Editorial: What comes after the 100-point system?
By Christian Eedes, 11 September 2024
-
Share:
10
The Platter’s South African Wine Guide was founded in 1980. Wine magazine, the forerunner of Winemag.co.za, in 1993. And the Tim Atkin South African Special Report in 2013. The question remains, however, “Is South African wine, taken as a whole, genuinely worthy of review at the highest level?”
When it comes to the regions of Bordeaux, Burgundy and the Rhône, the wines command enough interest and money to support quite a few full-time critics, but is there real money to be made when it comes to covering South Africa?
Punters want some assurance before spending and the stakes are higher now than they were 10 years ago – the three single site examples of Pinot Noir from Crystallum are line-priced at R734 a bottle, Columella 2022 costs R1,200 a bottle, MR de Compostella 2021 R2,050 a bottle.
But how to provide that assurance? For a long while now, the 100-point system for wine evaluation, popularized by critics like Robert Parker, has been used. Its limitations are various and increasingly function to enfeeble the fine wine discussion.
Unfortunately, there is a degree of similarity creeping into the wines, partly because of how tight-knit the top-end of the local industry has become. For those deeply immersed in local wine culture, constantly encountering the same regions, styles, or varieties, some redundancy is now beginning to appear – too many bottlings in the same idiom than is necessary.
The result is that whereas there were a manageable number of truly excellent bottlings for the highly involved wine enthusiast to deal with 20 years ago, there are now so many 95-plus wines that such a score is increasingly irrelevant. There were 17 wines rated 5 Stars in the 2004 edition of the Platter’s Guide and 226 in the 2024 edition. Making an informed purchasing decision has gotten a lot harder and the point system isn’t really helping…
Of course, the wine market is not monolithic, and there are always various trends at play, these often not in agreement or harmony. Syrah, for instance, might be the red variety of the moment, but it can be made in stylistically divergent ways. One producer may choose to make his Syrah as a “big red” and another as a “natural wine”, both subsequently obtaining the same score, this only serving to create confusion among those on the receiving end. Keermont Steepside Syrah from Alex Starey and Sons of Sugarland from Reenen Borman may well both rate 95 points, but they are very different drinking experiences.
Stakeholders all along the value chain (wholesaler, distributor, restaurateur, bar owner, retailer) have an interest in extracting as much value for themselves as possible and critics are under pressure to ratchet up scores to justify high price tags and fuel sales. All this can cause unrealistic expectations. If these wines don’t live up to the hype, consumers may be left with a sense of disillusionment.
Considering the above, I think it is high time to get beyond this reductionist approach that is the 100-point system, and yet I’m not sure how, and nor are some of the sensible people I canvas.
Many attempt to prioritize tasting notes that describe the wine’s characteristics—aroma, flavor, mouthfeel, finish, etc. This method provides a more personal and sensory-focused evaluation. Certainly helpful but let’s accept that a universal language of wine is ultimately not possible as there is a certain inescapable subjectivity when it comes to the physical process of tasting. The more detail the author of a note provides, the more likely he’s talking to himself…
Another way to break away from the 100-point scale is to focus on the broader experience of wine. This might involve putting the wine in the context of shared lived experiences. How does it perform with different foods or in different settings? Is this a “weekday wine” or a “special occasion wine” Is it “summer sipping” or a “winter warmer”? Matching the wine to a scenario can help consumers relate better and I think we need more of this.
A few wines have some cultural or historical significance, and this is a boon for the wine writer as it shifts the evaluation from technical to narrative driven. Unfortunately, in a saturated market, such wines are few and far between.
On reflection, it strikes me that overthrowing the 100-point system probably doesn’t involve replacing it with another concrete methodology but rather it’s about the writer building a following with a readership, and communicating the key factors that are most important to him or her, intrinsic quality obviously being one, but also such attributes as originality, drinkability and value.
The goal is to provide the audience with a deeper understanding of wine, and this should involve constant experimentation and tweaking of creative approach. Attract enough eyeballs and the pundit will hopefully be able to make a living – it’s as simple as that. As for the 100-point system, it’s probably not going away any time soon but should always be viewed with a healthy degree of scepticism.
-
Share:
Jono Le Feuvre | 12 September 2024
I think this article is hugely relevant, and I’d love to see the recommendations carried out more often in wine reviews:
https://timatkin.com/transcending-our-binary-bonds/
Vernon | 12 September 2024
I’d strongly support comments from Jos & Kwispedoor. Some time back I read this comment from Tim James on Winemag: “If you’re going to have an alcohol level over 14%, you really need to keep the residual sugar below 2 g per litre to avoid that sweetness.” From then on, I’ve paid much closer attention to Abv, RS etc.
A bit more guidance on ageability would also be valuable. For instance, Christian rated 2022 Hogan Divergent highly but since this wine is inspired by Chateau Musar I’m guessing it would benefit from 5+ years bottle age. Just my guess, though.
As for Jules’ comments on wine writing & critics, I’m totally with you there!
BRUCE WRIGHT | 11 September 2024
@Ryan Cotzee, I couldn’t agree more. Use a digital platform to include the end consumer in the process of tasting and education. Rather than a whole lot (select bunch) of people sitting and tasting and telling the masses what they think. I would be more than happy to acquire a bottle or 3 of decent wines and sit and taste it over a live Zoom call with a person who can not only “educate” me but also listen to my opinion, And the opinion of many may produce a more accurate rating.
