Elevating Aglianico Even Further: Grifalco’s Damaschito
500 Words (Or So) on the Future of Red Wine from Southern Italy
How We Rate Wine
by Kevin Day, Editor-in-Chief
If we had our druthers, we wouldn't even assess a rating on wines (it would be so much easier). But the truth is that some wines are better than others, and you ought to know how they all stack up.
Below we break down our process, what we value most in a wine, how we arrive at our opinion ratings, what they ultimately mean, and how to interpret them.
Illustration by Margaret McLain.
Our Process for Reviewing Wines
No single process is flawless, including ours. We do not see our wine reviews as any more righteous than a critic's score, but we do feel it covers aspects that they miss, and therefore, contributes an important perspective to your wine buying research.
When possible, we taste blind but in smaller batches (no more than a dozen). Usually this is done in a group setting as well, with (a) other wine professionals or (b) at a winery, where we can come back to a certain wine for more understanding.
But a good chunk of what we review is done at the table, to see how a wine evolves over at least an evening, and — with numerous categories of wines — even over multiple evenings. We frequently recork a wine, refrigerate it, then bring it back to proper temperature a day later to see what it says. This may be just a taste, or another glass. It all depends on what we're trying to learn.
This is how you likely drink wine, and because of that, our approach is more focused on the depth of review rather than the breadth of the review. If there was an analogy, it would be this: imagine this was a book review publication. Their goal is to skim as many books as possible to give you a brief, top-line summary of their merits. Our goal is to review fewer books per year within a niche category (e.g. "crime and spy novels" to our "Italian and French wine" focus). To do this, we read more pages and allow ourselves more time to get there.
In sum, we go for depth over breadth.
Guide to Our Opinion Ratings
Rather than a 100-point or 20-point scale, we simply place wines within a stratified star-rating system. That's because numbers are too definitive and iron-clad for what we want to convey. Wine is dynamic. Its elements fluctuate consistently. Think of these ratings as "tiers of possibility and potential" rather than "scores."
That said, if you were to convert our scores to a percentage of perfection, it would likely reflect the standard academic grading system found in the United States. The quarter-star approach also brings us closer inline with common wine assessment scales (i.e. a "solid and recommended" wine is closer to a 90-point wine if its ★★★★ 1/2 vs. just ★★★).
Here is more on how to interpret our ratings:
★★★★★
The Top Tier
Wines at this level are so good, we hesitate to even compare them to one other. Oftentimes, we can tell if we're dealing with a five-star wine because it has defied our ability to pin words to it. But we try anyways.
So, what do we prize most in a wine? Complexity mixed with effortlessness. Distinctiveness mixed with typicity. Energy as well as endurance (the latter noted both on the finish, and its potential to age). Lastly: the ability to work well at the table with a wide variety of foods.
This is a wine we will seek out in future vintages no matter what.
Note that this is not equivalent to a 100-point wine, nor do we consider these wines "perfect." This is simply the upper echelon of excitement for us as tasters.
Roughly 5% of the wines we taste, and 20% of the wines we write about.
★★★★ 3/4
A Thrilling Wine
These wines check so many boxes for us: energetic, shape-shifting, detailed, aromatic, complementary to a wide variety of occasions. The only hang up that prevents them from the top tier is either (a) an individual aspect that requires more maturity or balance, or (b) they're not quite "best in class" given their competitive set within their category. Regardless, these are memorable wines, and often noteworthy enough to get their own Wines to Admire column.
This is a wine we will buy again.
Roughly 10% of the wines we taste, and 50% of the wines we write about.
★★★★ 1/2
Solid and Recommended
These wines often appear in Tasting Reports and First-Taste Guides where we are analyzing a wider spectrum of wines, either from a specific producer or region. They are well made, indicative of their origin and variety, and often times, included because we have a high degree of confidence that our readers can find them when other, higher-ranked wines mentioned might require some searching. They only lack the magic needed to crack the levels above them.
This is a wine we'd consider buying again.
Roughly 40% of the wines we taste, but only 20% of the wines we write about.
★★★★ 1/4
Average
Wines at this level live in a bit of a gray area. They are technically sound and serviceable, but oftentimes lacking in enough character to make them memorable. But not all wines need to be memorable to be worth purchasing. Sometimes a simple, refreshing "quaffer" is all you need, and if the price is right, it ends up here.
It is important to note that wines from this level up are in the "go ahead and buy" window for us. See below for "Overpriced" to learn more on how value is incorporated into our ratings.
