What happened to Robert Parker? State of Wine Criticism in 2018

WINE TALK
21

Hi Robert
You’ve mentioned a couple of points (doh!) I wholeheartedly agree with:

Points can all too often work in the opposite direction to what the followers of points would want. The wines that garner high profile / high points scores can escalate rapidly in price, so what was a good wine at a decent price (e.g. Burlotto Monvigliero) has temporarily or permanently gone through the roof by the time it reaches the end customers. That 100 point score didn’t do any favours to the end customers, except those who had an opportunity to buy at cellar door / similar price, and who now rather than buying a wine they liked to drink, are wondering whether they ought to sell it instead, and the buyer (if they sell) will end up paying much more. In my opinion they’ll be paying much more than they should be paying, but that’s their choice. For some it’s a positive feeling to be drinking a ‘100 point wine’. Those wines we like and are consistently rated poorly - happy days! As long as there are still buyers, the wine gets made, in the same style and at an attractive price.

Critics can indeed provide useful suggestions as entry points to a new region - and especially representative examples with an established track record, but you are right, there is a wealth of opinion and insight out there, and at times those other sources are ahead of the game. I find many critics stick to the same wines that are ‘worthy of review’. This means some smaller gems go unnoticed, and can be a rich source of value for someone touring a wine region, or who taps into the knowledge of someone prepared to do that, or who has access to a wine merchant who is prepared to do the hard yards themselves. Those little gems often become favourites in the cellar.

Regards
Ian

22

I find quotes like this odd. In broad strokes, the two publications say basically the same thing about the wines reviewed for basically the same reasons. Why anyone would find one credible and the other a joke is beyond me. I realize you are mainly into Italian wines and Italy is one of the two regions where Vinous has a clear advantage if only because they have two reviewers and can cover more wines and more regions (and Ian D’Agata is the best of the Italian reviewers across the major English-language publications). And maybe you don’t like Monica Larner. For most other areas, it’s pretty much a wash for me, with the exception of anything Luis Gutierrez covers because that dude is a stud reviewer. I think William Kelley was a very good pickup for the WA and addresses one of the long-time shortcomings of the WA (Burgundy); let’s see if he sticks.

23

Parker was an invaluable resource in the 80s, when I was learning what I liked and before the internet made information so accessible. The information explosion caused some fundamental changes in the role of wine critics. It made them both more and less important, but in different ways and in different time frames.

When the internet first happened the critics, Parker primarily and Wine Spectator to a degree, became even more important because everyone, not just subscribers, had access to the scores. Retailers and consumers scrambled to get their hands on each new WA issue because even a 24-48 hour lead time was like having insider information one could capitalize on. Some went so far as to open a P.O. box at the post office WA used for mailings to get a leg up.

Over time, as online communities began to develop and more people shared scores and TNs, people began to realize that their online friends were often as good or better sources of information, and the power of the critics began to wane. At least with the community of wine lovers that cared enough to compare notes. Critics still have an impact on the larger public that is influenced by a shelf talker written by anyone.

24

Jim,

I too remember you as a knowledgeable and sensible poster on EBob, so welcome back! I returned to wine myself last year after a shorter break than yours and asked myself much the same questions regarding advice. FWIW…

TWA - I’ve never met him, but I feel sorry for William Kelley - he seems eminently interesting and well-intentioned - what a time to arrive. Like it or not, TWA used to be awe-inspiring in its domination - now, it just inspires chuckles. Industrial sabotage on a grand scale. I re-subscribed for access to the database, but it’s a complete waste of time otherwise.

Vinous - NM’s arrival tipped the scales in its favour for me and I have to say I’m impressed by their coverage since I subscribed. Also, Neal seems to be even better than before, as if a great weight has been lifted from his pen…so I recommend it.

But others are right about WB and elsewhere - there are indeed many proven palates providing excellent advice for free. Once you get a handle on who likes what, it’s a good alternative.

25

Reminds me of when Rovani downgraded 1993 white and red burgundy. I think it was something like 78 and 82 respectively?

I got some great buys for a while after that.

