Master Somm Invalidation

[Anton_D]

It was a sham/scam from the start.

I lean toward agreeing with you.

It’s a bit like the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame.

[John_Morris]

If there’s anyone in California who would be open to being interviewed by NPR on this topic, e-mail (best) or PM me. An old friend at NPR reached out to me looking for informed wine people – wine lovers or ITB – who could comment. I gather the story will run today, so she’s looking for someone ASAP.

[CFu]

If there’s anyone in California who would be open to being interviewed by NPR on this topic, e-mail (best) or PM me. An old friend at NPR reached out to me looking for informed wine people – wine lovers or ITB – who could comment. I gather the story will run today, so she’s looking for someone ASAP.

I wonder what relevant opinion non itb would have on this that won’t make them look like they are talking out of their butt.

[Drew_Goin]

DLynn has be repping brands for awhile (previously Penfolds, now Fantesca).

DLynn is solid. I first met him about 8 years ago or so in Dallas. I wont go long on the details of our first meeting, but it involved me obviously interrupting a blind/theory prep session he and other somms were partaking in at old-Grailey’s. Instead of punting me, he poured a glass of Vega Sicilia Valbuena, took me on a little tour, shot the shit with me for a bit. Fast forward a year and he jumped my car for me in a parking lot. I got to pop some bottles for his blind theory prep before he took off to travel and deep prep for his first MS final exam. A very good taster and a great guy to have a drink with.

As an aside, if you want an embarrassing moment have your beat up Explorer not start in a lot full of Mercedes and Porsches at a wine event and have to go in and ask the Somm to jump your car…

That’s a great testament to this person’s character! Thanks for sharing!

[John_Morris]

If there’s anyone in California who would be open to being interviewed by NPR on this topic, e-mail (best) or PM me. An old friend at NPR reached out to me looking for informed wine people – wine lovers or ITB – who could comment. I gather the story will run today, so she’s looking for someone ASAP.

I wonder what relevant opinion non itb would have on this that won’t make them look like they are talking out of their butt.

A fair question. ITB would be best, but occasionally some non-ITB WBer has something worthwhile to say.

If I think the person offering to be interviewed is whistling anally, I can alert my friend to avoid any embarrassment to NPR.

[K_John_Joseph]

Love it: John K@ne, known on the internet as K John Joseph, a wine enthusiast and Grand Cru Cru Berserker, was deeply disappointed to hear about the cheating scandal, noting that the leak was probably the result of “some old guy being drunk and altruistic” which, he added, “is not usually a bad thing.”

[John_Morris]

I’ll pass that quote along. Not sure if that will win you air time, however.

[john_stimson]

Sad deal for those involved. If I have my facts correct, the character in Cork Dork, M. Harris, who grew up down the block from where we used to live, was one of the ones who “passed” this year.

[Tim_McCracken]

From a press release:

Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas Board of Directors Establishes Parameters for Retests for Candidates Affected by Voided Exam

Following its decision to void the tasting portion of the 2018 Master Sommeliers Diploma Examination, the Board of Directors for the Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas unanimously decided it would:

• Refund all fees collected for the tasting portion of the 2018 Master Sommelier Diploma Exam;
• Hold two retesting opportunities, one before the end of this year and another during the spring or early summer of 2019. Candidates may choose either retest opportunity or may elect to take the retest during the regularly scheduled examination program in 2019;
• Waive the examination fee for the retest; and
• Offer appropriate travel cost assistance for the retest.

The Exam and Finance Committees are working on the specific site and logistical details. All 54 candidates who participated in the tasting portion of the exam will have the opportunity to take a retest.

“Yesterday was a tough day for everyone in the Court of Master Sommeliers, but especially for those who passed the voided tasting examination in September. There are no words I can say that will take away the disappointment and anger that our candidates are feeling today,” said Devon Broglie, MS, Chairman of the Board. “I can only imagine how hard it hit everyone to learn that something they worked so hard for was tainted by the actions of a single individual. We ask for patience as we work through the details of giving our candidates a choice of when and where they will take their retests.”

