Do Ratings such as by Parker or Wine Spectator have a legitimate role?

Hello Thomas:

First i want to thank you for taking the time to speak with us in this forum and compliment you on your English [fantastic].

Secondly, I wanted your perspective on the role, if anything, of rating experts such as Parker, Suckling, Wine Spectator and Tanzer. Do you submit for ratings, if so why?

Hello Andrew,

Well of course it does matter. They post their opinion on our wines and people who follows them has an idea. But in the end the most important think is always the same: what do YOU think? Do you enjoy the wine you have in your glass?
I have a lot of respect for most of of them. They are professionals. Do I follow them? Yes sometimes, especially to discover new things.
But the one I trust the most: little me…

Do we submit for rating? It’s always important to be appreciated but it is dangerous to adapt your work to get high score. Especially when you produce a wine that has been produced for ages, with a style, an identity and a soul…
Figeac is a good exemple:probably the best terroir of Saint Emilion, incredible aging ability, strong identity…but not the highest scores at all…

Interesting, and apropos, reference point. Figeac is wonderful. A 1990 I recently popped was sublime. I’m not sure I have heard someone ever say that its probably the best terroir of St. Em., but make sense.

What makes its terroir, and Palmer’s terroir, so special, comparatively?

Thanks again for all this information.


Well Figeac has a gravel soil (like we have in the Médoc) and that is the reason why I like it so much!!