My system I used for the first few years I was into wine, doing a lot of exploring, was similar to that, but calibrated to my perceived economic value. “How much would I pay for another bottle of this?” I think that’s a good exercise. So, your “it’s okay” would be a zero. Minus and double-minus for “not good” and “terrible”. An additional plus for each price bracket.
The idea of scoring by class is problematic for so many reasons. Just look at the negative views on Pinot Grigio above, in contrast to the experience of someone who tastes a lot of unconventional wines. Just because it’s a workhorse grape used to make oceans of bottom shelf swill doesn’t mean that’s anywhere near its potential. What would you do with your high relative ratings if you then had a mind blowing example that you would rate 100 on absolute terms?
Somewhat similar is the importance of not buying into grade inflation. Don’t be afraid to give the worsts wines imaginable 50 pts. Don’t give a wine not good enough to drink an 80s score. The 80s range should be where you’d put simple, utilitarian wines. Maybe that supermarket Pinot Grigio you like to buy for warm weekend afternoons is 80 pts, and that one you can find anywhere, but you had at a party once is 84 pts. Those dry Provencal roses are mostly 84 to 87 pts. More complex wines in this range may have some negatives that draw them down from being more enjoyable. If the negatives outweigh the positives and the wine isn’t enjoyable, the score should be lower. If it’s not worth drinking, it’s not worth 80 or more points.
Is there a difference between CT consumer scores vs professional scores, in this regard. I assume that most CT scores are not blind and may be influenced by setting company food etc. In that sense they can’t be absolute.
The real question is about professional scores or our own when we are in a blind tasting situation.
And ****** Buy the vineyard…