For me Suckling's ratings have become sort of a joke, and generally should be discounted pretty heavily. I think he's done a disservice to the wine rating industry with his inflated scores, which don't give consumers an accurate assessment of value. That said, he's nowhere near as ridiculous as Luca Maroni.
The thing that I hate is that he probably has made a lot money with his ratings. And that, that way of rating is engineered to make people pay to much for wine.
James Sucks...ing! I do remember a time that everybody i knew would criticize RP ratings, saying that his tasting is very modern and etc. Ok, what about now that we have THIS guy giving 90 points for everything fruit driven style and no mouthfeel? This remember only one thing from RP: Jay Miller! Probably James used to love his notes....😅😅😅
Back when he was with Wine Spectator, I really appreciated his ratings, and I thought my palate aligned with JS much more closely than with others, such as Robert Parker. Once he went out on his own, however, JS clearly struggled to maintain relevance, especially early on, and so he played to the market: He very clearly understood how retail shops sell their wine. A higher score generates more sales. Therefore, retail shops will put the shelf talker with the greatest accolades next to their bottles. When that shelf talker has a James Suckling score, that’s basically a free advertisement for his name and website. Wine producers may deny it, but they love it when their wines get very high scores, because they can command a higher price and sell more bottles. Therefore, the critic who gives a higher score is more appreciated by these producers, who then give better access to those critics for future tastings, winery, tours, etc.. In other words, JS has worked very hard at self-promotion and personal income, at the cost of credibility among most experienced wine geeks like me. I still appreciate his palate, however, and therefore I find I can take his review and score, lop +/- 4 points off it, and be happy with the results.
I think he has it right there's going to a person who inflates their ratings and that's going to be the ratings on the bottles. So long as he's ranking them correctly and not giving bad wines good reviews for cynical reasons a consumer knows which wines are better than others. The other critics should increase their scales. Maybe instead of numbers just use a scale that says what they recommend the consumer to do.
I was skiing with some friends in Tahoe, one of them a winemaker and vintners son who's father helped launch Phelps. He had me taste a Chardonnay and rate it . I thought it was pretty good and gave it an 89-90. He told me he had turned down purchasing an ad in the wine spectator and they gave the wine a score of 83. He was livid, I lost a ton of respect for the Wine Spectator. This was back in the 90's.
I always discount scores from the majors. I like buying test bottles from various producers and only use the score as a general guide. KB should be the new wine rating system with the bottles rated over 95 being classified as, “The Baum”!
Actually I bought some wines from him and I liked most of them, but even there were some disagreements. One example the Sven Nieger 2019 Riesling Ungeschminkt he scored with 90 and I with 85. Was this a bad wine, definitely not, but not my style or the wrong time (Rieslings tend to get closed sometimes). Robert Parker agreed with CB's 90s so I might be the one off. Lesson learned, great wine critics which align with your taste are a good guidance to taste and buy, but not alway, your taste profile might just differ in some aspects.
I really enjoy watching you go through your thoughts ant methods while you taste. Having been in the wines biz. for 40+ years, usually the last thing I wanna do is watch some "know it all" taste wine....you are an exception. Very entertaining, humorous and humble. Based on climate change and winemaking these days (Cold soak, etc) it's not as easy to make out Cote de Nuits vs. Beaune...cheers.
Great video, really enjoyed this. For me this speaks to the problem that all critics (whether you think they give inflated scores or are harsh) use such a narrow range of scores. If a broader range of scores for what are still considered good wines were used I think that would be a lot more helpful for the consumer.
We can occasionally buy wines rated 90+ by JS at our local grocer for about $10 or even less (Argentine malbec, for instance). Of course these are just ordinary everyday quaffs, not distinguished wines. I agree with Konstantin and the comments - it's necessary to make an at least 3 point downward adjustment to arrive at a correct score.
Hi Konstantin, the bottle shape was a good indicator for the Italian. Many bottles from mid-east coast to the heel of Italy are shortish neck with a rounded, fatter shoulder then tapering slightly towards the bottom - and quite heavy (I should photo a typical bottle and send). A lot of Puglian wines are in bottles like this - they must be spreading up North to Abruzzo. I do like Italians. However, I am so pleased that you worship Riesling, and the Mosel Rieslings are the most complex and excellent from my opinion. They open up so many layers as they taste, from dry/straw/mineral on the front yielding a kind of fruit-driven, almost syrupy middle - then morphing to the acidity which provides the unique and extended length which we all love. I would like to stay a week around Traben-Trarbach.... just because. Not easy from Oz though. Cheers, Phil
As a Brit I cannot understand the obsession with 100 scores at all, have never scored a wine and find the entire concept utterly meaningless - it has zero relevance to me. I judge a wine firstly on my own taste but more importantly on the mass market taste - most consumers will agree as to what is or is not a good Sauvignon Blanc so to exaggerate one wine is clearly a kick in your own teeth. I like to describe the wine and give it character - but I.ve never scored it in numbers- quite a childish and bizarre concept
Yeah, Suckling is known for overrating wines, but I do more often then not agree with his general tasting conclusions. Just have to take his scores with "a pinch of salt". It's the same with Vinum compared to Gault Milliau Deutschland or Weinplus (but not by a margin that big). At least in my opinion/experience. Love your vids. Down to earth, good descriptions of the wines with a touch of humour, well done again.
Konstantin, I found your comment on the points distribution inspiring. I think James SUCKLING mentioned that he gives 100 points to the wines who (yes, I intended using the word who instead of which) touch his soul - I found this rule pretty romantic and reasonable as a 100 point wine *should never* be an once in a life experience. May I ask how would you rate a wine 100 points?
I agree. I think the reluctance of many critics to award 100 points is unfounded. It's like that asshat teacher/professor who says "I never give A's because there's no such thing as a perfect answer in my class", when they definitely should, as the criterion isn't 'perfection', but rather answering all the posed questions/problems correctly and without mistakes.
