In May, I was a judge at two international wine competitions in California that taught me plenty about the current state of California wine. But they also illustrated a new trend in U.S. competitions: targeting particular audiences and offering specific judging perspectives, a big change from the traditional state fair model.

Does that make the results more relevant? Well, maybe.

Grouped tastings are growing in popularity

The first tasting was the tiny International Organic and Biodynamic Wine Competition held in mid-May at the Fountaingrove Inn in Santa Rosa. Started three years ago, it was originally called the Green Wine Competition and included "natural" wines from vintners whose vineyards aren't certified, leading some top vintners whose wines are certified to boycott in protest. Having been a judge in 2008, I was happy that this year organizers restricted entries to wines made from certified organic or biodynamic grapes.

Two weeks later I headed to San Diego for the Critics Challenge, where all judges, unlike most international competitions, are well-known wine critics. I've been a regular since its second year, 2005. This year, there were 1,312 entries.

Wineries enter any competition, of course, hoping to bring home some sales-enhancing bronze, silver, gold and platinum medals they can brag about.

New style wine competitions offer other reasons to enter. The Organic Competition, for example, is a limited universe with wines judged only against other organic and biodynamic wines. The year-old Sommelier Challenge, judged by sommeliers at top restaurants, is a way for winery owners who want to increase restaurant sales to get their wines in front of the people who are looking at them from the perspective of how well they'd go with restaurant food.

Targeted tastings can make judging easier

For critics like me, judging large numbers of wines at one go is a chance to make discoveries, especially from places and wineries I don't know, under the best conditions: tasting blind at a table in a quiet room with glasses of wines in the same category lined up in front of me. That's still the best way to assess wines sans preconceptions about producer, region or price.

At huge packed events put on by importers and winery associations, blind tasting is impossible, finding a spit bucket and scribbling notes is a challenge and inevitably someone spills red wine on my jacket (which is why I always, always wear black).

Frankly, competitions are also a way for me to spot trends and get a sense of the general quality in various wine categories. Many wines at the Organic and Biodynamic Competition didn't shine with pure, planet-positive flavors, but unlike two years ago, I found very few truly funky bottlings with serious flaws. One surprise when the labels were revealed: how highly I'd rated the certified biodynamic Quivira Winery bottlings. (I just learned they've just hired a new winemaker as of July 1.)

At the Critics Challenge, the large group of Pinot Grigios I tasted were quickly dismissed. Two smelled like bathroom cleaner, for others I simply wrote "ugh!" The dark, intense Petite Sirahs, though, showed what a comeback the grape has made and many received medals. A number of dry Rieslings stood out, especially the deliciously fruity 2009 Chateau Ste. Michelle, at $9 (!) the competition's wine of year and an ideal summer sipper.

Fewer California Chardonnays tasted as overwhelmingly oaky as those in past years, yet far too many showed zero personality. One notable exception: the balanced, elegant 2008 Jordan from Russian River Valley ($29), which won best Chardonnay, evidence that the most powerful, obvious wines don't always win in a blind tasting.

But do wine medals mean anything?

So I find myself puzzling over recent claims that medals given out at wine competitions are essentially meaningless.

Last spring, the Journal of Wine Economics published a paper by Richard T. Hodgson titled "An Analysis of the Concordance Among 13 U.S. Wine Competitions." In analyzing results of 13 of the largest and oldest U.S. wine competitions, the former statistics professor turned vintner found that many wines which had received gold medals at one competition received no award at another. He  concluded that "the likelihood of receiving a gold medal can be statistically explained by chance alone."

Competitions apparently showed agreement only on the wines judges didn't like. But that's pretty significant. In those I've judged, wines with flaws like volatile acidity haven't normally been awarded gold (or any other) medals.

Hodgson and other critics miss the point. Competitions are not running some kind of exact science TV crime lab. Who can be surprised that results depend on factors like what wines are submitted in a particular category, how the competition is run, and the experience and palate preferences of the judges?

Yes, surprisingly ordinary wines do get medals and wine lovers and wineries should check out who's doing the judging. But competitions are one way for unknown wineries and regions to break through the clutter of thousands on shelves and find an interested audience, which was recognized by a panel on the value of wine competitions at the fourth annual Conference of the American Association of Wine Economists held the last weekend in June.

Targeted competitions, such as those focused on wines from organically grown grapes or wines made by women or judged by sommeliers at least give consumers somewhere to start.

