Over at RebeccaChapa.com, Rebecca tackles an issue that is close to my heart — and that would be the reliability of wine competition results. Aside from the fact that she says nice things about the San Diego International Wine Competition, which I run and where Rebecca frequently judges, my friend makes a number of good points.
At issue is whether or not judges can replicate their tasting results when the same wine passes before them multiple times. These are blind tastings, of course, so a judge would have no way of knowing that an earlier wine had suddenly reappeared.
Rebecca points out that tasting order, temperature, bottle variation and a number of other factors (such as aeration) can alter one’s perception of the same wine over some period of time.
I am director of three major wine competitions (with the final deadline for the Critics Challenge coming up in several days) and thus keenly aware of the vagaries of judging.
I take the calls when a disappointed vintner wants to vent over a disappointing result. I listen, I sympathize, I do my best to console, but I never blame the judges.
The fact is, young wines (the coin of wine competitions) are fickle. They seldom exhibit identical characteristics each time tasted. Those that do are rare and obviously stand out. A good example of that is the 2007 Ventana Vineyards Riesling, which was awarded Best of Show white wine earlier this year in San Francisco and Monterey and a gold medal in San Diego. That kind of consistency is a sign of greatness.
This may not be a Robert Parker wine, but it certainly impressed three separate panels of wine professionals over the course of several months. Knowing that is useful for you, the consumer, and it surely helps the winery. When I last spoke to someone at Ventana, the ’07 Riesling was nearly sold out.
Coming up in a little more than three weeks a number of my colleagues here at WRO will convene in San Diego for the Critics Challenge. The Challenge may not be perfect, but it certainly is entertaining. And, best of all, in addition to the results you get an excerpt from the judge’s tasting notes.
You may disagree with the conclusion, but at least you will know what the judge was thinking.
8