AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
-
- Posts: 4036
- Joined: May 14th, 2013, 7:36 am
AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Platonic, Tantric, Sacred, Mundane, Malevolent ©
-
- Posts: 367
- Joined: February 24th, 2016, 10:08 am
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Don’t get your point, no pun intended. 2016 is widely regarded as a great vintage in Piedmont. He has given out one 100 point score that I can see, which is not unlike 2013 or 2010. I don’t see point inflation here
ITB
- Joe W i n o g r a d
- Posts: 507
- Joined: March 20th, 2013, 10:19 pm
- Location: San Diego
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
The article makes a point about the problem of point inflation.
- Sc0tt F!tzger@ld
- GCC Member
- Posts: 3075
- Joined: March 12th, 2013, 7:32 am
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
It’s not AG inflating points. It’s all the newbs out there who just got into these wines and never travel the region. His point is buyer beware of the fly by critic.
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
"More recently, the wine reviewing world has become populated by tasters who award wines absurdly high scores that those wines have no chance of ever actually living up to."
is this one of those statements that sounds true, but really cannot be verified because it's so vague and open-ended?
is this one of those statements that sounds true, but really cannot be verified because it's so vague and open-ended?
Yaacov (ITB)
-
- Posts: 367
- Joined: February 24th, 2016, 10:08 am
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Got itJoe W i n o g r a d wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 9:21 amThe article makes a point about the problem of point inflation.
ITB
-
- Posts: 3539
- Joined: February 15th, 2009, 7:11 pm
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Or maybe it's one of those statements that hits just a little too close to home?"More recently, the wine reviewing world has become populated by tasters who award wines absurdly high scores that those wines have no chance of ever actually living up to."
is this one of those statements that sounds true, but really cannot be verified because it's so vague and open-ended?
(ITB)
-
- Posts: 3539
- Joined: February 15th, 2009, 7:11 pm
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Back in the day, when you could still cross paths with legit 96- to 98-point wines in the general vicinity of $150, I felt like I could give valid scores to wines.
But in the last few years, as those wines soared to prices like $1500 or even $15,000, it started to dawn on me that I have no business whatsoever assigning scores to wines anymore, simply because I don't socialize in them zip codes no mo'.
Ergo I can try to imagine how a 98-point $15,000 Musigny might smell or taste, but it ain't never gonna get anywhere near muh nostrils [much less actually enter muh mouf].
But in the last few years, as those wines soared to prices like $1500 or even $15,000, it started to dawn on me that I have no business whatsoever assigning scores to wines anymore, simply because I don't socialize in them zip codes no mo'.
Ergo I can try to imagine how a 98-point $15,000 Musigny might smell or taste, but it ain't never gonna get anywhere near muh nostrils [much less actually enter muh mouf].
-
- Posts: 3539
- Joined: February 15th, 2009, 7:11 pm
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
A little off-topic, but the guys at Cellar Tracker are TOUGH SCORERS.
If you can find a wine there with 20 or 30 unique tasters [and not just two or three guys each posting ten different tasting notes on the same wine], and if those 20 or 30 unique tasters are converging on a score of about 94 points, then you're dealing with a world-class wine.
The same might be true of Vivino, but Vivino is much more difficult for me to suss out - I don't have a strong visceral sense of the difference between 4.3 vs 4.5 vs 4.7 vs 4.9 at Vivino.
[And because tards can do Vivino on their tardphone apps, the barrier to entry is much, much lower.]
If you can find a wine there with 20 or 30 unique tasters [and not just two or three guys each posting ten different tasting notes on the same wine], and if those 20 or 30 unique tasters are converging on a score of about 94 points, then you're dealing with a world-class wine.
The same might be true of Vivino, but Vivino is much more difficult for me to suss out - I don't have a strong visceral sense of the difference between 4.3 vs 4.5 vs 4.7 vs 4.9 at Vivino.
[And because tards can do Vivino on their tardphone apps, the barrier to entry is much, much lower.]
- Pat Martin
- Posts: 2634
- Joined: May 22nd, 2011, 11:38 pm
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
94 points is a world class wine.