For wines over 95 points, WASM uses a scale within a scale correlated to actual wine price/QVR, so someone who has only tasted "90" wines can't rate a wine 100. The sub scale is introduced, when taster indicates the wine is one of the best they have tasted within a varietal and then WASM asks the taster about the best ever wine contenders from the balance of taste, acidity astringency as a category; body, structure, complexity and multi dimensional aspects and then the Lush Opulent lingering mouthfeel throughout the three taste phases using a non-linear scale with six radio buttons within each of the three best ever sub categories
Here's a question.....do critics like JS rate wine (with very liberal scores), based on how they show presently, or how they believe they will eventually show??. Since they were all young, did Suckling feel that Faiveley would eventually be a 95 pt wine?.
I like your logic Konstantin when assessing wines. When you described the aromas and palate I could guess what the varieties were (except for the Italian wine) but as to location you would have to invite me to taste! Interesting wine made from the Passerina grape, something I've never tried. Research shows that it is a high yielding grape and I guess to get a high score there must have been some barrel selection in order to make it more complex. Thanks for the lesson.
Great video! Perhaps factoring in price as a part of the rating? As you know there is a departure between cost and pleasure as the price increases. 100 pt First Growth at 4 figures vs a 100 pt Cabernet for say, 150 euros! Cheers!
Always love these blind tasting videos! In this, I would've actually liked to hear what tasting notes James Suckling wrote for these for these wines. I typically look at both the score and description, since the latter also gives a better hint if it's a wine style that I like, or not. For this particular tasting I think it would've been cool to hear your thoughts about Sucklings analysis of the wines. @Leon: buy the 100 pts Burgundy next time!!! The suspense was killing ;)
I have found that the qualitative description is more helpful. I like heavy reds that are more earthy, soil, leather, licorice. I don’t like the berry bombs. This helps me more than the scores.
I really enjoy your videos. I am self teaching myself and you opened my eyes to so many varietals. I had never heard of that Italian varietal so will go learn more! Thank you!
I tend to discount the credibility of any store that relies on JS scores to sell wines, your video is a great example why. Fun and pacey and smart as always.
Enjoy and respect your comments Konstantin Not a fan of the 100pt system Generally only buy from producers with good reputations in good years I will look at a couple of reviews if available but more interested in the descriptions than the points scored Definitely noticed grade inflation over time but overall quality of wine making has improved Best value seems to be just under 90pts 88-89pts
Your explanations of taste and ratings has, I think, improved my tasting and expanded my enjoyment of wines. Most of my and my wife’s wine purchases are directly from the vintner or winery. So I would only use ratings when buying a bottle of two while traveling. I have noticed that ratings have inflated wildly. 90 point wines can be sometimes ok but not great (to me), so I’m not so moved by ratings except to filter out bad stuff.
Very good series and I agree with your assessment of Suckling. I relied on Steven Tanner ratings more than Parker and Wine Spectator, but not sure what happened to him after he sold his magazine. Hats off to you.
I really enjoyed your descriptions and was able to id the grape varieties before they were unveiled. Maybe I'm being cynical, but I think Mr. Suckling may be incentivized to score wines higher than his competitors in order to ensure good relations with some producers. Anyway, scores from critics can lead to problems for consumers because you don't know what the critics tastes run to and whether the match up with your own personal tastes. Thanks for the video, it confirms some ideas I had and was fun for an amateur like me. Any video on champagne would be most appreciated. Best, J
Excellent video. I rate it 100 pts ❤. Would like to see a Jeb Dunnuck taste-off next as my palate is kinda similar to his but noticing the scores creeping up a bit.
No, I don't use scores because they are all subjective but try to convey a spurious flavour of objectivity. Also, why not simply use a 20 point scale, like Jancis Robinson, if everything lies between 80 and 100? By coincidence my choice of wine this evening is a Gevrey-Chambertin, Villages, 2012 from Louis Boillot. Lovely. I bought it en primeur many years ago. I have no idea what score anybody would give it but I am enjoying it.
I use JS scores. I appreciate he gives more credit to enjoyable but less 'Parkerfied' wines. The difference between a 90 and 95 point wine is often 3 times the price, so this is a helpful value comparison when WS rated 2 wines the same and JS gave one a 3 point higher score - in that case it doesn't matter what the point difference is between WS and JS.
Very good point, the scale is not linear when correlated to price when quality increases exponentially not linearly, and, I would contend 4 times more expensive or should be between a 90 and 95, noting as the video reveals: a single, subjective, overall summary score by an individual is not precise and in the end means nothing, as you have to subjectively adjust each raters score based on their bias. Score needs to come from evaluating each wine attribute and have the precision [tenths, hundredths, thousandths for wine contests having over 100 wines] based on how many wines evaluated so there is not a tie, and so you dont have to use an artificial 5 point delta between wines to even come close to choosing correctly. KB was very humble to produce this video that provides the evidence what the majority of the industry already knows, but this video demonstrated the issues.
Suckling tasting notes are usually spot on vs others. Ratings are where he runs into trouble, but people should be looking at notes over the scores anyways.
First off, thanks Konstantin. Your videos are one of the finest wine related videos/content available on the net. I personally own the same wine from Faiveley, just a different 2018 vintage. Hopefully that one will show more performance given the extra years.
For the Burgundy, I wonder if Sucklling takes into the account of its aging potential, thereby increasing the point for what its peak could be. I do that with my wine also and that's why I buy some wine to put away even though its release score isn't high.
Thank you for ‘challenging’ James Suckling to a blind tasting. Over the years I have come to regard a rating by James Suckling as the kiss of death for a wine. I’ve been disappointed repeatedly by his inflated ratings, especially on inexpensive wines. Ever consider a Baum branding, that I could trust.