26

William is an excellent writer and taster. His depth is well beyond Burgundy, too. Look at this comments and notes on this board regarding Bordeaux, Rhones and Beaujolais. I have enjoyed some selections on Spanish wines by Luis. I will admit to looking at some shelf-talkers when I was looking for some Spanish wines and was way out of my league in that category.

27

the original Parker 93 red ratings were 67 for Cote de Beaune and 73 for Cote de Nuits, subsequently upgraded by Rovani. Don’t remember the score for whites. We gave Rovani and Parker a lot of shit for those scores and got the wines at a bargain.

28

There are lots of threads on this very subject - do a search and you’ll find out what’s happened over the past ten years.

Several things to remember are that some of the writers have switched from one place to another. Joe Cz was editor at WE and now works for EBob. Was he useless at WE and now suddenly knowledgeable? No. He was always pretty reliable. Jeb is much newer and more recent to many areas. I guess he’s OK but there are people on this board who’ve had a lot more wine from many of the places he covers. Suckling is out on his own doing road shows and he really doesn’t care whether anyone on this board respects him or not - he’s one of the few critics making good money.

The line-ups at all of the magazines have changed over the years. Some people are new, some have shifted regions they cover, and there’s a lot of info out there that wasn’t around in the 1970s and 1980s. When Parker started, the wine world was small and when he championed the Rhone he had some influence. Today, there are no real “new” areas that someone can make a reputation over. They’re trying to “call” a vintage in this place or that one as a way to stake out some notoriety, but it’s pretty much all bs.

This board is as good and bad as any of the publications mentioned, for many of the same reasons. So I see no need whatsoever to subscribe to any of them.

29

I agree that William has been an excellent add to TWA. I look forward to his posts here

30

I agree that the board is a great source of information. But, for me at least, it’s a compliment to, rather than a great substitute for, the subscriptions. There’s a big difference between professional critics and people like us. People like Tanzer or Parker or d’Igata or (insert your preferred aligned critic) taste through vast quantities of wines we can’t afford to sample, often in a setting that allows for comparisons that are impossible to make for normal enthusiasts. If they go through 40 or 50 Northern Medocs in a day, the better examples stand out.

Producers change hands, styles, winemakers, etc. and you don’t always make those connections without the subscriptions. I think my cellar is a lot better than it would otherwise be if I only relied on the very limited postings of wine boards or CT (which is a mix of people with and without experience). I was a prolific poster in the mid-90s and I know I had a lot of stupid opinions that have not stood the test of time.

I don’t mean to minimize the value of the boards – but, I do think you’re underestimating the benefits subscriptions offer for people who buy a fair amount of wine without first tasting it. Sure, you could say, taste it first then… But, that’s very often not possible or practical.

31

I do not believe amateurs are better than pros at wine tasting, but if anyone goes through 40 or 50 wines in a day the “better examples” don’t necessarily stand out. The larger scaled, more fruity, riper, more opulent wines stand out. Which is why many pros favor bigger wine styles and award them big points, but are not, for the most part, wines that I want to drink with dinner.

32

[/quote]
I do not believe amateurs are better than pros at wine tasting, but if anyone goes through 40 or 50 wines in a day the “better examples” don’t necessarily stand out. The larger scaled, more fruity, riper, more opulent wines stand out. Which is why many pros favor bigger wine styles and award them big points, but are not, for the most part, wines that I want to drink with dinner.
[/quote]

That’s far from universally true. What stands out is what you think is ideal. Case in point: Parker (in the day) and Jancis Robinson both taste through some voluminous amount of Right Bank wines in a day. Their scores often are only vaguely related to each other. They’re looking for different things. When you taste through 40 or 50 wines, you’ll note that there are plenty of big wines that suck.

There’s some truth to what you’re saying, though. I had a bottle of 2016 Martinelli Pinot Noir Biondi Home Ranch last night that was well pointed and had a little too much going on, IMO.