Roughly 20% of the wines we taste, but only 5% of the wines we write about.
★★★★
Indistinctive
Once we have reached this level, we are recommending against purchase of the wine. These wines are typically defined more by what they lack than what they are. Since our focus is on celebrating excellent wines — rather than being a comprehensive "buyer's guide" to wine — we typically do not include coverage of these wines. Behind the scenes, we do rate these wines and will provide feedback to the producer or importer if requested.
Roughly 15-20% of the wines we taste, and less than 5% of the wines we write about.
Less than ★★★★
No Point in Writing About It
Wines at this level are very rarely included on Opening a Bottle. Here we come across poorly crafted wines that suffer from the mistakes of the producer. Over extraction, imbalanced alcohol, clumsy use of oak and under/overripe fruit are common issues in these wines. Again: it takes a special case for a wine at this level to be written about on Opening a Bottle, and it is never for a good reason.
Roughly 5% of the wines we taste, and 0% of the wines we write about. Sadly, the percentage of wines that we would pin at this level is much higher, but our selection process of what we taste and review has mercifully worked to keep many of them off our table.
Not scored
Flawed
There is a separate category here, and that is a flawed wine. This can range from a bad case of brett (learn more) to TCA (aka cork taint) and a host of other maladies. Some of these are a reflection on the winemaker. Others are a mixed bag. Some are the result of bad transit and handling long after the bottle has left the winery. We simply cannot score these wines. Flaws are reported back to the importer, and we often revisit the wine. However, we have dropped winemakers from the Essential Winemakers lists over issues with flaws we feel are part of their responsibility.
Food-Friendliness
Versatility in a wine — it’s ability to partner with several different styles of food and/or occasions — should be celebrated. For one, it makes your wine shopping easier. If seeking "the perfect pairing" for an upcoming dish is intimidating to you (it was to me until I stopped seeking it), then buying a versatile wine can liberate you from worries.
But more importantly, excellent wines showcase different moods and expressions when placed in different culinary contexts. They are like actors in this way: the bad ones are typecast, the best ones can inhabit any supporting or leading role they are offered.
That said, some wines are intended to be consumed on their own. Italians call them vino da meditazione or "meditation wine," which is a pretty handy phrase. These wines deserve to be considered in such a light.
Either way, I have come up with five words to describe a wine's food-friendliness that I use throughout the site's wine reviews. It should be noted that these assessments account for the wine now, not at an advanced age:
Soloist – There is no shame in being who you are: an individual that needs the spotlight and no interference. A generally speaking example would be Amarone della Valpolicella.
Limited – This is sort of a purgatory rating. The wine's characteristics are typically so assertive that only a limited range of cuisine options would work well with it. Generalized example: Brunello di Montalcino or Bordeaux blends.
Selective – Slightly more broad than the limited assessment. Selective wines may have one element that requires a more fine-tuned choice of occasion/cuisine, such as heightened tannins that require something fatty. Generalized example: Langhe Nebbiolo.
Versatile – We have all met someone who can fit in anywhere. These wines are similar. Their acidity, their weight, their aromatic/taste profile are strong enough to be noticed with a variety of dishes, but also docile enough to support the food's flavors. Generalized example: Cru Beaujolais.
Impeccable – These wines are masters of transformation. Everything outlined under "versatile," only with an even broader spectrum. Generalized example: champagne.
Value
We could write a book on value, but this page is already long enough.
You would think that value would be the most concrete aspect of assessment in wine, but I actually find it to be the most reliant on gut feeling. In our reviews, value is relative to the wine's competitive set. For instance, a relatively pricey Beaujolais Village could perform as well or even better than Cru Beaujolais wines twice or three-times the price. This would enhance its value, even if it is pricier than other Beaujolais Village wines. (Our review will likely provide this context).
For wines from smaller regional areas with a smaller market presence, the comparison is to other wines in that style, but still from that country of origin.
As a result, we use these simple phrases to categorize a wine's value. We do not quote prices because they vary so much from market to market
Costly – Just as it sounds. Odds are, if it fits into this category, we won't be writing about it.
A Little Pricey – Just as it sounds. This is not a "buyer beware" situation, but some caution may be required if you are more of a frugal shopper.
As Expected – The "no surprises here" category.
Very Good – Wines that — given the circumstances of their production and how they taste — we would expect to be priced higher.
Exceptional – Everybody's favorite value assessment.