Earlier this week, the Board of Directors of the Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas unanimously voted to invalidate the results of the tasting portion of the 2018 Master Sommelier Diploma Examination for all 54 candidates, including the 23 that passed the tasting and therefore earn the title of Master Sommelier, due to clear evidence that a Master breached the confidentiality with respect to the wines presented for tasting. The Board of Directors has barred the Master involved from participating in any Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas programs or events and has voted unanimously to initiate the process of terminating membership pursuant to the organization’s bylaws.

“This is a difficult but required process.” Broglie said. “The Board has consistently made decisions to reinforce the integrity of the examination process and uphold the reputation of the Court of Master Sommeliers and the honor of the Master Sommelier title. These decisions have been painful. They come with consequences that are difficult to swallow, but ultimately these decisions are in the best interest of the Court, its members and our industry.”

[Mark_Y]

Do we not know who the culprit is yet? That has to be public info at some point since he or she is being kicked out of the court?

Wouldn’t there be law suits galore at some point? This feels like the beginning somehow.

[Matt_Mauldin]

From the SF Chronicle article:
“Passing the final test can mean a significant material difference in a somm’s life. An advanced sommelier in the U.S. earns an average salary of $87,000, while a master earns an average of $164,000, according to a 2017 GuildSomm survey.”

That must include people working in all segments of the wine world because there are very few floor somm’s making 6 figures plus. Most MS’ use the title to get out of the restaurant business and into something that offers better pay and better hours. The CMS has done a lot of good for the wine world, but at this point, I think it my be losing some of it’s utility.

I would never give much credence to a salary survey conducted by a school or other institution with a vested interested in making it appear that its credential will vastly increase the earnings power of those who obtain it. It’s like the employment stats at for-profit “colleges” and third-tier law schools.

GuildSomm, who did the survey, is a separate organization than CMS (although they do share some members). Either way, as an educated observer working in the wine business, it’s pretty clear to me that being awarded an MS and MW creates an opportunity for a major boost in one’s wine industry career.

[Neal.Mollen]

Article this morning in the Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/10/11/master-sommeliers-stripped-of-coveted-titles-after-cheating-taints-wine-tasting-test/?utm_term=.f26b6394d256

[MChang]

Interesting, I guess the only MS that didn’t get his diploma revoked was the main character in that cork dork book; he only needed to pass service this year

[Ian_Dorin]

Do we not know who the culprit is yet? That has to be public info at some point since he or she is being kicked out of the court?

Wouldn’t there be law suits galore at some point? This feels like the beginning somehow.

I was speaking with someone yesterday about this. More to the point, rampant speculation has begun, and it’s only going to besmirch them all. As the saying goes, one bad apple…

[aaronfullen]

Delta has a master somm organize their wine list, it’s prominently displayed that it’s done by her (Andrea Robinson) in biz/first class.
[/quote]

Which, given what Delta pours in Delta One internationally, makes Andrea look like a Philistine. Their wines up front are plonk, plonker and plonkiest.

I love me some Delta, but the wines up front are headache juice.

-af

[David_Cooper]

She is the Guy Fieri of Sommeliers.

[Nick_Ryan]

Sorry, I can’t help but see the Court’s response to this as cold-blooded and borderline unconscionable. These people have spend untold time and money to pass this test, working jobs that give you precious little of either. After passing I’m sure many immediately began to upend their lives, perhaps quitting jobs, even getting new ones already, planning moves, etc. Aside from the quantifiable cost of forcing them to undo these actions or put them on hold, there is the mental torture that undoubtedly many of them are going through. If it was Theory that had to be re-taken that would be one thing, but given the inherent subjective elements of blind testing I’m betting that not even the best of these candidates can be extremely confident of passing Tasting again.

I understand the desire to uphold the reputation and sanctity of the certification. But of these 23 who passed Tasting for the first time, are any manifestly unqualified? They already passed Theory and Practical. Absent hard evidence of exactly which, if any, of the students had cheated, a better course of action would be to do some digging and see if any of the students were obviously unprepared for Tasting… perhaps by asking instructors, fellow students, and so on. And only having those few, if any, retake Tasting.

