Ian,
Would it mean the the quality of agronomy at Pontet-Canet would be judged to be highter than at Lynch-Bages because the former is biodynamic and the latter is not?
Adam Lee
Clarice Wine Company
I wasn’t reading it that far, but maybe?
If PC gets some extra points over Lynch Bages, even though LB isn’t doing anything wrong, that seems like a bit too far when evaluating for consistency and quality. Just because your bio doesn’t mean that puts you past your peers.
As someone who has walked many vineyards over the years, one can’t simply look at the vines on a single day and say that the farming quality is good, bad or indifferent - because often it is the timing of actions rather than whether or not they are done. That takes years sometimes to see and requires attention throughout the growing season. I don’t know how a critic can be there to see that…which is why I am thinking the certification system is what they will follow (i.e. the Michelin Green Star they’ve come up with).
Adam Lee
Clarice Wine Company
2 Likes
Definitely not disputing that, but I feel like giving someone a higher grade for being biodynamic doesn’t feel right either, no?
Oh, I don’t think it is right…but I think it is the easiest way to do it. Some certification would be rewarded. How do you think they’d determine the quality of the farming?
Adam Lee
Clarice Wine Company
Where do I apply to be a newly-recruited wine inspector?
would be a helluva nice Monopole Crü perk!
4 Likes
Being biodynamic just means you’re a little bit nuts, do things that are not based in any observable science, and may actually be harmful (copper sulfate, e.g.). That shouldn’t qualify you automatically for a “higher grade”.
2 Likes
Biodynamic versus what? Conventional? Sure it should be a higher grade. Organic? Not so much. Voodoo should not get bonus points over staying away from chemicals.
2 Likes
Of course if you are really good at voodoo, you should be able to arrange a 3-grape rating no matter your farming practices.
2 Likes
It’s not my policy 
I would certainly be curious as to what they are going to ultimately decide.
Will there be any surprises? Will all the First Growth Bordeaux get 3 grapes? Will all the well known superstars of Burgundy get 3 grapes – DRC, Rousseau, Roumier, Mugnier, Leroy …
I suspect there will be a lot of talk amongst wine lovers when the rating is out. That will help the brand and the new rating system. Maybe this is the idea of the Michelin Management to get on top of the of the wine rating pyramid becoming as important and influential as in the restaurant scene.? Furthermore: somewhat like the new “1855” classification transforming it into modern times and expanding it over every relevant wine producing area?
It is an experiment for sure. I guess we will not know the reviewers. Michelin is hiding them normally.
The weak point of the idea is to me: Rating wineries and not wines does not do mother nature justice. There are vintages with so demanding circumstances that it is not possible to produce a wine worth the highest rating possible. Wine making has made progess but technique alone is no substitute for what a vineyard needs to produce something extraordinary.
Top producer can make the best possible in a challenging year but the end result will be a very good but not outstanding. Wine makers are no magicians.
I disagree — great producers are magicians and often make excellent wines in unheralded vintages. Getting more granular than that would be like awarding stars to specific dishes.
1 Like
Jurgen,
There will definitely be surprises - because if there are not how will Michelin get publicity? But the surprises can’t be so great as to make them seem ridiculous.
Their criteria will be interesting when it comes to America - where so many wineries of quality purchase fruit. How will they judge the quality of farming then?
Adam Lee
Clarice Wine Company
2 Likes
Who you source from matters then?
This is all sad for WA as they were such an important force, if not ‘the importand force’ in the wine world for many years. But as I certainly know, change happens. I would guess that Michelin will start at the higher end (like they do with most of their foci). The question to me, is if this is their focus, how successful will they be in establishing themselves in an already robust wine rating market?
Jeff Zacharia
1 Like
Compared to restaurants and hotels, wine is rather niche, and becoming more so with the current decline in popular interest.
What Michelin has that none of the other wine reviewers have are widespread recognition and distribution. Their subscribers may overlap to some degree with the wine geek population, but probably not to a large extent.
Whether a four-point scale (zero to three grapes) is better or worse than a five-, twenty-, or fifty-point scale, and what should count for inclusion, can be debated ad nauseum. Personally, I like the broad categories of a five-point scale based on what’s in the glass and potential for future development. Ratings details are likely more important to enthusiasts like us than to the typical consumer of Michelin ratings, who are used to zero to three stars.
It remains to be seen whether Michelin has much influence on pricing, demand, or winery practices. I’m doubtful that there will be much, if any impact. The one thing I’m confident of is that they won’t have anywhere near the influence that Parker did in his heyday.
1 Like
that’s a GREAT question!
Does Michelin rate organic restaurants higher than the equivalent non organic?
1 Like
But I understand that Michelin will be rating wineries not specific wines, which from my POV, for the less detail focused wine consumers, this might be a very smart move.