I’ve always done exactly as you recommend - subtract roughly 3-6 points from his scores. Still helpful when other reviews aren’t available. Nice to hear a MW confirm
I would really appreciate a video about Austria (Wachhau Riesling vs German etc.). You should also try the Wine Batonnage, since it won in a blind tasting against many Premiers Grand Crus and other big names.
I think you were spot on about the effect of high scoring from a business perspective. Being a high scorer might make you attractive to producers in the short to medium term but over the long term when you are not only a high scorer and, more importantly, have developed a reputation for being a high scorer this could be quite damaging as the more savvy consumers will just discount or, worse, ignore, your scores.
I’ve grown to dislike scoring wines, because when I see a 100 point Pinot from Patagonia costing $90 and a 97 point red Burgundy from France costing $700, I just lose perspective. Both wines are low volume and somewhat difficult to obtain. Just tell me if the wine represents its place, taste like the grape varietal, has complexity, if it is a quality wine, and whether I should buy to drink immediately/within 3 years, hold for some period of time-5 years, 10 years, 20 years or longer.
Thank you for this. I agree that JS score compression makes it harder to sort out what one should expect from a wine. I always subtract about 4, but I’m sure that’s not always true at the top end. But can’t afford that anyway!
You beat me to the punch with this idea again! Nice choices by Leon. I generally take 2 pts off Suckling scores but do feel like when he scores wines over 95, they are pretty good wines.
Always like your laid back, honest style! Yeah, I don't place much faith in some of the high ratings some "experts" give. One only has to follow the dots in many cases, as to who sponsors them or their publications in the background. Cheers Marc D
Good job on adjusting your guesses to how JS scores wines! I find 2020 red Burgundy to be tremendously difficult to taste blind, as many of them are dark in color, plummy and high in alcohol. Taking the vintage into consideration it makes total sense that you guessed Côte de Beaune!
Look at the bright side, you got the relative scores about right and I think that’s all one can ask for. A lot of professional tasters also build in aging. For me, the key is consistency …
I drank a 1992 Robert Mondavi Napa Cabernet reserve once back in 1995, and that was a 99. Simply astounding and unlike any other Cab Sav ever. I use that experience as the benchmark against which I compare all other great red wines
I read the reviews and ratings of the several most popular wine pros, but put little stock in what they say. I am more influenced by ratings and comments of others who, like myself, are just enthusiasts. Even more, I pay attention to the consistency, or lack thereof, in ratings among both enthusiasts and pros. At this point, I have more confidence in Mr. Balm’s comments and recommendations than any other single reviewer.
Totally agree with you re: Suckling scores. They are always 2-4pts higher than mine or any of my wine donk friends. Love the clip with Gary V. I am one of the original Vayniacs and met Gary a couple of times. A true gentleman and great guy. Good show!
I discount Suckling's scores by around 4 points, depending on the region. I have a not totally dissimilar palate to Parker especially on American wine. For Champagne I have my own standards and only look to Galloni and Parker for a general reference range.
Over the years, I agree, the ratings from JS et al have become less relevant because of apparent score inflation. In general, I might look at scores by a collection of critics to either look for a high quality wine at a relative bargain, or avoid a universal stinker.
My challenge with the 100 point scale is that it's really a 25 point scale (75-100) with a fail rating below 75, and even then critics tend to stay within narrow ranges within the 75 points. It'd be more helpful to have more detailed differentiation, and more transparency on what goes into picking the number.
I love your videos, and blind tastings like these are very enjoyable. For future episodes, it would be very helpful if, when reviewing wine color, you could hold it up against something pure white (clean sheet of paper or white napkin, etc), so we could see the color better on your videos.
My normal research on a wine includes getting several reviews, which may include Parker, Jancis Robinson, Suckling, Burghound, etc. Suckling tends to be high in scores, but still provides insight. Don’t fall in love with somebody else’s tastebuds! 😂
Suckling's scores are generally higher but at least consistent. They do offer a guide for the average wine buyer. Its better than the gold or silver medals that many wines put on their labels. Some of the medals are from dubious wine competitions?
Since today it's more of a team work than ever - I mean that all scoring is being made by a team rather than by one person - so it's even more interesting to understand the inflation or specific inclinations.
Could you make a video where you test the biodynamic calendar? I’ve heard many people faithfully beliving in it, whereas others say its purely made-up.
Wine ratings are interesting but rarely relevant to my own consumption as I have to budget, often below the entry level for such considerations to be meaningful. In re this, one of the most beautiful notes a white can have is the edelweiss floral of Riesling, especially in its more noble and profound expressions, and God bless Germany for this, because you can have this experience for £6ish if you know what you're doing, paired up with some nice pate and The Brandenburgs of Bach and you get a handle (no pun intended 🤣) on the very best of Western European culture.. I think its hard for point ratings meaningfully to factor in price. Nice one Konstantin! 🌟👍
100 points seems like such a strange scale. What is the difference between 95 and 96? 98 and 99? 88 and 90? It seems like he has a four point scale: 1-> Don't buy 2-> Buy with caution 3-> Buy 4-> Must Buy I think psychologically we'd rather score a 99 than 4 but essentially don't they mean the same thing?
Let me point out read Wine Spectator, I have done the James Suckling Master Class, I read his blog, etc. I still feel the 100 point scale is for showiness?
In general, I'm not a big fan of the points system, but I do understand it's place in the critic and consumer worlds. It can be quite helpful as a tasting/profile guide, especially when trying to navigate the enormous ocean of wine that is now available. I think the key here is finding a critic that aligns with your palate and then exploring many wines over time to see if that critic's nose/palate continue to align over time and in a consistent manner. As I hate alcoholic fruit bombs that bludgeon the head and palate, I personally avoid Parker's notes-- in fact, I steer clear from wines he thinks are "highly rated". Personally, I have found Suckling to be much more aligned with my palate and I have very rarely crossed a wine that he likes which I thought was awful. I have come to really enjoy Konstantin's approach and I love his channel (very professional, honest, logical, humble, entertaining, informative). I look forward to tasting a lot of Konstantin's choices (unfortunately many of his bottles are not immediately available in the US). Hopefully, I will be able to visit him at his wine school in the Black Forest one day. Salute!
