In February of 2007 I submitted ten of my selections to a very prestigious wine competition in the USA. I won seven medals (three gold, two silver and two bronze) out of the ten selections that were submitted.. I was told by one of the judges that it was some of the best Riesling that they have ever tasted. All of the big names were at the competition and I fared better than they did.

One week later I submitted the same selections (2005, 2004, 2003 vintages) to Bruce Sanderson the German Wine Critic at The Wine Spectator. They arrived in NYC on February 14, 2007. I called and spoke with Bruce at the end of February he said; “the wines were sitting in his office and he told me the wines would be reviewed and rated.”

I contacted Bruce again in late June, 2007. He stated; “that he was working on the White Burgundy and that he would taste the wines and the ratings would be out in one of the fall issues.”

Another call was made to Bruce on September 25, 2007. On September 26, 2007 Bruce returned my call and stated; “the older vintages would not be reviewed and he was unable to publish a review of any of the wines, because the publishing schedule had changed and the wines had not been tasted.”

When I called the next day and told him that a messenger would be coming to pick up the wines to send it to another publication which expressed interest in reviewing and rating them. Bruce hesitated and then stated; “the wines were not available because it had been tasted informally and it was decided that THEIR readers would not be interested.” I asked him for the tasting notes, but no tasting notes were available.

On October 5, 2007 I sent an email to Marv Shanken and copied some of the other wine critics that were writing for various newspapers to let them know what happened.

When I spoke with some of the other critics they told me; “that if you don’t advertise with them they will not rate your wines.”

It has been almost two years since this happened. I have and will never submit my wines to another critic. The only critics that matter to me are the consumers.

My wines are placed in many of the top hotels, restaurants and fine wine stores in the USA.

Attached, is the email that I sent to Marv…

Re: (Company Name) Friday, October 5, 2007 11:19 AM
From: “Mark”
To: mshanken at mshanken dot com

Dear Mr. Shanken:

I am writing to inform you about a rather unpleasant experience I recently had, regarding submission and review of my wines. I am the only American wine producer in Germany, and the largest supplier of bulk Riesling from Germany to America. My (Company Name) is small with limited resources for marketing, but my wines are of the highest quality. I think my story is classic American entrepreneurship. I was very excited to have the opportunity to have my wines tasted by your prestigious magazine. I submitted a substantial amount of wine, my full range, worth over $1000 (2005, 2004 and 2003 vintages) to Bruce Sanderson in February of 2007. I spoke with Bruce at the end of February and was told the wine would be reviewed and rated. I contacted Bruce again in late June, 2007. He stated; “that he was working on the White Burgundy and that he would taste the wines and the ratings would be out in one of the fall issues”. A subsequent call was made to Bruce on September 25, 2007. On September 26, 2007 Bruce returned my call and stated; “the older vintages would not be reviewed and he was unable to publish a review of any of the wines, because the publishing schedule had changed and the wines had not been tasted”. When I called the next day and told him that a messenger would be coming to pick up the wine, to send it to another publication which expressed interest, Bruce hesitated and then stated; “the wine was not available because it had been tasted informally and it was decided that YOUR readers would not be interested.” I asked him for the tasting notes, but no tasting notes were available. What was the informal tasting, the secretary and others took my wine home? Not only am I out the value of my product, but also the months that went by under the assumption that the wines would be reviewed. This is very disingenuous and disrespectful of small producers, and is shocking from a magazine of such reputation!

Regards,

Mark

No, I don’t think Parker is lying. I think he tastes Aussie wines differently than I do, in part because he brings a different background and a different set of assumptions to those wines than I do. (And just to be clear: I am NOT equating myself with Parker, for reasons I’ve stated above.) And no, you are not to be chastised for attaching scores. It’s a smart thing to do. People pay attention to scores. If I believed in scores, I’d put them up myself. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for me, it’s a pretty small minority out there that wonders what on earth is the difference between and 89 and a 90.

And “I more or less trust Parker when it comes to the Rhone; I don’t trust him when it comes to the Barossa Valley” isn’t it more appropriate to “agree” or “disagree”? If you don’t trust someone then you are saying they are lying.

The whole phenomenon of professional tasting notes and scores is probably suspect, anyway. To quote Goode: “When we don’t taste blind, our preferences are liable to be shaped by pre-existing information we have about the wine. Try as hard as we might to be objective, this isn’t possible. What we know about wine will shape how we perceive the wine, and will even influence how much we enjoy a particular bottle.”

With this in mind, the “pre-existing information,” e.g., notes and scores, starts to loom pretty large, and certainly explains–to me, anyway–why some winemakers will do whatever it takes to get a big score from a big-name critic.

The last time I made a similar point, and the myriad times before that, I was accused of taking the soul out of wine. Imagine that: learning about what it is you are criticizing removes the soul of what it is that you are criticizing.

Fact is, studying what it is you are criticizing is work. It’s much easier to just talk about what you think you smell and taste and how well you like it and then score it so other can benefit from your astute palate.

The real issue is what will critics do after score escalation takes them beyond 100? I mean, if it ain’t a 95, why bother?