in his reviews that grab my attention/aligning to things interesting where he has some credibility with my palate. For me he weights scores too heavy/inflated. In a number of ways, he reminds me of Laube from WS for Cali back in the day. Can he do that? sure and I just account for that.

In the real world, wine is not a way of life for the general consumer. If they see a number and go all in, well maybe they will learn something. In the 10 - 20 dollar range on one bottle, they will walk away going “I will/will not do that again” and hopefully recall the guy that guided or misguided them to that bottle. On the other hand, if they are shooting for cases or his high-end, top 100 list, 98 - 100 pointers, and laying out material money… well I know plenty of car dealers, realtors, financial advisors, insurance salesmen, etc… that would love to meet that consumer. They are a mark.

The old saying is let the buyer beware. And I love George Carlin who stated that “…whoever coined the phrase let the buyer beware was probably bleeding from the asshole”. In this day in the the information age, we all should be bleeding a bit less if a moment is taken to consult the inter-webz, friends, and trusted sources to develop an informed opinion.