33

You beat me to the punch. It’s not just that they taste 40-50+ at a time, it’s also the smaller quantities, the snapshot in time instead of over an evening, conditions, glasses, temperature, etc. i place far more value on someone like you or Neal Mollen posting impressions of one or a few Bordeaux wines enjoyed over an evening.

34

I think that what has happened to wine criticism is that it has splintered. There is no longer one holy diety who gives wines a score that is considered their absolute measure of quality.

Instead, there are a number of critics some of who specialize in wine regions (like Allen Meadows with Burghound) and others of whom don’t try to be terribly objective but rate wines on their subjective views of how wines should taste (like John Gilman of A View from the Cellar). There are quite a number of wine newletters and of wine blogs.

It might help if you state the types of wines you like and your favorite wine regions (I assume that it includes Bordeaux, but more traditional Bordeaux or more modern styled wines) and people can try to better tailor their recommendations to the wines you like rather than the wines they like.

Not a wine newsletter, but if you want to get back into current wine start listening to these. http://illdrinktothatpod.com/

35

I miss the days when the Wine Advocate rated highly the wrong Burgundy producers and vintages and the good stuff would go on sale.

36

Hey Howard,

OK, you asked…

Over half of my cellar is Bordeaux. I favor Left Bank over Right as a general rule – but I like it all. I am anti-over-the-top as a general rule, but I break that rule all the time. For example, I like really ripe Grenache from CdP, Beausejour Duffau, and Troplong Mondot. I love wines like 1996 Leoville Barton (had one last night and it was singing). I’m increasingly into Nebbiolo and have a real soft spot for Cru Beaujolais, Valle d’Aosta, Loire Cab Franc, and sleeper Bordeaux from top vintages. Some of my favorite producers are (often for personal reasons) JL Chave, Jamet, Beaucastel, Bosquet des Papes, Bernard Baudry, Climens, anything with Leoville or Pichon on the label, Grand Puy Lacoste, Montrose, Rauzan Segla, Domaine de Chevalier, Trotanoy, VCC, Felsina, Dominus, and Philip Togni, Ritchie Creek, Chappellet PH, Mount Eden and Ridge. For whites I am into Chablis, Sancerre, Mountlois and Vouvray, Muscadet, Sauvennieres, Jura (Chards), Graves, German and Alsacian rieslings, Verdicchio, Albarino, Godello, Fino and Manzanillas, Dog Point NZ SB… the list goes on for white. I’m generally not a fan of CA Chard, though there are exceptions. I have decided that I can’t afford to like Burgundy. I hate anything that speaks of carnivals or generally any red wines that might be good on icecream. I’m more tolerant than most of fierce tannins and wines that taste like rocks. I favor wines made by a families over wines made by conglomerates – but you can see obvious contradictions among my favorites, particularly in Bordeaux.

And – I absolutely love listening to Levi Dalton’s podcast. I’d like to meet him and thank him someday. Most episodes are like a mini-vacation on my commute to work. I especially like what he has done with the Piemontese producers.

Cheers,
Jim

37

Jim - I suppose you’re right to some extent but don’t forget that many people on this board also taste vast quantities of wine. If you’re at all in the business, you taste a lot and if you are an importer/distributor you taste at least as many as the critics will because they’re only tasting what you send them, whereas you’re beating the bushes for new producers.

However, I tend to forget that a lot of people don’t get to taste as much and consequently rely on others.

Even so, I’m not sure all the critics really know a lot more than many people here. Some do, but not all. If you live in Piedmont or Bordeaux or Rioja or Burgundy or Tuscany, or import wines from those regions, you’re going to know a lot more about what’s going on than someone who visits a few times a year and tastes the same producers each time, or who tastes primarily what’s sent to his or her office.

38

Hi Jim
You’re in no way compelled to answer this, but I’m intrigued by your comment above.

Were those:

  • Your tastes at the time, which have changed as you tasted more?
  • Your tastes at the time, which as you’ve read more you’ve changed your perspective?
  • Repeating the advice of others, which you’ve since realised you don’t agree with?
  • Something else?
  • Combination of the above?

