Trotwood-Madison vs. Winton Woods
.jpg)
2009-10 UD men's basketball
Pyramid Hill lights up
Home > Blogs > Uncorked > Archives > 2006 > December > 06 > Entry
NZ wine scandal could threaten the credibility of wine reviews, contests worldwide
There’s a very intriguing wine scandal fermenting in New Zealand, where an award-winning wine was stripped of its gold medal after it was determined the sample sent to contest judges was completely different from the identically labeled wines available to the public. The winemaker involved is scrambling to limit the fallout from the incident, and says there was no intent to deceive.
Still, I believe this scandal could reverberate well beyond New Zealand’s borders because it begs the question: How prevalent is the practice of winemakers sending a “special cuvee” — the wine from its best vineyard or best barrel, for example — to wine reviewers and wine competitions in hopes of bagging a high score or a gold medal, then bottling its similar-but-slightly-more-pedestrian wine for the unsuspecting public? I’m not suggesting it’s common. But I worry it might be happening more than we think.
Simply put, the credibility of the wine scores we read in Wine Spectator and the Wine Advocate and elsewhere relies on consumers’ belief that the wine in the bottle they buy in the corner wine shop is the same wine that scored the precious 90. If that belief is shaken, the scores become meaningless.
Some large wine publications solicit samples from wineries and award scores based solely on those samples. Others try to buy their wines in the marketplace, but still participate in large-scale tastings and events that unveil the new wines of the vintage, where some shenanigans could still take place.
So how often does this switcharoo occur, and what steps can wine magazine editors, newsletter authors and wine competition judges take to protect the integrity of their ratings and results?
This could get very interesting.
Thanks and cheers!
Mark Fisher
Comments
By john
December 12, 2006 4:58 PM | Link to this
Ever heard of Kiwi ingenuity.A classic case. Well done for catching them out.By Cru Master
December 11, 2006 9:45 AM | Link to this
and with the web 2.0 phenomenon, the power of reviews i beleiev will begin to shift toward the wider blogging community rather than the elite few so called experts.By Cru Master
December 11, 2006 9:43 AM | Link to this
with the monay making pin-off of all these awards, i doubt that there would be much of an impact, although there is potential to at least raise a few eyebrows.By Dennis
December 7, 2006 2:41 PM | Link to this
This type of thing is one of the primary reasons I like the results of the Orange County Fair competition. At least for California wines, they purchase the wines from retail and make an effort to include all California wines available through normal channels. They also break the competition into price categories so the $100 bottles are not compared to $10 selections.By huevosconvino
December 7, 2006 1:21 PM | Link to this
I hate to say it, but this incident won’t really affect my judgment regarding scores you see in a publication such as Wine Spectator. The process by which any wine receives a score is already highly suspect in my mind; it’s hardly an objective, quantitative process from what I have read. I’m not sure if this scandal really reflects on the credibility of wine media so much as the drive to get a wine into a massive import market or avoid being stuck with thousands of gallons of wine that cannot be sold at a profit. The wine media already has enough crises of credibility to worry about. *)By Tim
December 7, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
You should check out the winemaker’s side of the story, Mark: http://www.witherhills.co.nz/openletter.html I think in this case it’s just a matter of different batches and not any intent to deceive the judges.By Billy
December 7, 2006 8:24 AM | Link to this
Blogs to the Rescue! Whether or not the practice of sending special bottles to the Parkers et al is prevalent or not as big of an impact these days. Wine blogs (insert shameless plug here) and other independent review sources are exploding across the net. We are reviewing consumer wines from the consumer perspective. A consistent review of a wine from the Spectator and a reputable wine blog is a good indication that you are getting a quality product. Check out The Wine Cask Blog at http://winecask.blogspot.com Raise a Glass!By Jeff Lefevere
December 6, 2006 10:18 PM | Link to this
Good stuff, Mark. I love a scandal even when the elections are over. I’ve often wondered about the tastings that are conducted for critics at the winery … i.e. Parker. Who is to say what goes into that bottle for his sampling? JeffBy Terry Hughes
December 6, 2006 8:54 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the email alert to this article, Mark. It made my day…I did a brief, but brief, posting on it and linked to you. Sign me, Score Skeptic Now & For EverBy Doug
December 6, 2006 7:18 PM | Link to this
As a wine professional who tastes wine at least twice and sometimes 4 days per week I work primarily with distributors or brokers who get their samples from the wineries. These are all production wines, labeled, boxed with tax paid. I feel that barrel are not always representative of the finished wine and I approach those pretty carefully. I write reviews on the wines I taste and have always felt comfortable that what I write about is what is available.By Gene - Seattle Wine Blog
December 6, 2006 4:41 PM | Link to this
Sending “special cuvees” to wine conpetitions and wine publications is not the only reason the wine you buy may not taste the same as what, say, Robert Parker tasted and wrote about. These samples didn’t sit in at least two hot warehouses, customs, hot ships, hot trucks, hot retailers shelfs. By the time the wine gets to you via this turtorous route, it is amazing that it still tastes like wine. I agree with you totally, that there is probably a lot more of this sort of thing going than meets the eye. GeneBy wine-o
December 6, 2006 3:19 PM | Link to this
oh my gosh I am soooo shocked! It’s hard to deadpan in print, but insert Richard Wright voice here. If you believe those in the know in the wine industry both of these things happen on a regualr basis- both the big business trade mags getting the best barrel sample and also wineries doing several bottling runs. If you think about it, it is statistically impossible for anyone making wine in amounts larger than the largest barrel or fermentation/holding tank to make wines that are absolutely identical to each other. Factors such as time in barrel, toast level of individual barrels, and length of fermentation due to atmospheric conditions all play a factor in the finished product. In this day and age of wine “manufacturing” it is as common as the day is long. Think all 6 million cases of Yellow Tail or Two Buck Chuck were made exactly the same? How? On the other end of things how much trust should be placed on one person’s subjective tastes as to the quality of that particular wine when computed to numerical statistics? The answer: Be your own judge! Wine reviews should be helpful information but never a shopping list. For more reasons than I care to say here the emphasis should be placed upon your own feelings/knowledge/palate. Start there, and if you still can’t make a decision, and the somm. or store owner has no opinion, nor Hugh Johnson or Jancis Robinson or even your buddy Frank- then head for the magazine.By Diane Teitelbaum
December 6, 2006 2:58 PM | Link to this
Historically this kind of thing doesn’t spread doubt at random. The Austrian glycol thing destroyed the Australian business in Japan, but that was a result of name confusion on the country. The huge Bordeaux Scandal of the 70’s didn’t even put that one large company out of business, much less expand. The Italian scandel expanded in the US to include all Italian wine for a while instead of only the “usual supects”. Probably because americans back then only knew one wine name - Chianti - too hard to learn. And, there are always rampant rumors about who boots in the good stuff at competitions. But the truth is — this is the exception and people have no choice but to remain optimistic. My guess is this will die out quickly. One guy in a distant contest does not a panic make.By TJ
December 6, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
Hmm…there have been times when I picked up a wine based on a good review and felt it was inferior to the expectations of the review. When this does happen to me, I chalk it up to my tastes differ from the reviewer and or just got a bad bottle! But now this raises another set of questions…hmm…