01438 741177
As tasted by Tom Canavan:
4 Likes
Interesting looking at his comments (only one wine marked lower than 88/100). It didnât give me the impression that he was being totally impartial. Influencers eh?
Actually there are two - Zorzal and LâOusteau.
For me the narrow range (most between 88-92) means that most of the wines are of average quality.
Yes sorry Richard I overlooked the Zorzal. I guess I rather thought that his comments were all pretty safe and as you say âaverageâ sounding. However, I do sometimes think these âwell-knownâ wine critics abide by the âif you canât say something nice, donât say anything at allâ mantra. Of course it brings the whole point of scoring into focus doesnât it? Is 88/100 a safe score? What constitutes a stinker these days and does anyone ever mark anything much lower, or donât they mark them at all?
2 Likes
Surely a good critic is one who can see the merits in anything, and can turn that into a positive comment even if the wine isnt to their taste?
The society is only buying wines that they think are good, so in theory no bad wines although definitely some that I wouldnât chose as not to my taste. Itâs not like picking a restaurant at random or reviewing an importers whole portfolio.
4 Likes
Surely the vast majority of reasonably-priced wine - at least that of a quality one would expect from TWS - will be between 88 and 92?! I would certainly expect this, given that this article is mostly about wines at this level. Basically, the 100 point is to all intents and purposes a 10 point scale from 85 to 95.
Nice to see Las Jaras gets a decent rating. I thought a couple of people on here were very harsh about this wine (maybe didnât give it enough time open?)
5 Likes
Indeed. Weâve mentioned before the JR rating system where by in a 20 point scale, 12 of the lowest points do not appear to be used at all.
20 â Truly exceptional
19 â A humdinger
18 â A cut above superior
17 â Superior
16 â Distinguished
15 â Average, a perfectly nice drink with no faults but not much excitement
14 â Deadly dull
13 â Borderline faulty or unbalanced
12 â Faulty or unbalanced
Really the only reason to use such a scale is that 15 out of 20 looks better to the wine producer than a 5 out of 10 rating.
15 of out 20 looks to the untrained eye to be well above average whereas 5 out of 10 looks absolutely average. Which, ironically, is what a score of 15 out of 20 is meant to represent.
For wine to be purchased by typical consumers, a 5 point scale is all that is really needed.
1 Terrible.
2. Dull
3 Average
4 Good
5 Excellent
4 Likes
Canât really agree with this. Given that almost no wines sold these days are âterribleâ, itâs a four-point scale. And given that 90% of what we drink will be a 4, with the occasional 3 and even more occasional 2 or 5, whatâs the point at all?
1 Like
Dunno, as a consumer I just need to know if a wine is average, good or excellent really.
20 â Truly exceptional
19 â A humdinger
18 â A cut above superior
17 â Superior
16 â Distinguished
15 â Average, a perfectly nice drink with no faults but not much excitement
I mean, what really is the difference between a distinguished wine, a superior wine or a cut above superior. Theyâre just nonsense words to most people.
Imagine applying that scale to a book review or a film review, people would look at you as if youâd lost your mind. Ooh, that latest Oscar nominated movie is a cut above superior, we should check it out but such a shame its not a humdinger.
Plus, youâll see from reviews posted on WS website that there are plenty of wines that people drink that they definitely do not consider to be a 4 (good).
As for 100 point scales, what on earth is the difference between an 88 and an 89. I bet even the author has no idea.
And if few wines are terrible these days then it makes even less sense to devote 12 points on a 20 point scale to identifying such wines.
2 Likes
âAs an average consumerââŚ
Yes, youâre probably right.
But as regards discussion on here, itâs kind of irrelevant, seeing as absolutely no one who spends time on wine forums is in any way an average consumer 
As such, for me those minor distinctions are precisely what Iâm looking for. Obviously you have to understand the arcane secret code first 
There should probably be two separate scoring systems, one for geeks and one for shelf talkers 
2 Likes
Donât know about that, I had a bottom-shelf California Shiraz the other day that tasted of air. And not good air.
Plenty of 1s out there - remember Sturgeonâs Law.
3 Likes
Good question, especially when you consider that all other consumer goods - food, books, theatre, film, cars, phones, etc etc are marked down, when the critic feels it is appropriate.
Another reason why the removal of the consolidated member review page was so unhelpful.
3 Likes
Well, if you must Truly pushing the envelope in the cause of scientific enquiry!
2 Likes
Indeed.
Marking something down, and publicising that, is as important as marking something up. It tells you the tastes of the reviewer. Thatâs why WS reviews are so helpful, Members will give an average wine 3 out of 5. Nothing wrong with it, just an average bottle of wine. Whereas, trying to decode if a 86 out of 100 is a bad, average or good wine is going to be pretty hard work, particularly when the entire reviewing range of 50 wines starts at 86 and ends at 92.
Be far better to just start the reviews saying all wines were well made and competent but to help you find the best ones the 86 wine will be marked as a 1, the 92 wine will be marked as a 10 with the rest of the wines scaled appropriately.
2 Likes
Iâm sure itâs a typo or oversight, but he confused the Tissot Arbois as wine from the Savoie rather than the Jura. Maybe he was thinking of an Arbin Mondeuse⌠Arbin⌠Arbois⌠theyâre out to get us!
2 Likes
I think the âSavoieâ is the error. It adds up otherwise. Donât think thereâs any trousseau in Savoie !!
14% though but. I remember when wines form Jura struggled to make 12%.
Time to revisit methinks ⌠maybe this July.
Indeed! That was just my point 
As for the ABV - anecdotal evidence of one is that most of both Trousseau and Plousard/Poulsard seem to be at least 13.5% if not 14% these days⌠But still retain that lovely freshness and savoury moreishness (is this a word?!)⌠Yum!
3 Likes
I was a bit shocked when I saw the Tissot chardonnays are all like 14.5% too - doesnât stop them from being absolutely delicious though.
2 Likes
I very much agree. At the time they claimed it was not feasible to migrate it at launch but was on the list of enhancements, though how it would count as such, when it was already there, is moot.
Anyway, 8 months on and no sign of it returning so Iâm assuming its removal was intentional for whatever reason and I canât think of a good oneâŚ
4 Likes
Itâs been a while since the website was launched now and I know this is on a long list of things to do but I too donât want to lose the idea of the member reviews being brought together and will continue to push for itâŚ.
4 Likes