Adventures Palacescas |

It was not my idea to use a post you publish a translation of the article by David Lillie, but I saw no alternative for providing the original material if you read my scribbles on it, so here goes:

"When the 100-point scale to evaluate wines was adopted by Robert Parker and subsequent writers and publications, appeared to have a beneficial and stimulating effect on the American scene in the wine. Consumers who had knowledge and experience, or had suspicions about the wine market, confident they could march into a store and say "I'll buy a box of Chateau Cocoto he had 91 points for John Doe." The wine has become a more popular beverage and acceptable in homes and restaurants and the American image of the snooty wine agent was replaced by the more popular writings of Parker, Tanzer and Wine Spectator. The comfortable, even arbitrary scale points led the American consumer to unknown parts of the world, Gruner Veltliner became the new Pinot Grigio and producing never-before-known in obscure regions soon had North American importers. This is all very good, I guess ...

Today, though, wine lovers Americans are better educated and not longer need to be taken both by hand in a shop. There is wealth of information available in seconds on the web, including technical material and tasting notes and opinions of the chat rooms and blogs around the world. The idea that any individual can or should bind an arbitrary numerical score to a wine has become ridiculous and unnecessary. (Not to mention that many wines are tasted after the transfer or during malo-lactic fermentation or after being bottled ...) So talk to us about the producers and how they work in the vineyards and wineries, tell us whether you like wine and why, but let's stop insulting the producer and consumer, with a 100-point scale commercially oriented. We will sell as much wine, and writers will sell the same amount of reports and journals, with ratings more realistic.

One could argue that the mass-produced wines for daily consumption or wines that are designed to fit in an international style, or the taste of a critic, could receive 87 or 91 or any other note, without excessive injustice. But even with wines of this level, a score is not to put wine in their contexts, which is a crucial part of our profit. Even a description of the qualities of the wine carefully written and what food he can follow, it is quickly forgotten when followed by a number - even if that wine 85 points can be perfect with our dinner.

The most important argument against the points system is contained in the dedication and hard work of thousands of producers, mainly European, but with an increasing number in the U.S., whose efforts to bring consumers delicious wines produced naturally can not be graduated with number. We take the example of Catherine Roussel and Didier Barouillet of Clos Roche Blanche in Touraine. Their commitment to organic farming is not a marketing tool, as can be seen strolling through the vineyard. There are flowers to attract beneficial insects, plants with roots that fight diseases of the soil, other plants to enrich the soil and compete with the vines. Pruning is short to limit the performance in the most efficient and at the same time, risky. The harvest is always done by hand, fermentation occurs with wild yeasts and refining and bottling are done with the utmost care with little or no addition of sulphites and filtration. They are in good years and bad, delicious gourmet wines that are a joy to drink, but you will not find a Mercedes in your garage - we are in AOC Touraine and the prices are quite reasonable. What points they receive for their fantastic work - 86 or 88, perhaps? Catherine and Didier are not doing tests in which they miss 12 questions, are not making toasters and TV's that can be evaluated according to the quality of its production. They are making wines to be enjoyed with food, friends, and develop over time (Cot 1989 one is a beauty to drink) and they should not receive a score.

My former employers had a range of "Do *****" CA (beginning with" bad for Ca *****) that was much fun and as precise as that of 100 points. How about food, Good, Very Good and Excellent? "

Originally published in Chamber Street Wines