P@ tr!ck M 8rt!n
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
its really true. a wine on CT with several unique tasters thats over a 91 is a very solid wine most times. I've also found this really varies by wine region fans too. a 92 point Burgundy on CT will likely be one of the best wines I've ever had in my life. a 94 point cali cab... maybe the best wine you have in that two week period.Nathan Smyth wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 11:13 amA little off-topic, but the guys at Cellar Tracker are TOUGH SCORERS.
If you can find a wine there with 20 or 30 unique tasters [and not just two or three guys each posting ten different tasting notes on the same wine], and if those 20 or 30 unique tasters are converging on a score of about 94 points, then you're dealing with a world-class wine.
The same might be true of Vivino, but Vivino is much more difficult for me to suss out - I don't have a strong visceral sense of the difference between 4.3 vs 4.5 vs 4.7 vs 4.9 at Vivino.
[And because tards can do Vivino on their tardphone apps, the barrier to entry is much, much lower.]
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
More thread drift, but I had the same questions about Vivino ratings.Nathan Smyth wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 11:13 am
The same might be true of Vivino, but Vivino is much more difficult for me to suss out - I don't have a strong visceral sense of the difference between 4.3 vs 4.5 vs 4.7 vs 4.9 at Vivino.
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Your CT note had me thinking.. are these barbaresco scores perhaps too high in certain cases? There are many 30-60 buck wines scored 95+. Either those wines are wildly mispriced or the scores are too high?Nathan Smyth wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 11:13 amA little off-topic, but the guys at Cellar Tracker are TOUGH SCORERS
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
In my limited experience so far, those scores are too high. But often there are only a few of them, less than 5 for a lot of 2016s, so I take those with a grain of salt.Sh@n A wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 6:54 pmYour CT note had me thinking.. are these barbaresco scores perhaps too high in certain cases? There are many 30-60 buck wines scored 95+. Either those wines are wildly mispriced or the scores are too high?Nathan Smyth wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 11:13 amA little off-topic, but the guys at Cellar Tracker are TOUGH SCORERS
A s h i s h A g r a w a l
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
And what do most CT reviewers actually know about young Barbaresco? If they're tasting it now it's probably because they heard a lot about the vintage and came to it with high expectations.
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
- Ian Sutton
- Posts: 5283
- Joined: March 6th, 2014, 2:19 pm
- Location: Norwich, UK
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Stock in trade for wine writers!ybarselah wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 10:03 am"More recently, the wine reviewing world has become populated by tasters who award wines absurdly high scores that those wines have no chance of ever actually living up to."
is this one of those statements that sounds true, but really cannot be verified because it's so vague and open-ended?
As for beware of 'fly by reviewers', that sounds like simply dissing his competitors ..."trust me, I was the annointed one, but was ousted, so now I'm the self-annointed one - follow me loyal sheep!"
Normal for Norfolk
-
- GCC Member
- Posts: 3146
- Joined: March 31st, 2017, 9:57 pm
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Sauternes is probably the best value. Plenty of CT 95-97 wines for 100-200 for a 375.
Nathan Smyth wrote: ↑November 9th, 2019, 11:04 amBack in the day, when you could still cross paths with legit 96- to 98-point wines in the general vicinity of $150, I felt like I could give valid scores to wines.
But in the last few years, as those wines soared to prices like $1500 or even $15,000, it started to dawn on me that I have no business whatsoever assigning scores to wines anymore, simply because I don't socialize in them zip codes no mo'.
Ergo I can try to imagine how a 98-point $15,000 Musigny might smell or taste, but it ain't never gonna get anywhere near muh nostrils [much less actually enter muh mouf].
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Indeed, it sounds like a pissy way of saying, "I was here first."Ian Sutton wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 11:57 amAs for beware of 'fly by reviewers', that sounds like simply dissing his competitors ..."trust me, I was the annointed one, but was ousted, so now I'm the self-annointed one - follow me loyal sheep!"
He was (among critics writing in English), and deep knowledge of a region over a long span is of huge importance, particularly with wines like Barolo and Burgundy that are hard to judge young.
But even in his Piedmont Report days, he had an extremely compressed scale. Pretty much everything was scored 89-94. And I never found his notes very helpful. Worst of all, I've never seen him note wines that were distinctly oaky, something many of us nebbiolo lovers want to know. I've been dumbfounded on a number of occasions to read his reviews of wines that clobbered you with oak, and all he talked about was the nuances and beams of this or that, and how I shouldn't miss the wine. (To his credit, he doesn't seem as profligate with scores over 95 as many other critics.)