TLDR: Having your organization look like it’s run by a bunch of inconsiderate asses is going to do more harm to its reputation than, at worst, letting a handful of students through who might have been slightly under the bar because one of your own #$*()$#-ed up.

[Ian_Dorin]

Sorry, I can’t help but the Court’s response to this as cold-blooded and borderline unconscionable. These people have spend untold time and money to pass this test, working jobs that give you precious little of either. After passing I’m sure many immediately began to upend their lives, perhaps quitting jobs, even getting new ones already, planning moves, etc. Aside from the quantifiable cost of forcing them to undo these actions or put them on hold, there is the mental torture that undoubtedly many of them are going through. If it was Theory that had to be re-taken that would be one thing, but given the inherent subjective elements of blind testing I’m betting that not even the best of these candidates can be extremely confident of passing Tasting again.

I understand the desire to uphold the reputation and sanctity of the certification. But of these 23 who passed Tasting for the first time, are any manifestly unqualified? They already passed Theory and Practical. Absent hard evidence of exactly which, if any, of the students had cheated, a better course of action would be to do some digging and see if any of the students were obviously unprepared for Testing… perhaps by asking instructors, fellow students, and so on. And only having those few, if any, retake Tasting.

TLDR: Having your organization look like it’s run by a bunch of inconsiderate asses is going to do more harm to its reputation than, at worst, letting a handful of students through who might have been slightly under the bar because one of your own #$*()$#-ed up.

Following its decision to void the tasting portion of the 2018 Master Sommeliers Diploma Examination, the Board of Directors for the Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas unanimously decided it would:

• Refund all fees collected for the tasting portion of the 2018 Master Sommelier Diploma Exam;
• Hold two retesting opportunities, one before the end of this year and another during the spring or early summer of 2019. Candidates may choose either retest opportunity or may elect to take the retest during the regularly scheduled examination program in 2019;
• Waive the examination fee for the retest; and
• Offer appropriate travel cost assistance for the retest.

The Exam and Finance Committees are working on the specific site and logistical details. All 54 candidates who participated in the tasting portion of the exam will have the opportunity to take a retest.

I think this is pretty fair, no?

[Nick_Ryan]

I think this is pretty fair, no?

No, for all the reasons I outlined above. A fair outcome would be to force a re-test only for those students who appeared to pass “anomalously”. Clearly they don’t have hard evidence of any students cheating, or they would have been named, shamed, and banned. Instead they could try to figure out who might have cheated based on prior preparation, experiences with instructors, and so on, but that would require actual work.

[Phil_Smith]

Sorry, I can’t help but the Court’s response to this as cold-blooded and borderline unconscionable. These people have spend untold time and money to pass this test, working jobs that give you precious little of either. After passing I’m sure many immediately began to upend their lives, perhaps quitting jobs, even getting new ones already, planning moves, etc. Aside from the quantifiable cost of forcing them to undo these actions or put them on hold, there is the mental torture that undoubtedly many of them are going through. If it was Theory that had to be re-taken that would be one thing, but given the inherent subjective elements of blind testing I’m betting that not even the best of these candidates can be extremely confident of passing Tasting again.

I understand the desire to uphold the reputation and sanctity of the certification. But of these 23 who passed Tasting for the first time, are any manifestly unqualified? They already passed Theory and Practical. Absent hard evidence of exactly which, if any, of the students had cheated, a better course of action would be to do some digging and see if any of the students were obviously unprepared for Testing… perhaps by asking instructors, fellow students, and so on. And only having those few, if any, retake Tasting.

TLDR: Having your organization look like it’s run by a bunch of inconsiderate asses is going to do more harm to its reputation than, at worst, letting a handful of students through who might have been slightly under the bar because one of your own #$*()$#-ed up.

+1. A waived exam fee and some help getting them back to where they were on travel (without even considering lost wages or any individual factors/decisions that may have occurred in the month+ since their mistake)? The organization is being silly and way too precious at the expense of its candidates’ money and reputations.