Vinous published October 2019 ratings on the 2016 burgundy vintage with Neal Martin. I was curious if there is any noticeable pattern between the reviewers, e.g., (i) Neal Martin’s scores vs. Stephen Tanzers, in terms of points… e.g. is one more generous in awarding points than the other, and (ii) how their palates may differ (does one seek concentration/aromatics/power etc. more than the other)?
I do appreciate having two different, objective reviews and seeing point and other differences. I also understand that wines may show differently at different times (especially for such a young vintage). Nevertheless, I am trying to make sense - if one can - of some big score differentials on certain wines.
Not a subscriber, but historically I thought Tanzer had a much less compressed scale, particularly when it comes to Burgundy (I actually think some other reviewers do this for Burgundy as well). 86-89 could be a good to bordering excellent wine, particularly for non-1er or GCs. 90-94 is excellent and 95+ doesn’t happen. Neal scores Burgundy like he (and others) seem to score the rest of the world - starting at 92 or so. Overall, I find them both scoring without respect to style (or as some would claim, “objectively”).
Thanks, these are helpful notes. I have noticed Neal scored consistently higher than Tanzer, and it was helpful hearing you quantify it like that. I was looking Neal’s comments on the 2016 Benjamin Leroux Clos Saint Denis, where he called it a top wine of the vintage at a 98… vs. a January 2018 Tanzer score (from the 15 & 16 burgundy report) of 92-94. If Tanzer rarely goes 95+, then the upper end of his range would be consistent with the Neal Martin 98.
Does anyone have a sense for how much time they get to spend with the wine when coming up with the reviews & scores?
I’m part of the Burgfest tasting group, which is where Neal tasted most of the 2016s. We taste in peer group flights, blind, by vineyard. Most flights are relatively small with a maximum of maybe 9 wines. We start about 0830h and finish in time for a late lunch. It’s not one of those massive tasting schedules with 120 or so wines a day. The maximum is around 60 or 70 and we taste over 4 days. For the 2016s we did 260 wines over 4 mornings. Depending on the flight and its size we probably take somewhere between 25-40 minutes per bracket. It’s a relaxed pace and you finish up with both comprehensive notes and a great feeling for the vintage in question.
By contrast, the Southwold tasting is far more wearing. We taste more wines faster. Both are great events, and massive highlights of my tasting calendar, but both are very different.
PS whilst i dont have my own notes to hand, the Ben Leroux Grand Crus did spectacularly well. My wine of the vintage was Mugnier’s Musigny. My sole 100/100. Grivot Riche and Roumier Amoureuses following closely…
FWIW I’ve found Neal’s notes quite out of line with my tastes for whites, whereas Tanzer’s are a lot closer and therefore more reliable for me. I also have the sense Neal is generally less consistent at reading very young Burgundy than Tanzer, though of course that’s a dark art where everyone makes mistakes
Matthew,
Interested in the history of the Burgfest tastings. Is this a continuation of the tastings that Clive Coates published notes on for many years? I can’t remember if CC tasted the wines blind or not, and whether he tasted 3 years from the vintage…I think he reassessed the vintage 10 years out, not sure about 5 years.
Does the Burgfest group reassess the vintage at any time after this initial tasting as well?
Thanks.
Burgfest meets twice a year, to taste whites in May and to taste the reds, from the same vintage, in September. I’ve only been part of the group for a couple of years but, yes, I do believe Clive started it when he was buying for the hotel group. After Clive I believe Bill Baker took on the organising, then it was Roy Richards and now it is Jasper Morris. Jasper’s write up is excellent and you should check out his website. William Kelley also attends and produces a report for rp.com
I’ve never met Clive but have heard that blind tasting was not his favoured modus operandi.
We are lucky to have someone who manages the flights flawlessly, taking bottles from the cellar whilst we taste another flight, decanting into carafes and recording all results in a spreadsheet.
I like Neal s writing. He seems like a great guy. That being said I’ve never found his burgundy reviews helpful or insightful. My primary is Meadows with Tanzer back up. I like what WilliamKelly writes but do not subscribe to RP.