Elin McCoy is wine and spirits columnist for Bloomberg News. Her most recent book, "The Emperor of Wine: The Rise of Robert M. Parker, Jr. and the Reign of American Taste," won the 2005 World Gourmand Cookbook Award and was a finalist for the James Beard and IACP wine-book-of-the-year awards.

Photo: Contenders at the Critics Challenge tasting.
Credit: Courtesy Critics Challenge.

Comment

smaller | bigger

Write the displayed characters

Post Now Preview

robertw

to the anonymous guest, i would say you are certainly correct in your analysis. scores and medals are no guarantee, and we have indeed seen much attrition over the past 10 years. but it seems for every winery that passes from the scene, two more spring up. but in terms of sales today, here and now, the reality is wine merchants are addicted to scores as a sales tool. medals are mostly used by wineries and only a handful of retailers, and also by consumers who are savvy enough to use google to find wine competiion results before they venture into a wine shop. everyone's overthinking this, it seems. the scores and medals are merely a tool to help a wine stick out in an ocean of choices. but there is no substitute for building a solid reputation and following by consistently satisfying customers with outstanding wine.

a guest , July 06, 2010

...

A gold medal can help sales for a few weeks. But long term success depends on making good wine consistently and having the correct sales and marketing plan for your target market or price point. If someone thinks they can succeed in the market mostly based on scores and medals, it ain't gonna happen. I would like to see some stats on how many brands and labels have come and gone in the last 10 years and see if those brands had any more or fewer good scores and medals. Good grief. Most of us can't even remember specific brands that have dis appeared ten years ago, but, think about it, there are a lot of failed labels in the history books.

a guest , July 05, 2010

robertw

one more point on corrie's lament that consumers don't have access to medal winners at retail. there is one big retailer i know, beverages & more, that lists competition medals beside each wine it sells on its website. there may well be others that do same. i assume bevmo does this because it does matter to their customers. and many winery tasting rooms promote medal winners like crazy. i would assume, again, because it makes a difference to their customers.

a guest , July 05, 2010

Agreed

We are in complete agreement. It would be great to give consumers easy access to the results of competitions. An i-phone app, perhaps? All I'm saying is that Americans are less reliant on other people's opinions than they were in the past. As a wine journalist, I hope consumers are still interested in learning about what is happening in the world of wine. Wine authorities such as Elin are in high demand precisely because they can help wine lovers of all levels of knowledge cut through the jargon and find wines to enjoy. It's just that it seems that curiosity, rather than fear, is now the driving force. And that's good news.

coriebrown2 , July 05, 2010

robertw

That's true on some levels, Corie, but there are consumers who go on the internet and peruse the results of wine competitions specifically to find winning wines in their price range. I run 5 competitions and that scenario is repeated with each and every one, and has been the case for years. Some consumers rely upon reviews, some check competitions sites for results and still others rely upon the store clerk or simply take a shotgun approach. There's a bit of it all. All I'm saying is the wine competition medals have their place in the overall scheme. They certainly aren't the end all and be all. But no one resource is. And the vast majority of everyday wine drinkers just don't trust themselves when looking to step up to a nice bottle of wine from the cheaper stuff they quaff every day.

a guest , July 05, 2010

medals marketing

If consumers could access all of the medal winners from all of the competitions while they are standing in a wine story, or if wine stores used the medals as a way to sell wine, then maybe competitions would matter more. But the consumer who just wants a nice bottle of wine for dinner, even a nice dinner, doesn't have access to that information. They do not seem to be relying on advice much beyond their wine store clerk these days and the occasional mass market review. Sorry.

coriebrown , July 03, 2010

robertw

to corrie's point, i don't understand the americans have grown up angle. as if we've caught up to the europeans or what? the biggest wine competitions in the world are the international wine challenge in london, the concours mondial and the vinitaly competition. the grownup europeans are all over those comps. it's easy for you to say be adventuresome and drink what you like, but the average american who just wants a nice wine to serve company this weekend appreciates a little guidance. why is that so difficult for wine journalists to understand?

a guest , July 02, 2010

mcwine

A lively discussion and thank you to Elin for her contribution. Like all of the comments, I feel that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Any day, anything can happen in a blind wine evaluation. A smaller winery (particularly one from North America) can communicate awards, accolades, and scores from critics to help their customers stay customers...I have heard of out of stock situations just because the Critics Challenge or the SF International named a wine "Best". I think results from judgings are more important than what one guy says. At the end of the day it is the sum of the parts and the more you have in your winery tool box the more wine you sell.