Having tasted a lot of inflated Suckling wines I’ve noticed that he seems to prefer rustic earthy styles with higher scores in contrast to the big fruit and oak that made Parker notorious. I suspect that contrast can be synthesized into a more realistic expectation by merchants with their customers.
Hi Konstantin ! I am a french student and I am spending one week this summer in Germany (I won the free trains for a month). I want to visit great wineries and taste great wines ! Do you have any recommendations for me to visit wineries and taste wine in Germany ? Thanks ! PS : if any of the viewers want to give me recommendations I want them !! Love your vids
I'd go to Pfalz, e.g. Wachenheim and Deidesheim. There you have Dr. Bürklin-Wolf, Von Winning, Reichsrat von Buhl and more. Rheingau is also easily reached by train.
The problem I have with Wine scores is they never break down how they came up with a number. How much was the nose? How much was the structure? How much was the finish? It just seems like they grab arbitrary numbers.
I often wondered why you’re trusting someone else’s palate? They might not like what you like and vice versa. I like using apps, like Vivino, where you can follow people who have the same palate you do, and are not being paid for the score.
I really enjoyed these videos! Please do one against Neil Martin, as I think his scores are really more aligned with the market (pricing). I do look at suckling scores but don’t take them into account for choosing a good wine, I use it to weed out the ones I definitely won’t buy: if even JS scores low for this, perhaps everyone is being polite to the chateau. Please also consider doing a video against Jancis Robinson! After the recent drama on WB about critics rating higher non-blind for fear of being banned by chateaus, I look at overall critics scores, and especially JR because she is consistent blind/unblind. Finally, if you might start or end the videos on some personal observations on the stylistic preferences a particular critic may have, that will help us greatly in finding the right critic to follow.
Konstantin, not sure if you have put it down in writing or video before, but have you articulated what are the parameters of YOUR 100 point scale? good video and the points you make at end of vid are some of my concerns w score inflation
In some of your videos you showed a chart that compares the score distributions from different experts (Parker, Suckling...). Where didi you find that chart? Did you produce it by yourself?
Really cool doing these comparisons with the major wine critics. I bet you'd align a lot with Neil Martin. You should definitely do similar segments all the critics (J Robinson, LPB, Jeb Dunnuck, AG, NM etc)
Great vid as always. I completely discount JS’ scores. He may argue that his rating scale is different from others (92 means 2 different things) and there lies the problem: ratings from one critic to another are in the best case scenario like apples and oranges and it is confusing for the consumer. Unfortunately most people tend to equate them. I also think that there is an incestuous feedback loop b/w over inflators and wineries: higher ratings mean higher sale for the winery but also mean exclusivity and lavish treatment of the critic by the wineries. I know you like the 100 scale but to me, it implies a false sense of accuracy. I prefer Jancis’ 20 pts scale or the one I made up: - 1-2: bad, would not drink again even if free - 3: good wine, would drink it again (let’s say if on a wine list) but would not necessarily seek out or buy again - 4: I loved the wine, I will absolutely buy again current or can’t wait to try future vintages - 4.5 or 5: I adored the wine; I actively push it to my wine friends My 2 cents…
Even before I knew a thing about wine I’d see that James suckling pts on the label and immediately be repelled by it. I already knew that score was paid for.
Thanks for being honest and speaking the truth! Always feel like his score is over-rated and being a bit "commercial". btw, always enjoy watching your video :) - wine lover from Hong Kong~
For me Suckling's ratings have become sort of a joke, and generally should be discounted pretty heavily. I think he's done a disservice to the wine rating industry with his inflated scores, which don't give consumers an accurate assessment of value. That said, he's nowhere near as ridiculous as Luca Maroni.
The thing that I hate is that he probably has made a lot money with his ratings.
And that, that way of rating is engineered to make people pay to much for wine.
His program on that cruise line is extremely useful. I do not see egregious exaggeration in his scoring.
James Sucks...ing! I do remember a time that everybody i knew would criticize RP ratings, saying that his tasting is very modern and etc. Ok, what about now that we have THIS guy giving 90 points for everything fruit driven style and no mouthfeel? This remember only one thing from RP: Jay Miller! Probably James used to love his notes....😅😅😅
Glad I never heard of the Luca guy
Every wine that he rated highly I have never liked.
Back when he was with Wine Spectator, I really appreciated his ratings, and I thought my palate aligned with JS much more closely than with others, such as Robert Parker.
Once he went out on his own, however, JS clearly struggled to maintain relevance, especially early on, and so he played to the market:
He very clearly understood how retail shops sell their wine. A higher score generates more sales. Therefore, retail shops will put the shelf talker with the greatest accolades next to their bottles. When that shelf talker has a James Suckling score, that’s basically a free advertisement for his name and website.
Wine producers may deny it, but they love it when their wines get very high scores, because they can command a higher price and sell more bottles. Therefore, the critic who gives a higher score is more appreciated by these producers, who then give better access to those critics for future tastings, winery, tours, etc..
In other words, JS has worked very hard at self-promotion and personal income, at the cost of credibility among most experienced wine geeks like me.
I still appreciate his palate, however, and therefore I find I can take his review and score, lop +/- 4 points off it, and be happy with the results.
Ditto...everything you said. JS tasting notes are still valid and useful, just not his scores.
Agreed to everything you said!
I think he has it right there's going to a person who inflates their ratings and that's going to be the ratings on the bottles. So long as he's ranking them correctly and not giving bad wines good reviews for cynical reasons a consumer knows which wines are better than others. The other critics should increase their scales. Maybe instead of numbers just use a scale that says what they recommend the consumer to do.
