The rating game

L-R: Terrace Edge, Darling Awatere, and Chateau Le Grande. Photos / Babiche Martens

On a television relationship show, the resident therapist upbraided a husband for regularly marking his wife out of 10 for her performance of various conjugal duties, highlighting that this was not only unhelpful, but also detrimental to the quality of their relationship. Some things just shouldn't be allotted a score, and the debate rages on as to whether wine is one of them.

Wine is currently awash with different rating systems, which in theory are used by wine writers to assist drinkers with their purchasing decisions. However, from conversations with ordinary wine drinkers in this country, I've gleaned that in reality, while most grasp what a top score means, what the lesser ones represent is largely unclear.

Wine drinkers in the US have most enthusiastically embraced wine ratings, many buying and investing in wines based on scores out of 100 awarded by the influential Wine Spectator magazine and Robert Parker's Wine Advocate. It's created a league table for wines, where those rated over 95 points sell out and those under 90 can languish on the shelves, becoming a short-hand for shoppers who don't have the time or inclination to read a tasting note.

Parker created the 100-point scale back in the 1970s in an attempt to establish a democratic system of judging wine, which he says he uses "only to enhance and complement the thorough tasting notes". This expanded the scope of its precursor, the UC Davis 20-point scorecard developed in the 1950s, with the 20-point scale more widely adopted outside the US.

Other approaches include the star ratings, as used by Cuisine magazine, or the medals awarded by most wine competitions. These appear to be more readily recognised by wine drinkers, although writers favouring the numerical systems complain they're too broad in scope.

Kicking against all of these is American wine writer, Stuart Yaniger's lighthearted Three Stooges Wine Rating System in which wines are rated for their "Moe-ness", or named a "Larry" or "Curly" wine depending on their character. Yaniger says he developed it "to attack what I perceived as a major flaw in the use of numbers (or stars or clusters) to indicate wine quality", which for him is the limitations of "scalar quantities, measures of just one dimension" when endeavouring to evoke the multidimensional experience of wine.

Yaniger is not alone, with critics, including myself, arguing that numerical ratings are overly simplistic. Given the subjective nature of assessing wine, these can also be potentially misleading in suggesting it's possible to assess wines with a mathematical precision, when ratings can only ever be a rough guide.

Marks also vary widely between critics, highlighted by the high profile disagreement some years back over the 2003 Chateau Pavie, which Robert Parker awarded 95+, while respected UK wine scribe, Jancis Robinson gave it just 12/20.

Anyone who regularly reads this column will note an absence of scores accompanying the wines I'm recommending. Although I do mark wines in my personal notes and have to use different schemes when judging at wine competitions, I have never scored a wine publicly due to the manifold issues surrounding the practice.

I was recently asked to contribute independent reviews to a website, on which the last critic had employed a 10-point scale. Instead, I chose to use terms such as "average" or "exceptional" in conjunction with my tasting note, which I feel have far greater resonance with wine drinkers.

Ratings are too often a blunt tool used to sell wine, which encourage a passive approach to their purchase. I'd rather provide an accurate description and let people decide from that whether it sounds like something they'd enjoy. To me points are generally, well... rather pointless.

GRIS WITH EDGE

Terrace Edge Waipara Valley Pinot Gris 2008 $19
An impressively concentrated and creamy gris from this new Waipara estate that's chock-full of ripe pear, guava and exotic spice, underpinned by a fabulous freshness and hint of mineral. (From www.regionalwines.co.nz, www.terraceedge.co.nz.)

AWATERE AMOUR

Darling Awatere Valley Sauvignon Blanc 2008 $22.50
The fruits of an ongoing collaboration between respected winemaker Chris Darling and viticulturalist Bart Arnst, this is a fresh, citrussy and mouth-filling sauvignon, with vibrant notes of melon, flint and fennel. (From Accent on Wine, Caro's, Primo Vino.)

CRITICAL ACCORD

Chateau La Grande Clotte Lussac Saint Emilion, France 2005 $28.95
This richly elegant Bordeaux red from the excellent 2005 vintage is made by influential Bordeaux-based winemaker, Michel Rolland, who's regularly rated highly by Parker. I don't share all of Parker's preferences, but agree this wine with its dark fruit, velvety tannins and notes of roasted coffee is a beaut. (www.wineimporter.co.nz.)