a guest , July 02, 2010

Americans have grown up

Wine competition awards can be a great help for newbies in the grocery store aisle. And most people still want to know that a wine has pleased at least some critics when it costs a $100 or more a bottle. But, for everything else, we've taken the training wheels off and we're making our own decisions. The American public has become wine savvy in the last decade. With access to great wines from around the world, we've learned what we like and what we don't. That makes the U.S. a volatile market. We're neither loyal or predictable any more.-- Corie Brown

coriebrown , July 02, 2010

wine medals

I am always asked "how many points does this wine have?" It's so annoying because I know that these people are not adventurous and will not try a wine just for the heck of it, with or without points. I always tell them that points are given only from a few magazines and you have to have the same palate as whoever is giving points in order to appreciate the wines. I only like 1/2 of Parker's over 90 point wines for example. I think medals are good for local competitions - get the AVA known and to highlight some of the stellar wineries in the area. Other than that, I think one should rate the wines themselves. Be adventurous and enjoy an array of wine varietals and don't get stuck in the only 90 point wine rut.

a guest , July 02, 2010

robertw

I would add this point about the value of medals, in particular the silver. Let's say you are a fairly high-end winery and you have what you think is a very good wine that Laube and Parker don't like, for whatever reason, and both give it a low score. Take the Phelps Backus Cab that Laube rated in the 70s several years back. Wouldn't that wine have benefited from a silver medal at a tough compentition? Or let's say you make wines that are more structured, higher in acid and mineral driven than the two big-gun critics like. Wouldn't you be better served to enter a competition such as Critics Challenge, where most of the judges have vast experience tasting European wines that are stylistically more austere, or Sommelier Challenge, where the judges are esoecially attuned to wines that work with food? I think so.

a guest , July 01, 2010

Value of Wine Competition at least in part is based on quality of the judges

Thank you to Elin for the kind words about Critics Challenge. We are glad that she has enjoyed her experiences judging in it. The "Challenge Series" of international wine competitions is Critics Challenge, Sommelier Challenge and Winemaker Challenge. Websites, dates and information for them can be found at http://www.winereviewonline.com/contact_us.cfm. For each of these competitions, the judges are experienced in their wine professions, which we feel adds value to the awards given. The number wines entered in our competitions and the high quality of the wines would indicate that many fine wineries, importers, and wine marketers agree that these wine competitions and the awards given by them do indeed have value.

Felicia Forbes, Competition Coordinator for Critics Challenge, Sommelier Challenge and Winemaker Challenge.

a guest , July 01, 2010

@wineguru

fredj is absolutely right about bronze and silver medals not being awards wineries can promote. that's why all of my competitions dropped bronze medals more than a year ago. but i do believe silvers can help in the aggregate and aren't a left-handed compliment. as for the issue of palate fatigue, i know for a fact that is overrated. professionals can easily work through 50 or 60 wines in a morning session and ascertain the essentials of structure, flavor, complexity, absence of flaws, etc. winemakers do this every day as they taste samples from barrel and make notes in the cellar. the more frequently a professional tastes in that fashion, the more well calibrated and precise their palate becomes. it's exactly the opposite of what fredj thinks.

a guest , July 01, 2010

fredj

Elin,

The idea that wineries are "hoping to bring home some sales-enhancing bronze, silver...medals they can brag about" is absurd. They have as much value as an "84" rating from reviewers. No winemaker makes a living on left-handed compliments.

I do direct-to-consumer marketing and sales for small wineries. My clients consider bronze and silver medals embarassments. Most makers of premium wines do.

Having participated in events where we tasted 50+ wines in a day, I know that the experience leaves one with an overwhelmed palate -- and a buzz, no matter how religeously one swirls and spits.

This is one of the reasons "well known wine critics" so often miss nuanced medium wines: their palates are so thoroughly dulled by a day's tasting that the only wines they recognize are the over-the-top powerhouses. The average wine lover buys on the basis of that recommendation and is immediately disappointed by the wine's inability to coexist with a good meal.

Wine critics are a dying breed precisely because they have little interest in most wine drinkers' tastes. As the Millennials come of age (and their buying power increases), critics will go the way of buggy whips.

Yes, we use gold and platinum medals, and 90+ reviews as marketing tools -- while they're still relevant. They become less relevant by the month.

a guest , July 01, 2010