I was skiing with some friends in Tahoe, one of them a winemaker and vintners son who's father helped launch Phelps. He had me taste a Chardonnay and rate it . I thought it was pretty good and gave it an 89-90. He told me he had turned down purchasing an ad in the wine spectator and they gave the wine a score of 83. He was livid, I lost a ton of respect for the Wine Spectator. This was back in the 90's.
I always discount scores from the majors. I like buying test bottles from various producers and only use the score as a general guide. KB should be the new wine rating system with the bottles rated over 95 being classified as, “The Baum”!
Actually I bought some wines from him and I liked most of them, but even there were some disagreements. One example the Sven Nieger 2019 Riesling Ungeschminkt he scored with 90 and I with 85. Was this a bad wine, definitely not, but not my style or the wrong time (Rieslings tend to get closed sometimes). Robert Parker agreed with CB's 90s so I might be the one off. Lesson learned, great wine critics which align with your taste are a good guidance to taste and buy, but not alway, your taste profile might just differ in some aspects.
I bet Baum's cellar is full of "The Baum"!
I really enjoy watching you go through your thoughts ant methods while you taste. Having been in the wines biz. for 40+ years, usually the last thing I wanna do is watch some "know it all" taste wine....you are an exception. Very entertaining, humorous and humble. Based on climate change and winemaking these days (Cold soak, etc) it's not as easy to make out Cote de Nuits vs. Beaune...cheers.
Thank you Konstantin for sharing all this with us!
really like your blind taste series. can you try JR rating blind taste? I personally think JR's recent years ratings are quite objective
It’s the thinking and evaluation process which is so key in this presentation. Very well done. Evaluation is fascinating. Trinny London etc.
Thanks for addressing the score topic, nicely done.
Great video, really enjoyed this. For me this speaks to the problem that all critics (whether you think they give inflated scores or are harsh) use such a narrow range of scores. If a broader range of scores for what are still considered good wines were used I think that would be a lot more helpful for the consumer.
What a climatic end it would have been, if Leon had bought a 1500$ bottle of Pinot😢
Sure will on the next tasting 😉
Who and what ? try to impress here ? Forget it.
Get real. And more : learn.
Might have been the last we heard about Leon.
“Climactic ending.” To be more true to Niles Crane character. 😉
@@ulrichstern7517 "Niles Crane's character", nice try though, lol
We can occasionally buy wines rated 90+ by JS at our local grocer for about $10 or even less (Argentine malbec, for instance). Of course these are just ordinary everyday quaffs, not distinguished wines. I agree with Konstantin and the comments - it's necessary to make an at least 3 point downward adjustment to arrive at a correct score.
I looooove the Gabriel glass. And you can use it for white and red wine. Which makes it more economical and saves space.
Hi Konstantin, the bottle shape was a good indicator for the Italian. Many bottles from mid-east coast to the heel of Italy are shortish neck with a rounded, fatter shoulder then tapering slightly towards the bottom - and quite heavy (I should photo a typical bottle and send). A lot of Puglian wines are in bottles like this - they must be spreading up North to Abruzzo. I do like Italians.
However, I am so pleased that you worship Riesling, and the Mosel Rieslings are the most complex and excellent from my opinion. They open up so many layers as they taste, from dry/straw/mineral on the front yielding a kind of fruit-driven, almost syrupy middle - then morphing to the acidity which provides the unique and extended length which we all love. I would like to stay a week around Traben-Trarbach.... just because.
Not easy from Oz though.
Cheers,
Phil
As a Brit I cannot understand the obsession with 100 scores at all, have never scored a wine and find the entire concept utterly meaningless - it has zero relevance to me. I judge a wine firstly on my own taste but more importantly on the mass market taste - most consumers will agree as to what is or is not a good Sauvignon Blanc so to exaggerate one wine is clearly a kick in your own teeth. I like to describe the wine and give it character - but I.ve never scored it in numbers- quite a childish and bizarre concept
Is it really a 100 point scale if a 59 point wine is already unacceptable?
I just love your videos. So honest and easy understandable.
For me, “Suckling: 91” is just a beacon sending me in a direction. I would never buy or reject wine because of a wine reviewer grade.
Yeah, Suckling is known for overrating wines, but I do more often then not agree with his general tasting conclusions.
Just have to take his scores with "a pinch of salt".
It's the same with Vinum compared to Gault Milliau Deutschland or Weinplus (but not by a margin that big).
At least in my opinion/experience.
Love your vids. Down to earth, good descriptions of the wines with a touch of humour, well done again.
Konstantin, I found your comment on the points distribution inspiring. I think James SUCKLING mentioned that he gives 100 points to the wines who (yes, I intended using the word who instead of which) touch his soul - I found this rule pretty romantic and reasonable as a 100 point wine *should never* be an once in a life experience. May I ask how would you rate a wine 100 points?
I agree. I think the reluctance of many critics to award 100 points is unfounded. It's like that asshat teacher/professor who says "I never give A's because there's no such thing as a perfect answer in my class", when they definitely should, as the criterion isn't 'perfection', but rather answering all the posed questions/problems correctly and without mistakes.
For wines over 95 points, WASM uses a scale within a scale correlated to actual wine price/QVR, so someone who has only tasted "90" wines can't rate a wine 100. The sub scale is introduced, when taster indicates the wine is one of the best they have tasted within a varietal and then WASM asks the taster about the best ever wine contenders from the balance of taste, acidity astringency as a category; body, structure, complexity and multi dimensional aspects and then the Lush Opulent lingering mouthfeel throughout the three taste phases using a non-linear scale with six radio buttons within each of the three best ever sub categories
Very cool
I could watch these all day.
Fascinating ❤
I would like to see you drink and discuss some of your top varietals/wines.
Here's a question.....do critics like JS rate wine (with very liberal scores), based on how they show presently, or how they believe they will eventually show??. Since they were all young, did Suckling feel that Faiveley would eventually be a 95 pt wine?.