So, he is clearly knowledgeable and he's been following the wines for a long time, but that doesn't suffice. For my money, I'd rather listen to Walter Fissler, Jancis Robinson's Piedmont man.
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
I think sweet wines tend to get high scores. They're hard not to like. I know I find myself giving lots of points to sweet wines when I'm keeping notes for myself. I wouldn't base any QPR calculations on those CT scores.Mich@el Ch@ng wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 12:24 pmSauternes is probably the best value. Plenty of CT 95-97 wines for 100-200 for a 375.
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Why not? If you like them that much, aren't they worth as much as other wines that you like that much? I may be an outlier, but that's how sauternes ended up being 30% of my cellar...John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 12:54 pmI think sweet wines tend to get high scores. They're hard not to like. I know I find myself giving lots of points to sweet wines when I'm keeping notes for myself. I wouldn't base any QPR calculations on those CT scores.Mich@el Ch@ng wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 12:24 pmSauternes is probably the best value. Plenty of CT 95-97 wines for 100-200 for a 375.
A s h i s h A g r a w a l
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
I have no quarrel with sweet wines. I own a lot of late harvest riesling. But I think the idea of some mathematical calculation of value based on CT scores (basically, points per dollar) is just silly.
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
-
- Posts: 3539
- Joined: February 15th, 2009, 7:11 pm
- G. Shields
- Posts: 148
- Joined: September 2nd, 2015, 12:17 am
- Location: Lyon, France
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
John, just for correction, it’s Walter Speller...John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 12:49 pmFor my money, I'd rather listen to Walter Fissler, Jancis Robinson's Piedmont man.
![[thumbs-up.gif] [thumbs-up.gif]](./images/smilies/thumbs-up.gif)
I agree that he seems a useful source of info. I like that he tastes a bunch of the wines blind, and often again at the domaine. I feel this provides a reliable judgement. He also does call out oak/élevage notes when he comes across them.
Gawain Lagnado
Instagram: gl_rhone
Instagram: gl_rhone
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
I would value collective judgement. I think there is worth in group thinking, if you remove the outliers than can distort results.John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 10:01 amAnd what do most CT reviewers actually know about young Barbaresco? If they're tasting it now it's probably because they heard a lot about the vintage and came to it with high expectations.
$ _ € ® e . k @
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Oops. My bad.G. Shields wrote: ↑November 11th, 2019, 2:50 amJohn, just for correction, it’s Walter Speller...John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 12:49 pmFor my money, I'd rather listen to Walter Fissler, Jancis Robinson's Piedmont man.![]()
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Collective judgment of people who may know little about tasting wines that are hard to evaluate young?Markus S wrote: ↑November 11th, 2019, 5:57 amI would value collective judgement. I think there is worth in group thinking, if you remove the outliers than can distort results.John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 10:01 amAnd what do most CT reviewers actually know about young Barbaresco? If they're tasting it now it's probably because they heard a lot about the vintage and came to it with high expectations.
![scratch [scratch.gif]](./images/smilies/scratch.gif)
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
I believe most folks posting on CT have some acquaintance with wine, and unless there is some idiot who always posts "93" on wines, I think the scores there can be parsed to get a fairly accurate reading of a wine. When you take out the outliers (for instance, the Cali Cab drinker giving a "65" to a Jura poulsard), you get even better results. I feel it's the same way I read critics. Examine the trigger words (these are individual to everyone) and either discount them or give them weight to adjust to your palate. Obviously if someone merely posts a score with no context, that would not get used.John Morris wrote: ↑November 11th, 2019, 6:07 amCollective judgment of people who may know little about tasting wines that are hard to evaluate young?Markus S wrote: ↑November 11th, 2019, 5:57 amI would value collective judgement. I think there is worth in group thinking, if you remove the outliers than can distort results.John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 10:01 amAnd what do most CT reviewers actually know about young Barbaresco? If they're tasting it now it's probably because they heard a lot about the vintage and came to it with high expectations.![]()
$ _ € ® e . k @
- John Morris
- GCC Member
- Posts: 16855
- Joined: June 21st, 2009, 2:09 pm
- Location: Gotham
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
I've been in a number of blind tasting groups for years, and when tasting serious young wines on release, the tendency is for people to give the highest scores to the most approachable ones. Relatively few people have tasted wines young and followed them over decades and have a sense for when a wine has great potential but is very young and tight. I think that's particularly an issue with Burgundy and nebbiolo-based wines, but also with cabs in many cases. That's why so much winemaking these days is aimed at making wines that are easy to drink out of the gate, even if that means sacrificing depth and longevity.
