I voted other because I considered other as myself. I have not purchased a wine based on a critic score in a very long time. It’s been a while since I paid attention to critics so I don’t have an opinion on who is good and who is bad.
Great idea for a poll, and I know it is not possible to include everyone as the critical field has rapidly expanded over the years, but I would suggest adding Meadows (Burghound) to the list and John Gilman as well.
Coincidentally, those are also the two critics on whom I rely most- but among the more serious collecting crowd for certain regions they have a strong fan base.
Both are important, as also they have strong and very distinct voices. To exclude them makes this a nonsensical poll. In addition, there should be a none option.
Well if you’re thinking of getting a place there don’t bother. There’s really nothing available.
so this is the second detractor for CT… the other mentioned “shills”. Is CT becoming like a TripAdvisor now? say it isnt so…
Uh, CellarTracker is a user based review platform. Of course there will be biased reviews. Just as there are here on WB. I’ve never seen it being like TripAdvisor and if you see something that isn’t right report it. The staff at CellarTracker will address it, they are very responsive.
For my part, I do find CT useful at times. As with anything- over time you see certain voices you have come to trust and those voices carry more weight.
The greater issue I find is reading tasting notes for wines that were obviously compromised- CT exposes a truth many of us have long known, namely that there are a lot of people out there who do not have a strong personal knowledge of the wines they buy and then write notes describing classic heat damage- but attribute it to the wine itself being faulty.
Here is a follow up question to consider- what does the “trust” in the reviewer entail? Are you well acquainted with a given region/winery/vintage and looking for some thoughts before making a purchase, or are you not experienced and looking to place all your trust in another opinion?
If the latter- what is the end game? Are you hoping that someone else’s view on a given wine that you do not know well is going to give you assurance of a tasting experience that you want in X number of years? That is quite an unrealistic expectation.
The uncomfortable reality is that you need to need to frequently taste the wines you are interested in and then use critical reviews for more high level decisions- for example whether to increase or decrease your overall purchases in a given vintage. Beyond that, the reliance on someone else becomes too great. Within the confines of that, pretty much every established critic is of some use because you have a personal experience on which to interpret the notes you are reading.
I’m not 
Jonathan Newman
OKOK so I missed some people. What I would really want to do is break it down by region AND do a ranking versus a check box vote. However cant do that with forum tech.
I can start a new one with the new names.
Re: shelf talkers… in my listed use case above they are useful and far more efficient than checking individual wines on my phone. 
What is never mentioned is the difference between critics and cellartracker is that almost all scores from professional critics are from a) an embryonic stage of the wine and b) the critic seems to be tasting less than a glass of the wine. To me that is always one of the fundamental flaws of the entire industry. You are almost always reading reviews of the wine where it is in barrell or at best just bottled.
To me it’s almost like all people being judged by their pre kindergarten teacher.
I obviously fit in the camp that likes cellartracker at least as much as the critics.
Unfamiliar vintage + unfamiliar wine + reasonable price = Damn, buy it and form my own opinion.
What is it about needing a benediction to try a new thing?
For a hobby populated by people who buy wine that costs multiple hundreds of dollars per cork, why would anybody need a shelf talker? It’s an unfamiliar vintage and an unfamiliar wine at a reasonable price! Start the party!
Seriously, what’s the worst the could happen?
Plus, always buy the wine with an animal on the label!
Nice to see that no one critic has an overwhelming following, even though if you sum Galloni and Tanzer you get a hefty 30%. But much as I would like to be pleased about the outcome of this (limited) poll, precisely in these days I am upset because the 100 points given by Galloni to the 2013 Burlotto Monvigliero has made the price explode, and the wine virtually disappear. So absurd and so scary.
I’ve always felt CT scores are too much influenced by professional critics’ scores, so much so that I bet less than a few percent of all wines are ever scored higher by the collective CT score than any one given critic’s score. I’m convinced the average CT user looks at a professional critic’s score, is influenced by the score, then tastes the mine, and subtracts a couple of points. I’d love to look at an analysis of CT scores qbefore and after a professional critics scores are published. I’d bet almost anything there’s an enormous influence. There’s no way the vast majority of CT users rate wines without being influenced by other people first.
Jeb for Washington.
+1
Sometimes chunks of text lifted verbatim from pro reviews.
Well done.
I suppose if you know specific CT users (despite their best efforts to keep you from knowing who they are – thanks “maxpleasure” for that note!") their notes are as useful (or not) as posts here can be, but as a crowd sourced form of information, CT is utterly useless to me. Why would I care what a bunch of people – some who just started drinking wine, some who have undisclosed commercial interests, some who have palates even worse than mine – have to say about a wine? It is no more use to me than yelp.
That isn’t to say I never check the notes. If the 5 most recent notes say a wine I plan on serving is super tannic and not ready, I may well go for something else. If a string of notes all say, effectively, I couldn’t choke this down, it might give me some pause.
But the idea that I should make buying decisions on the collective “wisdom” of the general public on a topic like wine just strikes me as crazy.
I will say that CT notes would be much more useful if Eric had the same “real names” policy as this board. I know that isn’t practical but, eg, it is meaningful to me when I see one of Leve’s notes on a bdx. A note from “wineriot69” is not likely to draw me in. (I made up these names to protect the innocent; it I happened to hit on an actual user, no offense intended)
CT reviewers don’t use those tough words like delineated, beams of tannins, graphite and salinity all for one wine.
No, definitely would trust none of them to buy on scores alone.
However I’d happily read the tasting notes from a cross-section of them, and if anything jumped out as (personally) interesting to try, then yes I might well buy a bottle to give it a go. Perhaps even Suckling.