Don't trust gold medal wine winners -- the blind judging shows no consistency

[steven johnson]

Gold medal wines generally don't repeat if they are entered in another contest. That may be due to different batches being sent but more likely the inconsistency in the palate of the judges, even if they taste the same wine later, according to a research study.

http://www.wine-economics.org/journal/content/Volume4/number1/

But a study of U.S. wine contests published this week suggests consumers should not always assume that gold medal winners are outstanding wines.

Writing in the Journal of Wine Economics, retired Cal State Humboldt professor Robert Hodgson said he looked at the results for more than 4,000 wines entered in 13 U.S. competitions in 2003 and found little consistency in what wines won gold medals.

However, of those gold medal winners, 98% were regarded as just above average or below in at least one of the other competitions. Hodgson said that demonstrated how little consistency there was.

Hodgson drew the ire of many wine contest organizers earlier this year when he published a four-year study of the California State Fair Wine Competition that found judges often rated the same wine differently when they tasted it twice in a blind group of wines.


Findings of wine contest study hard for critics to swallow

[Hello_Kitty]

1. *cough* emporer has no clothes *cough* eom

[Vickers]

2. Have you read "The Billionaire's Vinegar" ?

I highly recommend it.

The whole high-end wine thing is a scam.

[Warpy]

3. The constant search for "the best" is a fruitless one

because we all have such radically different taste.

I've never gone wrong buying a $10-$30 bottle of wine from California. California wine is always quite drinkable.

The best part about sticking to the lower end of the price point is feeling free to experiment, instead of blindly throwing a lot of money at something mentioned in a magazine article.

After all, the expert taste might not be your taste. It's rarely been mine.

[customerserviceguy]

4. The same can be said of Northwest wines

Very decent ones can be had for quite reasonable prices. I've found out here in NY, they don't get a lot of "respect" when it comes to pricing, and I can pick up some really good deals. People here are way too fascinated with France.

[Warpy]

10. I agree with that silly fascination with France

Every bottle of red vinegar flavored with cigarette butts has been from France, which is why I now stick to the California varietals, with occasional forays into other wine making countries outside Europe. Wine makers outside Europe aren't quite as obsessed with traditions that don't produce consistent wines. France is big on tradition when the science of winemaking might serve them a bit better.

In any case, you just can't beat California (and really, the whole country) for reasonably priced wines of consistently good quality.

[customerserviceguy]

12. "red vinegar flavored with cigarette butts"

Now that made me laugh!

Those of you out there reading this, give a try to some Columbia Crest wine, especially the Grand Estates line, you won't find a better wine for that low a price. I cannot think of anyone else that makes that quantity that good and inexpensive.

[Laelth]

5. I agree. California makes excellent wines.

I do like a Sangiovese to come from Italy, but other than that little personal quirk, I have been completely satisfied with nearly every bottle of moderately-priced wine I have ever had from California.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Hello_Kitty]

9. After about $20, the marginal return is negligible IMHO.

I've never gone wrong with the $15 - $20 range from just about anywhere. Hell, there are some $6 bottles that'll do the trick.

[customerserviceguy]

13. In Oregon Pinot Noirs

you really do see a difference between the $20 range and the higher-priced ones. They got smart, and figured out that the market does put a high value on their wines.

One indulgent pleasure is to go to Archery Summit in Oregon (less than an hour south of Portland) and try the $20 sampler. They'll even dig out a $150 bottle for that, and if you have spent some time with Pinot Noir, it will be worth it. It's the equivalent of spending a night in a five-star hotel, but it doesn't last as long!

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

6. I always seek out the "Best Table Display" winners.

More clearcut, and not quite as subjective.

[Gold Metal Flake]

7. You Either Get It Or You Don't!

Is the sort of thing I might say to you if I were a wine snob. But I'm not.

[Jakes Progress]

8. This is easy.

Just don't buy wines you haven't tasted. Get thee to a winery. Drink and buy that vintage. What's good one year sucks the next.

Don't buy unless you like it. Otherwise you might as well go by pretty label.

[WeDidIt]

11. Fuck this finding the "best wine" shit

I look for value when I taste wine.

What I'm looking for is a really good wine of the varietal in quesiton for an exceptionally reasonable price.

For years, this was most Bogle varietals (especially their Chardonnay and Merlot). Unfortunately, others discovered the high value for low price and drove up the demand, thus driving up the price.

[customerserviceguy]

14. Part of the fun

is finding the next undiscovered great inexpensive wine producer. Somebody's always trying to fill that role, so the chase can go on!