The Cru’s New Wine Ratings
August 11, 2008
I have long debated whether or not to include wine ratings here on The Cru - well the debate is over.
The reason I have been reluctant in the past is because I find it hard to apply an intrinsic value to something which in essence is an extrinsic experience. The thought process is much like me believing gymnastics should not be an Olympic sport - the winner is determined by human opinion rather than an absolute and this is a notion that I find flawed.
I do however recognise the need to create some sort of reference for readers and consumers alike. So when I stumbled on an explanation of Spittoon’s wine rating system I was drawn to the formula used.
So here below is the wine rating system that I am going to adopt here on The Cru :
Four ratings - Drinkability, Interest, Value and Enjoyment are each assigned 1-5 points with 1 being poor or bad, 5 being excellent or superlative. Totalling these supplies a rating out of 20. To convert this to a 100 point rating the scores are totalled, doubled and added to a base 60.
I guess one could just leave it as a score out of 20 but the norm seems to be the 100 point scale so I won’t deviate from that.
Thanks to Andrew of Spittton for giving me the ‘go-ahead’ to use his formula here on The Cru and for the rating system itself.
I think it suits The Cru - it leans more towards the experience of the wine without ignoring what’s inside the bottle too much.
Let me know what you think!
Posted in The Cru, Wine Reviews
August 11th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
obviously I’m biased but I think its a damn fine idea!
August 12th, 2008 at 9:03 am
Great idea, I agree that it suits the style of the blog and its readership. There are enough ratings simply on the classic scale of appearance, nose, palate, and while these are essential criteria, interest and value are key criteria too!
August 12th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
the norm seems to be the 100 point scale so I won’t deviate from that.
Hardly the norm. It’s a very recent system for wine tasting, popularized by R Parker. The standard at Veritas is the Univervisity of Califronia 20 point system. The standard on Platter is 1-5 stars - which is actually a 10 point system since they use half stars.
I dislike the 100 point system since no one can explain the difference between 90 and 91 points. Also because its not a 100 point system, since no wine can score less than 50 points.
But if you’re going to use the 100 point system, why on earth faff around with scoring in 5s, then doing all that arithmetic — just score from 80-100
August 13th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
my loose use of language has got the better of me again.
no, you are right pete, it’s not the norm but is my belief that it is fast moving towards becoming the most popular rating scale if it isn’t already.
i tend to favour the 20 point system myself.
so what im going to do is represent all of them. the 100 point scale for all the parker inclined; the 20 point scale for all those j. robinson inclined; and the 5 point scale for all those platter inclined!
and if that becomes too much hard work - then ill just tally the four scores out of five and make it 20 points.
but let’s see how it goes!
thanks for the thumbs up erica
August 13th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
I think Peter is missing the point - the ratings are as you describe assigned five points and I havent found anything else that covers value, interest, drinkability and enjoyment. The ‘maths’ bit (which isnt at all a bother) is just to convert to which ever system you prefer - out of 100, 20 etc
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 am
[...] I’m not going to do the above breakdown from now on - I just did it this time to show you how I’m applying the new rating system! [...]