By Oliver Styles | Posted Monday, 05-Mar-2018
Even vintage variation can’t sway critics from giving surprisingly consistent scores for big-name wines.
If you find yourself regularly watching downhill skiing on the television you will, after a few races, understand that you are only watching it for two reasons. Firstly, like most sports, you want to see your country – or your hero – win. Secondly, and quite disturbingly, will come the inescapable realisation that you’re waiting for someone to crash.
Watching jumpsuit-clad men and women hurtle down a slope registering times that are only tenths and hundredths of a second apart, with no major errors on the way down, is athletically marvellous but, unfortunately, reasonably dull. Watching one or more of them lose an edge on a turn, or get their balance wrong on a jump, is exciting. It’s exciting for the wrong reasons – like I imagine watching a gladiator fight would be exciting.
And so to the world’s truly great wines where we similarly find an endless procession of scores whose differences match those of the timings of a downhill podium. Tenths of a second; a 100 point here, a 95-plus there, and a 97-99 squeezed in the middle, holding the bouquet, crying bitterly on the inside.
Read the full report: https://www.wine-searcher.com/m/2018/03/why-bother-rating-the-first-growths