Pernicious Delusion ? The Amateur Wine Review

Some fifteen years ago the amateur wine review was taken to task by certain people in the professional space, who asserted that these reviews were “pernicious delusion” - which is to say that these comments and scores had no value to the consumer as reliable assessments either of a wine’s character or style and, perhaps more importantly, of it’s quality. 

Matt Kramer (whom I greatly respect) asserted that “One hundred people who don't know much about, say, Auxey-Duresses, adds up to 100 muddied, baffled and often duplicative conclusions.”

And with reference to sites that post amateur reviews, Steve Brody posted in 2014 - “The readers and users of these sites are almost always slaves to their personal preferences and current trends.”

Amateurs are presumed to be a) untrained  b) subject to bias and c) lacking in expertise.

Cellartracker and other platforms which operate as bulletin boards for wine reviews by amateurs of course protested.  Analysis was done that purported to demonstrate how closely correlated in actuality were the scores given by those who post on Cellartracker with the scores of professional critics - and that this correlation was not materially more divergent than the correlation between scores among the critics themselves. This analysis is available on the Cellartracker site.

So how much reliance should the consumer place on the “amateur” review posted on these sites ? 

In answering that question, let us not conflate two issues.  The first is whether there is value in the opinion of the person who truly has no wine expertise. The second is whether there is value in going to sites that post non professional reviews.  This note addresses only the second issue.

In making a determination as to that second question, I make two points that are fairly evident -

(a) The space is not served by professional critics. 

I myself refer to Cellartracker (and similar other sites) because there is nowhere else I can go to get a sense of where a wine is today.  Professional critics seldom revisit a wine after 10 years or 20 years. On those occasions where I can find a professional critic’s review of a 15 year old bottle of Michel Lafarge Volnay Vendage Selectione I greatly value that opinion. But good luck trying to find that review.

(b)  The “amateur’ world now includes many people who really know their stuff.

It is pretty clear when reading a note on Cellartracker if the person knows what they are talking about. And I would be the first to admit that if you have a high bar in this regard that number of persons may be less than 5% of the those submitting reviews. But apart from the quality of the content of any particular review text itself as an indicator of the knowledge of the person writing the review, there is data available as to the submitter of the review - for example, how many entries they have posted. How can one assert that someone who has written more than 600 reviews this year on Cellartracker, is untrained, subject to bias and lacking in expertise ? Not only that, but I can sort by reviewer. Some of my friends post on Cellartracker - and I value their opinion more than most professional critics.

The amateur wine drinking world has changed - even in the last 15 years. At it’s apex it has become much more competent, knowledgable and qualified. The reality is there is now a whole host of people - many of whom are in the wine industry or so close to it as to make no difference - whose opinions of wine are reliably informative. Consider how many people have earned the WSET Diploma - are all these people to be supposed untrained and lacking in expertise ? In any given year there are almost 100,000 people attending WSET wine courses - and WSET is just one course provider. Consider how many have actually been to visit wine regions.  Information today is so much more readily available. Dedicated enthusiasts today really know their stuff.

Of course when a review on Cellartracker speaks to the high level of tannin in a Barbera d’Alba I set that review aside. But am I to set aside the opinions of members of our own little wine tasting group - made up largely of people working in the wine trade or who have qualifications in wine - simply because they are not professional wine critics ? Of course not.  And no doubt those professional or aspiring professional critics who 15 years ago were so vocal in disparaging the value of the amateur review would not contest this either. By “amateur” they meant only people who are biased, untrained and lacking in expertise. Not simply people who aren’t professional wine critics. Today a great number of amateurs know precisely where Auxey-Duresses is - and many of these have actually visited the village, tasted from its cellars and know whether the wine went through malolactic fermentation. And they are posting reviews. And with that, the value of these sites has increased.

Whether there is value in the opinion of the true uninformed amateur - one who is indeed untrained or inexperienced - is a whole different debate.  I am just saying the serious enthusiast is not in that category and that their number should not be underestimated.

The picture directs one to Auxey-Duresses.