I like your logic Konstantin when assessing wines. When you described the aromas and palate I could guess what the varieties were (except for the Italian wine) but as to location you would have to invite me to taste! Interesting wine made from the Passerina grape, something I've never tried. Research shows that it is a high yielding grape and I guess to get a high score there must have been some barrel selection in order to make it more complex. Thanks for the lesson.
Trying to parse a white wine blindy that isnt a chard or riesling is ultra difficult, given how Italy has so many grape varieties
Agreed. Tossing in an obscure bottle of white wine I have never even heard of would throw me off.
Great video! Perhaps factoring in price as a part of the rating? As you know there is a departure between cost and pleasure as the price increases.
100 pt First Growth at 4 figures vs a 100 pt Cabernet for say, 150 euros! Cheers!
Which wines have you ever rated 100 points?
Watch the episode where he rates the 150+ year old Port
Always love these blind tasting videos! In this, I would've actually liked to hear what tasting notes James Suckling wrote for these for these wines. I typically look at both the score and description, since the latter also gives a better hint if it's a wine style that I like, or not. For this particular tasting I think it would've been cool to hear your thoughts about Sucklings analysis of the wines. @Leon: buy the 100 pts Burgundy next time!!! The suspense was killing ;)
I have found that the qualitative description is more helpful. I like heavy reds that are more earthy, soil, leather, licorice. I don’t like the berry bombs. This helps me more than the scores.
I really enjoy your videos. I am self teaching myself and you opened my eyes to so many varietals. I had never heard of that Italian varietal so will go learn more! Thank you!
I tend to discount the credibility of any store that relies on JS scores to sell wines, your video is a great example why. Fun and pacey and smart as always.
Enjoy and respect your comments Konstantin Not a fan of the 100pt system Generally only buy from producers with good reputations in good years I will look at a couple of reviews if available but more interested in the descriptions than
the points scored Definitely noticed grade inflation over time but overall quality of wine making has improved
Best value seems to be just under 90pts 88-89pts
Your explanations of taste and ratings has, I think, improved my tasting and expanded my enjoyment of wines.
Most of my and my wife’s wine purchases are directly from the vintner or winery. So I would only use ratings when buying a bottle of two while traveling. I have noticed that ratings have inflated wildly. 90 point wines can be sometimes ok but not great (to me), so I’m not so moved by ratings except to filter out bad stuff.
Very good series and I agree with your assessment of Suckling. I relied on Steven Tanner ratings more than Parker and Wine Spectator, but not sure what happened to him after he sold his magazine. Hats off to you.
I really enjoyed your descriptions and was able to id the grape varieties before they were unveiled. Maybe I'm being cynical, but I think Mr. Suckling may be incentivized to score wines higher than his competitors in order to ensure good relations with some producers. Anyway, scores from critics can lead to problems for consumers because you don't know what the critics tastes run to and whether the match up with your own personal tastes. Thanks for the video, it confirms some ideas I had and was fun for an amateur like me. Any video on champagne would be most appreciated. Best, J
I love these videos so much. So much thoughts and philosophy in them. I really appreciate the amazing quality- thank you.
Excellent video. I rate it 100 pts ❤. Would like to see a Jeb Dunnuck taste-off next as my palate is kinda similar to his but noticing the scores creeping up a bit.
No, I don't use scores because they are all subjective but try to convey a spurious flavour of objectivity. Also, why not simply use a 20 point scale, like Jancis Robinson, if everything lies between 80 and 100?
By coincidence my choice of wine this evening is a Gevrey-Chambertin, Villages, 2012 from Louis Boillot. Lovely. I bought it en primeur many years ago. I have no idea what score anybody would give it but I am enjoying it.
I use JS scores. I appreciate he gives more credit to enjoyable but less 'Parkerfied' wines. The difference between a 90 and 95 point wine is often 3 times the price, so this is a helpful value comparison when WS rated 2 wines the same and JS gave one a 3 point higher score - in that case it doesn't matter what the point difference is between WS and JS.
Very good point, the scale is not linear when correlated to price when quality increases exponentially not linearly, and, I would contend 4 times more expensive or should be between a 90 and 95, noting as the video reveals: a single, subjective, overall summary score by an individual is not precise and in the end means nothing, as you have to subjectively adjust each raters score based on their bias. Score needs to come from evaluating each wine attribute and have the precision [tenths, hundredths, thousandths for wine contests having over 100 wines] based on how many wines evaluated so there is not a tie, and so you dont have to use an artificial 5 point delta between wines to even come close to choosing correctly. KB was very humble to produce this video that provides the evidence what the majority of the industry already knows, but this video demonstrated the issues.
Interesting deduction notes from that Pinot Gris, cheers from Argentina!
Suckling tasting notes are usually spot on vs others. Ratings are where he runs into trouble, but people should be looking at notes over the scores anyways.
First off, thanks Konstantin. Your videos are one of the finest wine related videos/content available on the net. I personally own the same wine from Faiveley, just a different 2018 vintage. Hopefully that one will show more performance given the extra years.
For the Burgundy, I wonder if Sucklling takes into the account of its aging potential, thereby increasing the point for what its peak could be. I do that with my wine also and that's why I buy some wine to put away even though its release score isn't high.
This is great content, could you repeat this type of experiment with other wine critics or even with the same but other wines.
Thank you for ‘challenging’ James Suckling to a blind tasting. Over the years I have come to regard a rating by James Suckling as the kiss of death for a wine. I’ve been disappointed repeatedly by his inflated ratings, especially on inexpensive wines. Ever consider a Baum branding, that I could trust.
I’ve always done exactly as you recommend - subtract roughly 3-6 points from his scores. Still helpful when other reviews aren’t available. Nice to hear a MW confirm
I would really appreciate a video about Austria (Wachhau Riesling vs German etc.). You should also try the Wine Batonnage, since it won in a blind tasting against many Premiers Grand Crus and other big names.