Jules | 11 September 2024
I don’t know what would replace the 100 point scale – it has served a very useful purpose for all involved in the wine industry for decades (including end-consumers).
My worry has always been that there seems to be hardly anything below 85….which in essence means we are dealing with a 15 point scale. Rather like having road speed limits at a too ‘conservative’ level, all the traffic bunches up together, leading to an increased chance of accidents!
Yes I would like more information on prospective ageing potential and food pairing, although the more florid writing style of the poet/critics can be a little too much; one suddenly starts to wonder if some of them inhabit the same planet Earth as their readership.
After all, how many people really get near to experiencing or memorising the smell of “Moroccan saddle leather”, “warm stones”, “sun-raisined cherries” (?!?). Has anyone ever tasted: “…resinous evocations of rosemary, fennel, black tea, and marjoram…”? Not me.
I used to quite enjoy reading the highly respected critic Clive Coates, whose reviews were very pithy and devoid of the hyperbole that too often accompanies reviews written by the ‘poets’ section of the wine writing fraternity. As a fellow wine writer said of him: “I like the economy and matter-of-factness of his tasting notes very much, and the total absence of adjective-soup”. But the fact was that, in his element, he was a true expert and master and people respected his (20 point) scoring and short assessments.
The wonderful thing about wine writing is that, like its subject, it’s varied and opinionated. But as another reader suggests, others’ opinions are just guidance – we have to get out there are experience the wines ourselves.
Kwispedoor | 11 September 2024
To add to what Jos and Jules said, I would also like more technical info on the wines. I’m, very generally, impressed by low sugars, low pH and moderate alcohol levels (these are often not updated for new wines on wineries’ websites, plus you’d have to do a separate search for it). Of course wine can find great balance in many different ways, and one shouldn’t be too technical about it, but it greatly helps decision making when you’re not quite sure whether to buy a wine or not.
And the 100-point scale is – for most reviewers – a 10-point scale from 88 to 98 (it must be a really tiny percentage of wines that’s scored outside of that bracket). Instead of the purple prose, where people embroider conceitedly with exotic and poetic language, or when they supposedly get 7 or 10 different aromas on every wine, I’d much prefer some EMOTION in the text. We are passionate about wine, right? So: is it meh? Average? Merely solid? Exciting? Comforting? Difficult not to drink quickly? Seriously immersive/contemplative/individual? Do you not want to stop drinking it, or is it slightly hard work? Does it really move you?
Jos | 11 September 2024
The simple fact is that most people are not able to attend dozens of tastings every year to make informed decision as to what they buy. Hell, most people are not even able to drink enough wine to get a real sense of variety/producer differences across vintages. So the need for some guidance is necessary and most people do not subscribe to publications to get vintage reports and notes. Even fewer are willing to pay for it. So ultimately, a sticker with a rating is as much as most people are going to engage with.
Personally, I want a reviewer to provide me with data (alc, PH, acidity), type of variety (buttery Chardonnay), their basic notes and the optimal drinking window (“let it sit for 5 years before drinking and it will easily cellar for 10 year”). That way I know if I’m into the style of wine, whether it’s a fruit forward high alcohol Bordeaux blend or something else.
I can then use the score to understand the reviewer’s view on that wine. That is, X reviewer believes that this style of wine, within this variety and vintage, is a 95. So when they review a different wine within that same parameter (same vintage and same style), I can then compare their ratings from that perspective.
Because there is no point in comparing Bouchard Finlayson Missionvale Chardonnay with Bouchard Finlayson
Crocodile’s Lair Chardonnay, even if they have the same rating as they are fundamentally different Chardonnay’s.
I guess that is a criticism of reviews on Winemag for me, I don’t expect long-form essays, but I do feel like there isn’t always sufficient information on what’s actually in the bottle to make an informed decision from an uninformed consumer perspective.
Dieter Gugelmann | 11 September 2024
I agree with Jos’ arguments almost 100%. What I like is decided by my palate. The points and descriptions are just a guideline for me, nothing more. People, just enjoy the South African wines because they are fantastic and most can be stored for a long time.
Melvyn Minnaar | 11 September 2024
The Messianic aura that some high-profile wine ‘critics’ have created for themselves and the hapless way in which producers fall for the 90-100 point ‘blessing’ are creating a disjunct that is slowly draining the existential experience and pleasures of wine. Yes, let’s talk about what wine does when you drink and think about it.
Ryan Coetzee | 11 September 2024
I think the trick is to learn a couple of critics so you can properly understand what they mean by the words they use. I feel I have a slight handle on what you like and dislike, and why, so your views give me an idea about what I am buying. But I think critics should do more tastings online and explain in detail what they think about particular wines and why. Audiences can drink along and learn to connect the descriptions with what they are experiencing. Helps the audience understand the critic better.
The other solution is to get to the point where you know what you like well enough not to need critics too much.
Sarel De Vos | 25 September 2024
The 100 point system is flwed by its lack of width in its scoring range resulting in a concentration of scores in the 80+. A 70 point wine is “undrinkable” and is hardly ever encountered. The scoring should strart at 50 to 60 ( 1 star), 60-70 (2 stars), 70- 8o (3 stars),80 -90 (4 stars) and above 90 (5 stars) An 82 point wine would be a weakish and 88 a strong 4 star. This approach would most likekely not be acceptable to marketers that cater for drinkers rather than for investors.