some people still use a 20 pt scale.(sort of thought both broadbent and robinson used one of those) the pre parker scale was a 20 point scale, which included points for appearance, smell, and who knows what else.

i think parker's scale is really a 30 point scale that starts at 70 or so. mad dog, thunderbird, mogan david, or wild irish rose, probably score in the low 70's on the parker scale.

one of the most famous systems uses a three beaker rating.

parker came out with that 100 point, taste only system, and it became very popular.

Agreed that Parker (and his tasters) use only a 30 point scale.... I think wines that score below a certain level are simply not published.

Yes... actually, those points equate to sales and also cost money... the same was Wine Spectator points also produce revenue and also cost points. There is an intersting correlation between WS advertising and WS points... yes, they dont like to hear that but it doesnt take a Nobel Economist to figure that out... :rolleyes:

Another controversy has boiled up over there as well that threatens to further damage RP's brand and credibility.

http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/...d.php?t=206266

It seems that Jay Miller gave a 96 rating in 2007 to a Spanish wine, Sierra Carche 2005, a Jumilla from a new brand name winery. That rating was used to market the wine (of course) and it has sold briskly. However, over 10 months ago, a Parker board member tasted the wine and found it undrinkable, not corked, just lousy wine. He Fed Exed a bottle of it to Miller (whom he knows personally) with his "TN" and suggested Miller re-taste the wine. Apparently, Miller sat on it for 10 months until a couple of weeks ago, then tasted it and pronounced it equally undrinkable and that "any resemblance to the wine"...he'd tasted earlier was non-existent.

Sets up some interesting questions. Among them: did the winery substitute inferior juice under the auspices of the highly rated wine (when it ran out due to the hot sales..or for other reasons) and, why did Miller wait 10 months before re-tasting the wine?

The Wineberserkers.com board has really taken the gloves off on this one: http://www.wineberserkers.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7441 :D

Sort of like a wine geek version of an episode of Law & Order. Some very tangled storylines leading to a suprise ending? :confused:

Like Watergate's Deep Throat said...."follow the money".

clover-- thanks for the heads up on this. While Im a member of the Parker BB, I rarely post there anymore.... I guess this proves the old saying... "when it rains, it pours..." :eek:

For what it's worth, further discourse about Parker revolves around the controversial wine bloggers and his blatant disregard about their existance as credible review sources.

http://www.winebloggersconference.org/

Several boards have pointed to Parkers comments around the lack of credibility with the thousands of blogs out there that are starting to change the way the public views how to analyze wines, which may be contributing to why fewer people subscribe to the publications. I know a flurry of professionals have blogs and have commented that Parkers analysis of a specific style of wine does not appeal to every palate, instead you look at the palate of those who drink wine (male/female/regional/with food/no food) and latch onto those who you like. (referencing the bloggers or blobbers as he called it). This set off alot of fury.

Knowing many in the wine industry, wineries definitely make wines to appeal to the palates of the tasters of the major publications. I feel, like any industry, more power to them for trying to generate revenue and knowing the power of the magazines and the publications to generate revenue. The same for those smaller wineries that craft based upon their own terroir or style. However, I think a shift is happening as Parker called out bloggers who received free wine and having allegedly no moral ground for wine reviews and credibility, even if the blogger was a certified sommelier through CMS, the only international guild for certified sommeliers. (not meant to take away from the many ways to get a certification). If he's getting special treatment, what right have you to criticize a wine blogger or regional publication?

I have lost my respect for not just Parker, but for many within that circle as more defensive and almost offensive comments are made (on his blog) from the blogging review circle that has, IMHO, quite a potential to offer more depth of reviews once the newness wears off and the stand outs set themself apart.

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/Palm-D050; Blazer/4.3) 16;320x320)

After reading the details of the latest "Miller-Gate", I would be surprised if this critic manages to keep his job for much longer.



The GrapeVine seems to be saying that JM will be cleaning out his desk sometime soon after this latest dust settles.... so as to save the Owner of the Circus some 'loss of face' and not make it look too much as if he has given in to public pressure to use the guillotine.

At this point, Miller just has to go for RMP to maintain any semblance of credibility. These "Miller-gate" issues, if nothing else, have exposed his rating methodology and independence to be severely lacking, to say the least. I actually think Miller was duped in this case (the importer or brand owner slipped him higher quality wine that what was eventually released as Sierra Carche), but to sit for 10 months on the evidence sent him by "his biggest fan" (Kenney) is unexplainable. Not that Miller hasn't offered some incredibly lame excuses on the BB.

As to the Sierra Carche issue (Carche-gate?), that one is REALLY going to take some 'splaining by the winemaker, importer, retailer. The latest response, allegedly from the winemaker, is that they "accidentally" bottled some higher quality juice in one production run and, go figure, that happened to be the one that Miller was given to taste.

