Wine Experts?
0I came across this article today and found it quite interesting (especially having a mathematics background 
).
The Myth of the Sommelier
- 4 comments, 9 replies
- Comment
I came across this article today and found it quite interesting (especially having a mathematics background ).
The Myth of the Sommelier
Independently found the same link and just finished reading it.
Perhaps we both subscribe to 1440?
@rjquillin Yep!
I’m not entirely convinced he’s got the math right or that he’s making all the right assumptions. But I’m also not willing to spend the time to figure it out. I think his conclusion that points and ratings aren’t all that useful is obviously true and that the rpm advice is the best advice for wine tasting.
@klezman There is at least an inference that sommeliers, critics, and other tasters are hacks who lack credibility, lack the taste buds to do the job, or will sell out when that opportunity presents itself. I would point out that there are talented, trained, and tested somms who don’t play the publication games and so whose data points do not show up in the author’s statistics. I call your attention to the film Somm III, currently available on Amazon Prime and probably elsewhere. At 41:08 there is a scene from a blind all PN tasting with NYC somms. One of the somms is able to identify the wine, not just to the level of country or region, but down to the producer. So if the point of the article is that published wine ratings and comparisons are biased or useless, then point taken. But if the author is trying to say or imply that the ability to make such distinctions consistently is fictional, then I disagree. As @kaolis would say, FWIW.
@davirom @kaolis yes, that’s a lot of what I mean. That’s why I find points and medals rather useless and I rely on descriptions from reviews if anything. The article obviously doesn’t attempt to analyse that aspect of things.
I feel like I don’t quite know how to read/understand the article. It seems to me to be saying something like “experts are not reliable and they’re expectations are too predetermined.” That’s fine and I’m sure it’s true, but so what? Like I’m not sure what to do with that. I’m not trying to drink wine on that level. It’s still fun to try new wines. It’s fun to taste and compare, both different wines and the wine with what the label says. It’s nice to drink a bottle you know love.
@Ten9Eight … and perhaps find reviewers that mirror your tastes
@rjquillin @Ten9Eight @klezman @davirom @Mark_L
Is this the same topic?
https://www.wineberserkers.com/t/wine-critics-know-nothing/341095
@kaolis the article is deleted now.
@Ten9Eight @rjquillin @klezman @davirom @Mark_L article/post deleted but it was in reference to the author, if I have this straight:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Lasker
@kaolis @klezman @Mark_L @rjquillin @Ten9Eight The author’s inclination towards pseudoscience definitely calls his methodology into question. As klez says upthread, it’s not worth the time to get into the specifics.
@davirom @kaolis @Mark_L @rjquillin @Ten9Eight sounds like a lovely guy, too, based on that Wikipedia article.
@davirom @kaolis @klezman @rjquillin @Ten9Eight I knew nothing about him when I posted the original article, and if I had I would not have made the post.