I don't worry much about the points score... I just prefer whether it suits the food i am having it with and would i buy it again... 😊😊😊
Loved this video, as much as I distrust Suckling. I really appreciate you poking a hole in his scoring of wines. More please!
I think you were spot on about the effect of high scoring from a business perspective. Being a high scorer might make you attractive to producers in the short to medium term but over the long term when you are not only a high scorer and, more importantly, have developed a reputation for being a high scorer this could be quite damaging as the more savvy consumers will just discount or, worse, ignore, your scores.
Genius, noting with an objective approach the scores would converge especially using more precision to the hundredths place
I’ve grown to dislike scoring wines, because when I see a 100 point Pinot from Patagonia costing $90 and a 97 point red Burgundy from France costing $700, I just lose perspective. Both wines are low volume and somewhat difficult to obtain. Just tell me if the wine represents its place, taste like the grape varietal, has complexity, if it is a quality wine, and whether I should buy to drink immediately/within 3 years, hold for some period of time-5 years, 10 years, 20 years or longer.
Really appreciate the way you think through a tasting, very helpful!
Thank you for this. I agree that JS score compression makes it harder to sort out what one should expect from a wine. I always subtract about 4, but I’m sure that’s not always true at the top end. But can’t afford that anyway!
Great video again. I try to identify the grapes/vines along with your descriptions, super entertaining! 🙂
Great fun--as always. I'm no wine connoisseur but I like your style. Very interesting!
You beat me to the punch with this idea again! Nice choices by Leon. I generally take 2 pts off Suckling scores but do feel like when he scores wines over 95, they are pretty good wines.
Very entertaining. Thank you!
Always like your laid back, honest style!
Yeah, I don't place much faith in some of the high ratings some "experts" give.
One only has to follow the dots in many cases, as to who sponsors them or their publications in the background.
Cheers Marc D
Good job on adjusting your guesses to how JS scores wines!
I find 2020 red Burgundy to be tremendously difficult to taste blind, as many of them are dark in color, plummy and high in alcohol. Taking the vintage into consideration it makes total sense that you guessed Côte de Beaune!
Another fantastic video!! Thank you very much!! How about including a Swiss wine sometime in one of the videos?? 🙂
Look at the bright side, you got the relative scores about right and I think that’s all one can ask for. A lot of professional tasters also build in aging. For me, the key is consistency …
Hi Konstantin,
Any chance to see some Hungarian wines on the channel?
Found your channel recently and is awesome keep up the awesome work.
Hungarian gruner is good. But stop supporting terrorist country Ruzzia!
I drank a 1992 Robert Mondavi Napa Cabernet reserve once back in 1995, and that was a 99. Simply astounding and unlike any other Cab Sav ever. I use that experience as the benchmark against which I compare all other great red wines
I read the reviews and ratings of the several most popular wine pros, but put little stock in what they say. I am more influenced by ratings and comments of others who, like myself, are just enthusiasts. Even more, I pay attention to the consistency, or lack thereof, in ratings among both enthusiasts and pros. At this point, I have more confidence in Mr. Balm’s comments and recommendations than any other single reviewer.
Totally agree with you re: Suckling scores. They are always 2-4pts higher than mine or any of my wine donk friends.
Love the clip with Gary V. I am one of the original Vayniacs and met Gary a couple of times. A true gentleman and great guy.
Good show!
I discount Suckling's scores by around 4 points, depending on the region. I have a not totally dissimilar palate to Parker especially on American wine. For Champagne I have my own standards and only look to Galloni and Parker for a general reference range.
Over the years, I agree, the ratings from JS et al have become less relevant because of apparent score inflation. In general, I might look at scores by a collection of critics to either look for a high quality wine at a relative bargain, or avoid a universal stinker.
Hi, Konstantin. Love this format against renown critics. Can you do this for Jancis Robinson and/or Jeannie Cho Lee?
My challenge with the 100 point scale is that it's really a 25 point scale (75-100) with a fail rating below 75, and even then critics tend to stay within narrow ranges within the 75 points. It'd be more helpful to have more detailed differentiation, and more transparency on what goes into picking the number.
I love your videos, and blind tastings like these are very enjoyable.
For future episodes, it would be very helpful if, when reviewing wine color, you could hold it up against something pure white (clean sheet of paper or white napkin, etc), so we could see the color better on your videos.
Faiveley NSG 2019 was super for its price- rather than spend $$ on the premier crus. Fun blind tastings!!
LOVE this series!!
My normal research on a wine includes getting several reviews, which may include Parker, Jancis Robinson, Suckling, Burghound, etc. Suckling tends to be high in scores, but still provides insight. Don’t fall in love with somebody else’s tastebuds! 😂
And i want to know what do you think about iDealwine?
Suckling's scores are generally higher but at least consistent. They do offer a guide for the average wine buyer. Its better than the gold or silver medals that many wines put on their labels. Some of the medals are from dubious wine competitions?
Since today it's more of a team work than ever - I mean that all scoring is being made by a team rather than by one person - so it's even more interesting to understand the inflation or specific inclinations.
Could you make a video where you test the biodynamic calendar? I’ve heard many people faithfully beliving in it, whereas others say its purely made-up.
Haven’t even pressed play, I just had to say THANK YOU, Konstantin!!! 🙏🏼 We asked for this, and you made it happen. I’m excited to watch !!
Wine ratings are interesting but rarely relevant to my own consumption as I have to budget, often below the entry level for such considerations to be meaningful. In re this, one of the most beautiful notes a white can have is the edelweiss floral of Riesling, especially in its more noble and profound expressions, and God bless Germany for this, because you can have this experience for £6ish if you know what you're doing, paired up with some nice pate and The Brandenburgs of Bach and you get a handle (no pun intended 🤣) on the very best of Western European culture..
