As a relatively new winery, I feel it is important for me to submit my wines to a select group of reviewers to get their feedback on my wines. Why? There are a few reasons I do this:
1) I am truly interested in their professional opinion about my wines – ‘they’ drink and review a lot more wines than I ever will . . .
2) Their reviews can only help me, as far as I’m concerned, in getting my wines known by more people in the ‘wine world’.
That said, the points that are associated with the reviews are certainly of interest to me, but they are not ‘end alls’. I am always amazed at the apparent disparity with the reviews of many wines, including mine, and the points that are awarded to them.
For instance, in the latest Wine Advocate, out 2006 Cuvee Christie GSM Blend had the following review:
The 2006 GSM Cuvee Christie, a blend of Grenache, Syrah, and Mourvedre, reveals abundant aromas of cedar, spice, pepper, black cherries, and raspberries, a round, gracious texture, medium to full body, and a heady, pure finish with no hard edges. It is a seductive red to drink over the next 3-4 years.
I really enjoyed reading this review, for I think it captures the essence of the wine at this time, and is in line with what many who have tasted the wine at the various events I have poured at over the past 6 months.
At the bottom of the review are the ‘all important’ points . . .an 88. So does these points ‘match’ the review? I don’t know, but I’ve been told by a few who read it that they do not – that the points should have been higher . . .
I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this issue – and not just about a specific reviewer, but about reviews and points in general . . .