After the rating (96) came out, they did more bottlings of other juice that was crap and sold it as Carche hoping to get away with it. I know..I'm very cynical..but this brand is owned and was created by Guy Anderson Wines, a large UK based "brand creator" for wines. I think, if enough objective investigation is done (a big IF), that it will turn out that GAW tried to capitalize on the rating and, at the very least, had horrendous quality control procedures leading to releasing wine that even Miller has called "undrinkable".

The reactions on the Parker BB are getting nastier including one that coins a new Parker rating for the wine.... "Undrinkable; Rating 96!". :D

when the '88(maybe 89) burgundy came out, parker was the only person working at parker, inc(other than mom, who typed the newsletter, mailed it, and answered the phone). parker gave a very good review to the '88 barrel samples(i do not know where he tasted them). when the wines came out, he thought them grossly inferior, and did state so. in fact he then rated the '88's far below anyone else. his reviews and comments killed '88 sales in the usa. (i bought 47 cases of the '88 as distressed merchandise. most was grand cru).

it greatly enhanced his rep, but also got him thrown out of burgundy. i do not think he has ever reviewed burgundy wines since. one of the main reasons to hire Pierre Rogavani(sp) was to have a burgundy reviewer.

miller should have shouted immediately, particularly since parker's action was done so famously.

Bordeaux, by the way, is a particularly problematical area, as many chateau grade by barrel, and maybe mix a few in to stretch product. certainly the best barrel is used for the trade tasting.

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/Palm-D050; Blazer/4.3) 16;320x448)

I agree he (JM) needs to go, but..... what about RP's ego.....?!

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/Palm-D050; Blazer/4.3) 16;320x448)

I thought RP once said he didnt 'get' Burgundy... (!???!!)

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

Its going to be interesting for Argentine producers if JM does get the ax... I know many are praying that Neal Martin is not his replacement...

All I can say about this is that it's not surprising in the least. IME, this happens more than a lot of us (or they) want to admit. Within my limited circles of the biz, the topic of "ringer" bottles/cases (and the associated high scores) has come up quite frequently, and not just with Parker wines, but with pretty much all the notable critics out there. Usually any comment about a ringer is followed by nervous laughter but general acceptance. If you say this in the presence of a vintner though, the reactions can be pretty comical ;)

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

I dont know too much about ringer bottles... but once you are ITB its not very hard to conclude that the wine industry is basically run by a small group of buddies...

I cannot claim to know too much either, it's just a theory (albeit one with perhaps some validity) that gets brought out sometimes. That being said, I agree 100% with your statement about the small group of buddies. It's amazing how incestuous the industry is.

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

The old boys club thing is not just the critics... Also the international flying winemaker that carry weight are all in the same clique... :rolleyes:

if you read the occasional wine and food reports in the back of advocate, you will see a number of burgundys. i presume they come from parker's (or a friend's) cellar. i assure you Mark's Duck House in Arlington does not have aged Musingy, chapelle chambertin, echezeaux.(strange wines for dim sum).

I don't even want to get started on that group of individuals. :mad:

Now now..... the international spoof juice they make may be without a soul.... (some say Mendoza tastes like Stellenbosch tastes like California tastes like McLaren Vale tastes like Colchagua tastes like Toro tastes like Bordeaux) but it actually tastes not bad, or....?

:p ;) :D

haha You're right, it doesn't taste bad...But without a soul, without an expression of terroir, what is it really?

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

Hence my use of the Spoof Juice denomination... :D

haha well I'd have picked a slightly different word, but to each his own ;)

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

which one...?

For those who have a copy of Parker's first edition of Bordeaux, have a look at his reviews for Chateau Boyd-Cantenac and Chateau Pouget for the years 1982 and earlier. They were not vinified separately until the 1983. Translation they were the same wine, as noted by Hubrecht Duijker and Hugh Johnson. Some of Parker's tasting notes were from the same month for the same vintages of these two wines, (presumably at the chateau) but his score and descriptions are different. Subsequent editions got around this problem by eliminating reviews of Pouget from this period.

Parker should be regarded as a guide NOT gospel.

As far as his praise of the 2003 vintage in Bordeaux goes, call it what you want but that isn't Bordeaux. There are other professional tasters who have advocated 2003 but Parker is the most notorious and influential. After over 25 years collecting and tasting I have come to the conclusion that people's palates are different. I also happen to believe that there are horses for courses and that certain tasters are better in some regions than in other regions. What always spoke volumes to me were the regions that received very little coverage by Parker himself in the Wine Advocate, e.g. Germany and Champagne.

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

Agreed... Parker is of no use for Champagne.

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.4; Series60/5.0 NokiaN97-3/10.2.012; Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; en-us) AppleWebKit/525 (KHTML, like Gecko) WicKed/7.1.12344)

Stevenson is my critic for bubbly... ^

Wirelessly posted (Nokia N97 / Palm TX: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/Palm-D050; Blazer/4.3) 16;320x448)

The mess over at the Parker boards seems to continue... :eek: