Vintelligence:

The Essential Digest by the Editors of HinsdaleCellars.com

Red Wine Rating is Not Just a Game of Chance

August 2006

When contemplating the score assigned to a premium wine on your radar -- especially a red wine rating -- ask two important sometimes neglected questions.

Where and when? The great wines of the world will generally taste better in the barrel. Many can experience a bottle shock period of one to three years, depending on the vintage or who makes it. In a state of bottle shock, the wine will tend to "close up" after it is out of the barrel.

Preeminent taster Robert Parker, Jr. (The Wine Advocate and eRobertParker.com) will tend to review over a number of years. First, he'll assess the out-of-the-barrel state. Then he'll come back and taste again in the second year, maybe the third year. Of course, we know some red wines don't "close up". New World wines usually don't. Old World wines typically do. This drives some consumers crazy. Wines of Bordeaux, Burgundy, the better northern Italians, are great out of the barrels. If you were there at that very moment you would be getting the same tasting notes as Parker or other master tasters.

The out-of-the-barrel element really depends on the vintage and the style of winemaking.

Unfortunately, some of the highest scoring red wines will not taste good upon acquiring and tasting them for the first time. They are not in a ready state. They are in a lessened state. To apply the analogy of running in a marathon, a red wine rating is really just a snapshot of that wine over the course of a long journey. A great red wine can disappoint at certain stages of its evolution, like a runner trailing the pack by a mile and a half. At some stages of the race, you are not seeing them at their best. And yet if you had tasted them when the critics had them you probably would agree with the critics.

The challenge for those professionally engaged in assigning a rating to a particular red wine is they are often trying to get at where that red wine will be in five to 10 years. Especially at the high end, when you are spending a lot of money on some reviewer's score, it is a tough call as to whether you buy into the forecasted excellence.

Mr. Parker, having earned a nearly universal trust among novice and veteran collectors alike, never really addresses the question of his scoring threshold -- the moment at which a rating reflects the here and now versus the anticipated. But we are convinced that, more so than other reputable publications and their tasting teams, Mr. Parker only will go beyond 94 points when he believes in a wine's aging potential. That is the magic number. Between 94 and 100 lies the potential for a wine to become a masterpiece.

Sometimes, the potential of a red wine is realized to its fullest but that is never known until the passage of time. The 2000 Chateau Margaux first was given a rating of "94-96" by Mr. Parker in April 2001. He then notched it up to "96-99" status in February 2002. By April 2003, he surrendered to others who earlier said the 2000 Margaux was clearly the "wine of the vintage" and rated it a 100.

But some epic red wines go in the opposite direction against all odds. Take the 1982 Petrus, a Pomerol from Bordeaux.

In August 1993, Mr. Parker wrote: "So hauntingly perfect and phenomenally concentrated from cask, only to taste awkward and funky during its first 5-6 years in the bottle, the 1982 Petrus is showing signs of living up to the terrific hype I heaped on it."

Simply put, the 1982 Petrus never got there. It happens all the time. But Mr. Parker tends to only re-review wines that people have broader interest in from a rating standpoint (because they were a 100), or Bordeaux, Rhone, Burgundy, maybe the California Cabernets. An obscure red wine often times he will not go back to.

Many years later, in June 2000, Mr. Parker assigned a 98 with a hint of regret, writing, "From barrel, this remains one of the greatest wines I have ever tasted."

Ultimately, your decisions will be based on personal experiences and how a given master taster aligns with your preferences.

International Wine Cellar’s Stephen Tanzer is deemed by some similar to Parker's fellow taster Pierre Rovani, in that he does not rate as many wines but has a drier taste, which is fine. There is nothing wrong with that. Just know that when Tanzer says something is lush, Parker might call it less lush. Red wine ratings are especially subjective.

Burghound founder Allen Meadows seems to insist all wines from Burgundy are 10 years away from drinking. You wonder if this guy really enjoys wine or not!  But we know there is an elite group of people who love Burgundy. When it's good it is one of the best wines in the world.