For my own part, although it was useful as a confidence builder to focus on Aussie, then NZ, then Italy and so on, slowly building my confidence and experience, I relied too heavily on the Aussie critics. Their love of warm climate South Australian reds does not mirror my own preference for the wines of the cooler areas of the country (which I took a while to realise). Thankfully I built the contents of my cellar up relatively slowly, but had I raced into it, I’d have cases of McLaren Vale and Barossa Shiraz that I now realise is at best an occasional drink for me (c. 1 bottle per year).

Luckily by the time I moved onto Italy, I’d still read critical opinion, but my purchases were more strongly guided by what I’d tried and enjoyed. Hence I rarely have any Brunello di Montalcino in the cellar, but will have other Sangiovese based wines (Chianti, Sangiovese di Romagna, Vino Nobile di Montepulciano), all of which are awarded typically lower scores by critics, and also priced lower. Even if the prices were the same, I’d still be buying what I do now, as I prefer it to Brunello. [good.gif] to the critics, as they’ve made my preferred drinking cheaper [dance-clap.gif]

Regards
Ian

39

Hey Howard,

OK, you asked…

Over half of my cellar is Bordeaux. I favor Left Bank over Right as a general rule – but I like it all. I am anti-over-the-top as a general rule, but I break that rule all the time. For example, I like really ripe Grenache from CdP, Beausejour Duffau, and Troplong Mondot. I love wines like 1996 Leoville Barton (had one last night and it was singing). I’m increasingly into Nebbiolo and have a real soft spot for Cru Beaujolais, Valle d’Aosta, Loire Cab Franc, and sleeper Bordeaux from top vintages. Some of my favorite producers are (often for personal reasons) JL Chave, Jamet, Beaucastel, Bosquet des Papes, Bernard Baudry, Climens, anything with Leoville or Pichon on the label, Grand Puy Lacoste, Montrose, Rauzan Segla, Domaine de Chevalier, Trotanoy, VCC, Felsina, Dominus, and Philip Togni, Ritchie Creek, Chappellet PH, Mount Eden and Ridge. For whites I am into Chablis, Sancerre, Mountlois and Vouvray, Muscadet, Sauvennieres, Jura (Chards), Graves, German and Alsacian rieslings, Verdicchio, Albarino, Godello, Fino and Manzanillas, Dog Point NZ SB… the list goes on for white. I’m generally not a fan of CA Chard, though there are exceptions. I have decided that I can’t afford to like Burgundy. I hate anything that speaks of carnivals or generally any red wines that might be good on icecream. I’m more tolerant than most of fierce tannins and wines that taste like rocks. I favor wines made by a families over wines made by conglomerates – but you can see obvious contradictions among my favorites, particularly in Bordeaux.

And – I absolutely love listening to Levi Dalton’s podcast. I’d like to meet him and thank him someday. Most episodes are like a mini-vacation on my commute to work. I especially like what he has done with the Piemontese producers.

Cheers,
Jim
[/quote]

Since you don’t drink Burgundy, Burghound would not be for you. You might like Gilman as he would lead you to some wines you are not familiar with that you probably would like. My guess is that you would like the wines he likes but not necessarily dislike the wines he dislikes. So, it depends on whether you can take his criticism of favorites of yours in order to have information to explore new wines you would like.


My guess is that your favorite would be Vinous.


Experiment a bit. I think Vinous gives people a free trial period. I think John Gilman sends people a sample issue or so. Try a few out.

40

My own (limited) experience with John Gilman is that he is both iconoclastic and difficult to pigeon-hole. That is both good and bad. It means he will not follow the crowd and will occasionally write scathing (and entertaining) reviews of otherwise highly regarded wines, which is to his credit, I think. I should also say that in a very few exchanges we have had he has been extremely forthcoming and engaging. I’d like to have a meal with him and talk about wines.

But I have a great deal of difficulty getting a bead on his palate. If everyone else love a wine (critics and the unwashed masses on CT) and he gives it a 79 and blasts it, well, he is entitled to his own judgment and good for him, but it is hard to see how that view could be useful as a buying guide.

So I generally find him interesting but not terribly useful.