I think its hard for point ratings meaningfully to factor in price. Nice one Konstantin! 🌟👍
WASM price points a wine to the penny based on an individuals scoring of each wine attribute
Damnnnnnnn Konstantin just said Leon ain’t got no balls 💀💀💀
So ein Video zu Falstaff oder Lobenberg ratings wäre auch toll.
Great video again. Please do Jancis :-)
100 points seems like such a strange scale. What is the difference between 95 and 96? 98 and 99? 88 and 90? It seems like he has a four point scale:
1-> Don't buy
2-> Buy with caution
3-> Buy
4-> Must Buy
I think psychologically we'd rather score a 99 than 4 but essentially don't they mean the same thing?
Let me point out read Wine Spectator, I have done the James Suckling Master Class, I read his blog, etc. I still feel the 100 point scale is for showiness?
In general, I'm not a big fan of the points system, but I do understand it's place in the critic and consumer worlds. It can be quite helpful as a tasting/profile guide, especially when trying to navigate the enormous ocean of wine that is now available. I think the key here is finding a critic that aligns with your palate and then exploring many wines over time to see if that critic's nose/palate continue to align over time and in a consistent manner. As I hate alcoholic fruit bombs that bludgeon the head and palate, I personally avoid Parker's notes-- in fact, I steer clear from wines he thinks are "highly rated". Personally, I have found Suckling to be much more aligned with my palate and I have very rarely crossed a wine that he likes which I thought was awful. I have come to really enjoy Konstantin's approach and I love his channel (very professional, honest, logical, humble, entertaining, informative). I look forward to tasting a lot of Konstantin's choices (unfortunately many of his bottles are not immediately available in the US). Hopefully, I will be able to visit him at his wine school in the Black Forest one day. Salute!
Having tasted a lot of inflated Suckling wines I’ve noticed that he seems to prefer rustic earthy styles with higher scores in contrast to the big fruit and oak that made Parker notorious. I suspect that contrast can be synthesized into a more realistic expectation by merchants with their customers.
I've noted that KB generally rates conservatively, a 90 to 93 point wine here is where the value/quality ratio generally meet
Hi Konstantin ! I am a french student and I am spending one week this summer in Germany (I won the free trains for a month). I want to visit great wineries and taste great wines ! Do you have any recommendations for me to visit wineries and taste wine in Germany ? Thanks !
PS : if any of the viewers want to give me recommendations I want them !!
Love your vids
I'd go to Pfalz, e.g. Wachenheim and Deidesheim. There you have Dr. Bürklin-Wolf, Von Winning, Reichsrat von Buhl and more. Rheingau is also easily reached by train.
@@mikaelplaysguitar Thank you very much !
Hey Konstantin, I’d suggest trying Tbilvino winery, from Georgia🍷
The problem I have with Wine scores is they never break down how they came up with a number. How much was the nose? How much was the structure? How much was the finish? It just seems like they grab arbitrary numbers.
Like these wine critics comparison formats! :)
I often wondered why you’re trusting someone else’s palate? They might not like what you like and vice versa. I like using apps, like Vivino, where you can follow people who have the same palate you do, and are not being paid for the score.
I really enjoyed these videos! Please do one against Neil Martin, as I think his scores are really more aligned with the market (pricing). I do look at suckling scores but don’t take them into account for choosing a good wine, I use it to weed out the ones I definitely won’t buy: if even JS scores low for this, perhaps everyone is being polite to the chateau.
Please also consider doing a video against Jancis Robinson!
After the recent drama on WB about critics rating higher non-blind for fear of being banned by chateaus, I look at overall critics scores, and especially JR because she is consistent blind/unblind.
Finally, if you might start or end the videos on some personal observations on the stylistic preferences a particular critic may have, that will help us greatly in finding the right critic to follow.
Where did you get the wine bags for the blind tasting from?
Konstantin, not sure if you have put it down in writing or video before, but have you articulated what are the parameters of YOUR 100 point scale? good video and the points you make at end of vid are some of my concerns w score inflation
In some of your videos you showed a chart that compares the score distributions from different experts (Parker, Suckling...). Where didi you find that chart? Did you produce it by yourself?
Yes, I made it.
@@KonstantinBaumMasterofWine very intresting chart!
Really cool doing these comparisons with the major wine critics. I bet you'd align a lot with Neil Martin. You should definitely do similar segments all the critics (J Robinson, LPB, Jeb Dunnuck, AG, NM etc)
I like to use the scores as an aggregate, average them out so to speak.
Thanks for another fine video
I'm a cheesemonger and I'm new to your channel, do you do content about wine and cheese pairings?
Not yet... even though I had cheese with some of the wines on this channel.
😄😄 imagine Leon going on a shopping spree and really emptying Konstantin´s wallet with a 100 point Pinot Noir 😂
Great vid as always. I completely discount JS’ scores. He may argue that his rating scale is different from others (92 means 2 different things) and there lies the problem: ratings from one critic to another are in the best case scenario like apples and oranges and it is confusing for the consumer. Unfortunately most people tend to equate them. I also think that there is an incestuous feedback loop b/w over inflators and wineries: higher ratings mean higher sale for the winery but also mean exclusivity and lavish treatment of the critic by the wineries.
I know you like the 100 scale but to me, it implies a false sense of accuracy. I prefer Jancis’ 20 pts scale or the one I made up:
- 1-2: bad, would not drink again even if free
- 3: good wine, would drink it again (let’s say if on a wine list) but would not necessarily seek out or buy again
- 4: I loved the wine, I will absolutely buy again current or can’t wait to try future vintages
- 4.5 or 5: I adored the wine; I actively push it to my wine friends
My 2 cents…
Even before I knew a thing about wine I’d see that James suckling pts on the label and immediately be repelled by it. I already knew that score was paid for.
Thanks for being honest and speaking the truth! Always feel like his score is over-rated and being a bit "commercial". btw, always enjoy watching your video :) - wine lover from Hong Kong~