I heard him on the XChateau podcast, I really liked what he had to say.
2 Likes
Iâd say Iâm more focused on the deep articles and not score primarily, although I do care a little bit. Iâm starting to lean more to Jeb
3 Likes
Neither. Youâll learn more from reading this board than youâll get from any subscription. And youâll get all the reviews and scores thrust in your face on retail listings and email blasts whether you want them or not.
6 Likes
I feel that vinous is a great middle ground out of all the options . Their interface on iOS and website is really great and easy to use.
1 Like
Spectator is the National Enquirer of wine.
4 Likes
Iâve been getting that vibe
I know what you mean. Every time I read it, I feel like I am kind of reading a newsletter for some sort of cult.
1 Like
Another strong vote for Vinous
2 Likes
The Wine Independent is new but much more in depth. Long well written articles about wineries and vintages and wine makers. Some good photos. Best for California and Bordeaux. Less for Spain and Italy. Fun to read. Scores are not over bloated like Hunnock.
2 Likes
Greetings from Chateauneuf!!! I appreciate all the love and nice words on my site and on my work. Anytime I can help someone find better wines for less, Iâm happy.
2 Likes
+1 for JD. Definitely more Napa focused and very good central CA reviews.
No mentions of the $25K pay to play for Vinous?
2 Likes
Where were you when I needed you twenty years ago?
2 Likes
Slavishly following points because I did not trust m own palate, young fool that I was back then 
3 Likes
Q: Iâm planning a meal and am trying to pick between Flannery and Morgan Ranch for the beef. Which one, in your opinion, would be better?
WB1: Snake River Farms
WB2: Holy Grail
WB3: Debragga
WB4: Allen Bros
WB5: First Light
2 Likes
Ha!
I still love points and donât mind being shamed for it. You just gotta know and trust who is assigning those points. Iâm generally good with the scores of a couple critics, but more notably. Look at some of the super-tasters on this forum who use points: Keith L., A So, Fu, Salil, Kane, Pat Martin, etc., just to name a few. I love that they still assign points as it adds value to the overall assessment, IMHO, but notably they are also some of the best notes writers as well.
1 Like
Which publication you subscribe to (if at all) mostly depends, I think, on how you consume wine and what youâre looking for. And I use the word âconsumeâ intentionally here - there are many ways to drink wine, and all of them are correct.
Some people are looking for more general coverage, others are looking for more âfair scoresâ (though Iâm personally sure what that means). I subscribe to one publication - WA - because I find my palate aligns most closely with Williamâs. So every once in a while, checking to see what he thinks about a wine is useful to me. If you find Jon Gilmanâs palate more to your liking, then you may well want to consider subscribing to his publication instead.
Other people are interested in drinking wines that get really high scores, which is a different way of consuming wine. Having more publications may make more of a difference to them.
Other people still are looking to be able to take a quick glance at scores to make sure the wine theyâre buying isnât particularly poor in that vintage. In that case, critics that occasionally buck the trend may make the most different.
I donât subscribe to either of these publications, as I mentioned, so Iâm not best placed to comment on this specific question. But I do think it depends on why you want to subscribe and what youâre looking for.
I think this is an interesting perspective, but I donât think itâs dispositive. This forum is great, but as I say with all of the few notes I post on this forum, all information is free or your money back. As with any source of user generated information, some of it is likely to be questionable. I donât necessarily trust everything written on /Wallstreetbets either 
On a serious note though, my WA subscription provides an extremely different service than this forum (or dinners/visits/Instagram, which is where I really get wine information); theyâre not in conflict. I also got the WA subscription to support William, whoâs very kind in sharing so much knowledge on this forum and generally.
2 Likes
Saying you can learn from reading this board is obviously not the same as saying every single post is fully accurate and equally valuable. Doesnât change the idea. You read and learn.
Half the people charging money for their reviews right now got their start as amateurs posting on the boards, including Jeb and Galloni. They did not acquire a Mandate of Heaven when they started selling subscriptions.
3 Likes
Hey, I am one to talk: I put point scores on my CT reviews! My point was not to go slavishly point hunting - points plus a useful tasting note in combination from a source youâre familiar with can really give a complete picture.
1 Like
@Robert.A.Jr
I think @JohnMag and I were talking (joking) about chasing points issued by certain professional reviewers. In the early aughts, I fell under the spell of a certain critic who shares your first name. A bit later, I found myself staring at a collection of hedonistic, extracted, oaky wines that no longer interested me and that were getting less appealing with time. Thankfully, I pivoted quickly to balanced and food friendly purchases.
I agree with your appreciation of certain tasters here and on Cellartracker. I was referring to those who were swaying fledgling wine buyers like me before the word âinfluencerâ was part of our lexicon.
Cheers
Warren
1 Like
An interesting exercise would be to find a wine that has disparate scores across reviewers and then taste it yourself. Whose assessment of quality do you agree with?
Try the 2019 Cakebread Dancing Bear Ranch, for instance. Galloni rates it 80, Dunnuck 97 and WS 93. Thatâs the best I can do in 5 mins of searching.
2 Likes