AG throws him under the bus and backs up
JD 13 and 14 100
RP 13 100
AG 13 88 14 91 with nice bland notes of course
weird reviewer shit for sure, but I do wonder about AG day and day out
Rather than just scold a critic because you don’t like the number, how about debating what he actually said about the wine.
I applaud a critic who puts it in the line when he (or she) gives an opinion, rather than just giving a score to follow the crowd or keep people happy.
Did anyone see what AG said about the 16 Vice Versa? Under the barrel scores for 17 VV he talked about the 16s. From my understanding he chose not to give scores and said the 16s were “impenetrable”. How is it a 16 VV gets a 100 from LPB and AG won’t even give it a score? How can two reviewers be so far off from one another? I for one love VV
Is this a rhetorical question? ![[wink.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/04707e6a7bbb03e0153e349d8a9270d30e1e9525.gif "wink"){kind=small}
Couldn’t agree with you more, David.
Yup. The critics are not aligned. Go figure, many of us are not either. Different strokes for different folks. I don’ always agree with AG, but respect his notes. I did not always agree with RP, but learned how to compare his notes to my palate. I have no basis for comparison yet with LPB. I have bought wines based on their “popularity” on this board, with some wins and some losses. It is a learning process.
I just don’t understand how two reviews can be so far off. I can understand a possible 5 -7 point difference from two professional reviewers. However, when one gives a perfect score and the other can’t even score it, something seems off IMO.
He scored it. You just don’t like the score.
I just find the point disparity interesting from a consumer point of view. I ask myself if it says more about the reviewers than it does about the wine, or is this just very polarizing wine. I would actually be more curious to try a wine that received a 100 pts from one reviewer and 88 pts from another, than a wine that received the same scores across the board.
It’s not the first time nor will it be the last. Monprivato starting around 2009 and 2002 Krug come to mind.
don’t be critical of a critic? this is the thread to discuss, but maybe this is a dead horse 
?
different palates and scoring for different folks
AG doesn’t get too excited about Bevan, or anything for that matter, and the modern Napa style but maybe just add 2 points to AG scores
I love Alban, Andremily, K Vintners, AG does not and on down the line
Caymus 12 80 AG 96 RP
Caymus 13 85 AG 94 RP
(AG notes the sweet style and “processed” taste, while RP calls it irresistible)
LPB gave Scarecrow a 100 in 16 with AG at 98
in 14 RP and JD gave Scarecrow 100 while AG is at 96
fun stuff, as this is not meant to be anything but more enjoyment of wine
a critic is not putting anything n the line, AG and JR are well respected they just prefer a different style of wine at least based on scores or are more frugal with points
cheers
It has been my experience that a wine scored this way (big spread with very high scores and a few lesser scores) usually has a very unique aspect that some critics reward and some will not. Just my 2-cents worth. Critics do have different likes and dislikes. Cheers!
Gray,
They are putting their opinions out there in words. The fact that all you are willing to discuss is the scores says all I need to know about the depth of your interest.
words AND points buddy
as in golf it’s not how you got the score, but the score that counts
or as in Playboy, i buy it to read the articles, LOL
and please spare me and the rest of us the petty scolding, we can all be above that unattractive behavior as we most all are on here because of a deeper appreciation of wine
cheers
What does the note say? What are the words. It’s quite clear that those who decry the low scores are taking it a wee bit personally,
I don’t think anyone here was decrying the low scores. We were just pointing them out and discussing the differences.
That’s more than half the problem.
The hypocrisy of people who say they don’t care about scores, but then focus on them as if they are personal affronts.
A couple of things to consider:
-
No 2 reviewers review the same bottle of wine and no 2 reviewers review wines in the same setting. When and where you taste DOES affect how a wine tastes - regardless of how one thinks differently.
-
There is no such thing as an ‘objective wine review’ - that’s an oxymoron. Reviewers score and rate wines based on their own preferences . . . period.
-
I have seen directly how reviewers are ‘affected’ by their relationships with specific winemakers / winery owners.
-
A reviewers words usually give the best idea of how he or she feels about the wine - and it should be clear based on these words why wines receive the scores that they do. If not, the reviewer is not doing a good job ‘conveying’ why they do what they do IMHO.
So much more to this, but that’s some food for thought right now.
Cheers.
Like this?
AG throws him under the bus and backs up
JD 13 and 14 100
RP 13 100
AG 13 88 14 91 with nice bland notes of course
weird reviewer shit for sure, but I do wonder about AG day and day out
There seems to be a sense that Antonio is some how wrong about this. Look at the 2012 Caymus case. He wasn’t wrong about that… except that he gave it 80 points instead of 50.
This disparity in in scores is probably telling you something, and it’s likely that a bunch of people will not like this 100 point wine.
Why is this discrepancy important?
It doesn’t sound as if people are wondering who’s right in order to make a purchase decision. It sounds like people posting here have already made up their minds.
Is it concern for effect on secondary market prices? Ego? Lack of confidence without universal confirmation?
Differences of opinion are normal, especially in a subjective area like wine criticism. And they make life interesting.