I use the Wine Advocate scoring approach which usually bottoms out in the low 80’s for me.
Here’s the breakdown. The number within the parenthesis is the maximum allowable points for each category.
The aggregate of these five (5) categories results in the total score.
• Color (5) - Virtually all wines receive 4 or 5 point unless defective.
Been actively buying since the 2012 vintage so about 5 years now, and compared to many here I still consider myself a noob. My “training wheels” scoring system is simple:
Excellent - one of the top wines I’ve ever tasted.
Very Good - a “wow” wine. Buy again / load up.
Good - very drinkable and consider buying again.
Fair - tolerable but don’t buy again
Poor - Dump / DNPIM
I mainly do this in CT to simplify buying when mailers come out.
We mostly (and infrequently) use numerical scores because that’s what CT is coded for, mostly we just leave simple personal consumption notes when a wine is either above or below average for us, sometimes as simple as “HOLY FUCK SO GOOD”, sometimes with a little more specificity (“over the hill, was probably never good”, “tasty now but needs 1-3 years”, etc.). We have similar tastes and so one note is usually sufficient, but on the off chance our assessments differ we’ll note that as well, “Took a long time for the fruit to emerge, very herbaceous out the gate, L did not like”.
TBH I think that a far more practical (and realistic) scale to work with. Sometimes there is an awful pressure (often self-inflicted) to ‘become better / more professional / more accurate (ugh!)’. Your scale is perfectly good for a lifetime.
Of course an associated tasting note will remind you why you might have rated the wine as you did.
Of all my Cellartracker tasting notes, only 36% have a numerical score entered. And I’ve grown increasingly fond of “gut impression score” over the past couple years, which tends to be a two or three point range.
That said, of the 36% of my notes that do have scores entered, the highest I’ve gone is 100 points (once — it was an OMFG-bring-me-to-my-knees wine), and the lowest I’ve gone is 69 points (once). Most of my scores fall into the 84 - 93 ten point band. My score distribution is bell-shaped about 90 points.
85 = I told you not to put in your mouth
86 = Don’t put in your mouth
87 = Wish you didn’t put in your mouth
88 = Wish I didn’t put it into my mouth
89 = Would rather not put it into my mouth
90 = Wine is drinkable
91 = Wine is passable
92 = Wine is good
93 = Wine became enjoyable
94 = Wine became quite pleasurable
95 = Wow wine
96 = Stop what I am doing wow
70’s - Is technically alcohol, but isn’t something I want a second glass of - Regardless of price.
80’s - Soundly made, enjoyable wines, with shallow depth.
90’s - Wines that I really wish I owned more of.
I frequently slum it, so I think I probably hand out more 70’s than most. Technically a passing grade, but you’re not going to show the report card to your parents.
I don’t score wines. However last year, I tasted approximately 50-60 Chianti Classico wines over two days in Castellina in Chianti at a festival in the middle of town. The wines included the “regular” bottlings (I think they call these “del anno”) as well as Riserva and Gran Selezione. To keep track of the wines, I started with the idea of adding a check mark next to the wine on the listing for those that I enjoyed. This quickly evolved into a three grade system of: check-, check, and check+ with the corresponding interpretation of roughly: “I do not want to finish this”, “this is a decent wine”, and “this is a wine I would like a second glass of”, respectively. Influenced perhaps by my wine consumption, I found it necessary to create the final enhancement to my system by creating another category of check++. These were those wines that seemed very special to me and were worth seeking out and making efforts to find and buy. Of the 50-60 wines tasted, only a handful received the check++. I have made use of this system recently at large tastings and even smaller tastings or wine dinners when I occasionally point out that a wine has been given “my coveted check++ rating”. This is often met with puzzled looks, but perhaps this grading system will eventually gain more widespread understanding and acceptance.(apologies for not being able to figure out how to put in the check symbol in this post) -Jim
My ratings are the same way - Poor, Decent, Good, Very Good, Excellent (except I’ve never rated a wine Excellent in practice). I agree that this is as much precision as anyone should ever need
96-100 Exceptional and confirms the existence of a Supreme Being.
90-95 Really good to WOW.
86-89 Good, no flaws, acceptable as a Tuesday wine, happy to have in a restaurant or at a non-geek’s house.
80-85 Palatable and not bad, acceptable at a wedding, a rubber chicken dinner, or a fundraiser.
76-79 I don’t like it, might finish one glass if I am thirsty, but not take a second glass.
70-75 Find a place to hide the glass behind a potted plant.
60-69 Will swallow the first taste but that’s it. Smile while leaving the glass on the nearest horizontal surface. In the 68-69 range, may drink the glass if it is provided by a well-paying client who extols its virtue or, as happened to me in 1981, while having dinner with the PRC equivalent of the CIA station chief in Hong Kong and he was telling me how wonderful this Chinese wine was and I knew if I spit it out, I might be dead by morning.
56-59 Will consciously spit out the first taste and seek water to rinse out mouth.
50-55 Will unconsciously expel the wine from mouth as soon as it hits the taste buds. Have difficulty holding onto glass while attempting not to laugh/cry. I have only experienced this once - Blueberry Bliss at Berserkerfest 2.5.
I don’t use a scale, it’s binary: enjoyed it, or didn’t.
As for a numerical scale, if I did one, it would use a normal distribution, such that Y = { 1/[ σ * sqrt(2π) ] } * e-(x - μ)2/2σ2, so as to keep the system as simple and comprehensible as possible.
Currently, the most popular scoring systems use a standard deviation that I find too narrow to really allow for comparison of wine ratings.
I think we should pool data and when we find a wine critic or publication with a standard score deviation that is too narrow, out they go.
I’ll try and run through your questions in order. Note: I rate wines for benchmarking purposes and future references only. I don’t rate every wine I drink - far from it.
My rating system bottoms out at 75, however IMO anything below an 80 is undrinkable for me. I’m rarely exposed to wines that poor in quality. Low to Mid-80’s are typically monochromatic - one dimensional. They offer up little in the way of bouquet, are unbalanced on the palate with little discernible fruit and they have no secondary or tertiary notes. Wines in the upper 80’s have more discernible characteristics both on the nose and palate, with a bit more complexity, but they may exhibit flaws that hold them back. 90-94 are well made wines that have good balance, character, aging capability and offer interesting bouquets and complexity with lingering finishes. 95-97 are classics with very high levels of expression for the varietal or blend. They are wines you will remember and bring something unique to the table. Once I get past 97 it gets tough, because history enters the picture and I start comparing to other wines I’ve had at this rare level.
I try not to let others influence me when I’m evaluating a wine. I know what I like and what I don’t.
To me 100 point wines are as rare as they are subjective. Having said that, to be a 100 point wine it must represent the fullest expression of the varietal or blend (ex. Bordeaux, CdP etc.). It must be in perfect harmony and balance and the structure has to be near perfect. On the nose I have to discern primary, secondary and tertiary notes and be able to explain them. On the palate it has to drive the same level of complexity, bring something unique in texture (mouth feel) and have a long memorable finish. The wine has to take you on a journey with each sample providing new hidden treasures. A 100 point wine should be an epiphany and something you never forget. It does not have to be WOTY, because one may be exposed to more than one 100 point wine in a year.
In 2015 I was exposed to a Northern Rhone Syrah that I’ll never forget. I’ll be chasing that experience for the rest of my life.
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
-Jim