By Daniel Eddy, May 2008

We call them “Score Whores” or in kinder terms: “Cherry Pickers” or “Parkerites” and “Tanzerites.” All are names for customers who shop by number, much to the chagrin of the 100-point scale originator, Robert M Parker Jr., since he really wanted people to read his voluminous texts, not just see the number and buy.

 You can tell cherry pickers by their rolled up magazines or by their sweaty, crumpled pieces of paper, printed up from a late night online search. Often they blatantly walk up to the front counter and say, “I’d like 10 wines, all 90 points and above.” The score might be their only criteria — a problem, since no matter how good your reviewer, wine is a subjective endeavor. High number or not, you might not agree with the reviewer’s tastes, hence the accompanying text.

Timing remains the other biggest downfall to this kind of cherry picking. By the time the scores come out, the wine has been on the market for a while. Those with good palates have already gobbled up a limited production wine, leaving nothing left in the stores. I find this to be especially the case with most of the year-end reviews like “Wine Spectator’s Top 100.” By the time this anniversary issue hits the stands the wines have already been scored and sold.

    What do the numbers mean? And why 100 points? The first question is easy as most magazines give you a key and that key corresponds to the grading scale most of us used in high school and college. Roughly 90 and above are A’s, while 80 and above are B’s and so on. Some reviewers may be a little more stringent and use more of a 94 and up as A and 85 and up as B, but the relative scale is still the same. To simplify: 80 - 85 is a good wine, not the best; 85 - 90 are very good wines and most consumers will be happy with anything scored at this level; 90 - 95 are truly excellent wines, and the only real issues would be subjective differences in the consumer’s palates; 95 - 100 represents wines that are undeniably great. Most reviewers point out that anything between 97 - 100 are sublime and any number variance is personal preference and raw emotion. Occasionally 100 point, or perfect wines are scored and then devoured by the market.

Does subjectivity make the scores invalid?  Short answer is no. 

Robert Parker of The Wine Advocate, Stephen Tanzer of International Wine Cellar and Jim Laube of The Wine Spectator, as three prime examples of well known wine reviewers or “megatasters,” have their jobs because their palates are spot on. Knowing an individual megataster’s tastes can help, since once you learn their palate you can fit your own tastes into their schema and even know when you might disagree.

Megatasters tend to score higher on some of the more opulent wines, especially when one tastes hundreds of wines. No matter how perfect your palate, or how assiduously you spit, when confronted with so many wines, certain styles tend to make more of an impression. These are the “Parkerized Fruit Bombs” that have defined a California style tendency towards extracted ripeness, coupled with incredible depth. These wines are often imbibed alone, without food, so almost need to be a meal in and of themselves, and might not pair as well with a real meal. Does this make these high scoring wines bad? Not at all. But these manipulated styles with impressive scores disappear fast.

With so many wines on the market many magazines are turning to a committee to score their wines. This can make a personal relationship to the reviewer more difficult. I would say that the different magazines tend to have “house styles” that they prefer, and anyone who has seen a Wine Enthusiast 92 on a wine that got a Wine Spectator 87 knows this can happen. Again, truth is subjective, and the Enthusiast tends to be more enthusiastic about softer, riper wines, where the Spectator can lean to more complex, deep, woody flavors.

Scores shouldn’t be a shopper’s first criteria. You need to look at the meal you are attempting to pair, or the context of your consumption. What’s for dinner? Are you just tasting with friends? If you already know you want a red zinfandel, then you can look at the scores for final selection, but always read the text. The text gives you the real information. The number is just the beginning. Other country’s magazines use different methods or scales. England’s Decanter uses a five-cup scale with five being the best. It makes sense that Americans would gravitate to a 100-point scale, both because of our academic background, and also because of our desire for high scores in sporting events. The single digits of a soccer game seem dull when compared to the higher digits of American football or basketball.

Remember it is a business, and even though Tanzer and Parker don’t accept ads in their publications, they still make a living through their subscriptions and their famous noses. Money is involved, as “palates for hire” they can make Bordeaux quake with a bad vintage review. Wining by the numbers is not always a sure thing.