Add to that the fact that most CT posters are not tasting blind, and there are lots of reasons to discount those scores of very young wines.
Add to that the fact that most CT posters are not tasting blind, and there are lots of reasons to discount those scores of very young wines.
"I pencilled in half an hour to suffer fools tomorrow, but now I’m thinking I might bump it out until Monday." -- @duchessgoldblat
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
“Only he who has walked through the deepest valley knows how other valleys of lesser depth are relatively more walk-throughable, valley-wise.” – @TheTweetOfGod
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
I've tried using Vivino a few times especially when buying $15-20 wines and most times I've been disappointed. 4.0 wines that sounds like solid wines in the comment section turns out to lack any depth and complexity instead they are hiding behind a lot of oak, vanilla and sweetness.
For some times now I've been using an average of Wine Spectator and James Suckling scores as pointers on what to expect of a wine. WS can be low with their scores and JS is the king of inflating points.
So if WS gave a wine 91 and JS gave the same wine 96 I'd assume it is a 93 point wine. It's not always accurate but it works as a good pointer.
If its an Italian wine I look up and there's no WS rating and only a JS rating I subtract 5-7 points from what JS gave. I participated in a tasting hosted by a tuscan winery which WS gave a low 90s rating while JS gave it an almost perfect 100. I'm a big fan of Italian wines but I don't think its just Barbaresco that "suffer" from point inflation.
For some times now I've been using an average of Wine Spectator and James Suckling scores as pointers on what to expect of a wine. WS can be low with their scores and JS is the king of inflating points.
So if WS gave a wine 91 and JS gave the same wine 96 I'd assume it is a 93 point wine. It's not always accurate but it works as a good pointer.
If its an Italian wine I look up and there's no WS rating and only a JS rating I subtract 5-7 points from what JS gave. I participated in a tasting hosted by a tuscan winery which WS gave a low 90s rating while JS gave it an almost perfect 100. I'm a big fan of Italian wines but I don't think its just Barbaresco that "suffer" from point inflation.
D. Ekholm
- larry schaffer
- BerserkerBusiness
- Posts: 7741
- Joined: January 28th, 2009, 9:26 am
- Location: Santa Ynez Valley, CA
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Another interesting thread - and AG's sentiments could certainly be echoed by every 'professional' reviewer out there. I understand where he is coming from - but this doesn't kind of sound a little 'sour grapes' to me, no?
At the end of the day, are wines being made 'better' and 'more consistent' than ever, therefore 'objectively deserving' higher scores? I mean, AG has definitely offered higher scores than he did in the past, maybe not necessarily with Italian wines but certainly with domestic ones.
Cheers.
At the end of the day, are wines being made 'better' and 'more consistent' than ever, therefore 'objectively deserving' higher scores? I mean, AG has definitely offered higher scores than he did in the past, maybe not necessarily with Italian wines but certainly with domestic ones.
Cheers.
larry schaffer
tercero wines
tercero wines
-
- Posts: 1794
- Joined: August 5th, 2010, 11:11 am
- Location: Oakland, CA; Cigliè, Piedmont
Re: AG: 2016 And 2017 Barbaresco And Point Inflation
Yeah, you mis-spelled it.John Morris wrote: ↑November 11th, 2019, 6:06 amOops. My bad.G. Shields wrote: ↑November 11th, 2019, 2:50 amJohn, just for correction, it’s Walter Speller...John Morris wrote: ↑November 10th, 2019, 12:49 pmFor my money, I'd rather listen to Walter Fissler, Jancis Robinson's Piedmont man.![]()
Oliver McCrum
Oliver McCrum Wines
Oliver McCrum Wines