2006 Boekenhoutskloof Cabernet Sauvignon cassis, black plum, soil, cedar, raw tobacco leaf and herbs, depth, intrigue and some hints of ripeness left behind by the puppy fat. Bold, structured and gritty. This wine is just about getting into its stride, beautifully marrying old world spice, funk and acidity with ripe, rounded fruit flavours. Well balanced, clearly from where it comes from but at the same time could fool you for a top 2003 Bordeaux. Absolutely lovely, with depth, poise and the ability to improve a touch more. 69+/100
Sounds like you enjoyed this wine . . . . but then rate it somewhere in the ‘technically flawed’ to ‘below average’ qualitative range. I guess that’s better than bashing it then giving it an 86.
For some reason I can’t fit my scoring system explanation into my signature…
Jono Beagle’s hundred point scoring system.
<30/100 not worth bothering with
<50/100 good wine but I wouldn’t buy a case
<60/100 very good showing grape and terroir character
<70/100 excellent example of a wine from this country/region/grape
<85/100 _one of the very best wines that the region has to offer.
85/100 one of the very best wines you are ever likely to drink
5/9/2011 rated 60 points: Christ, what is going on here? Wonderfully seductive fruit and enticing minerality are smothered by an acrid blanket of burnination. A wine Trogdor would love, perhaps, but not me. After some Googling it appears that South African wines are infamous for “burnt rubber”. A little is actually enticing, but this tastes like a tire factory worker washed his dirty clothes in the barrel. An embarrassing product for the price charged. (604 views)
Does the foul burning taste actually go away with time?
J.B. I am just curius what wines wil score 90 points on your scale
Here today 3 vintages of B.H.K Syrah.
2006-2007-2008 and they all scored more than 90 points!
I’m not sure that I really understand your rating scale…based on your description, it sounds like you are still only going to use about 50 points:
Please note that I am moving to a new scoring system. As a rough example, > anything above 30/100 is drinkable, above 50/100 shows typicity and I would seek out, above 60/100 is very very good, above 70/100 is mind-boggling > (almost like the UK university scored, you got a first, above 60 is 2:2, above 65 is 2:1, above 55 is 3rd, above 50 is a pass, below… go back and re-do your A-Levels…
How exactly do you differentiate between the points 70-100, which have been labelled as “mind-boggling”? To me, when a wine is mind-boggling, I’m tossing it in that 98-100 point range of the conventional 100 point scale. Your scale seems to lend itself even more to faux precision than the original.
I also noticed that you use the 20 point scale as well. Why switch back and forth between grading systems?
I’ve refined the system as states above, to perhaps better reflect my views. Between 70-100 well preference, bottle variation, company, setting, the usual subjective stuff.
In terms of only using 50 points, not the case; I have tasted a multitude of wines that I would give 10-20 points if not less; the only thing is I’ve only just moved to this new system, so reference points are not written down but memories based on old scores. I no longer use the 20 point scale.
three nights later with a Vacuvin stopped in the neck ripe, round black fruits, more silk and velvet to the texture, rounded tannins and balanced. It feels almost subdued, but rounder and more giving. Still with nice length… Perhaps showing more restraint and less exhurberance but the youthful fruit hasn’t yet subsided into real tertiary character. Tobacco, cedar and cherry still linger. 65-68++/100
+1. It’s silly to invent your own ‘language’ that no one else speaks and everyone must translate. I, for one, can now skip your posts. If your goal was to isolate yourself, bravo.
So you are saying, basically because I’m experimenting, you can ignore the post?? Why didn’t you in the first place then??
You have basically said that if anyone uses their own scale you will ignore them!
Sounds like point-chasing… Equally meaningless, and surely this proves that they key is to read the tasting?? If it is glowing then one can work out that the score works for that person.
![[pillow-fight.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/3/365d4ae6de5fe0cd9e7345760c12ceae1ed5e206.gif "[pillow-fight.gif]")
![[oops.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/1/1f129ddad071ffe5db6c99817c3cab666035a70a.gif "oops"){kind=small}