My New Puppy’s Kibble: 75 Points
Blake Gray did a stellar job in today’s SF Chronicle wine section profiling the 100 Point rating system. One part of the story really made me think. I’ve considered this before, but it deserves highlighting.
Certain varietals and wines simply don’t appear to be in contention for a 100 point rating. They include Sauvignon Blanc, Chenin Blanc, Beaujolais, Rose. You know, those wines that simply can’t, without a tremendous amount of magic applied, every be truly powerful and over-the-top.
This is not an indictment of the 100 point scale. It is rather an indictment of nearly every wine reviewer in the world as well as the simplicity of the American palate and mind.
I defy anyone to make a cogent argument for the propriety of the phenomena that is American Roses never attaining 100 points or, for that matter, as far as I know, any rose ever getting 100 points.
Please…somebody…please explain why it is proper that this has never occurred. Has there really never been a great Rose? Has there never been a rose with impeccable balance, well defined aromas and flavors, etc?
I don’t see how it is possible to argue with the reviewers that give 95-100 points for the most powerful of wines that hit their palates. We are talking about subjective evaluatiion that includes a personal opinion as to what makes a wine great. However, that personal criteria for greatness is as objectively authoritative as my new puppy’s apparent view that chopped steak is a greater meal than his kibble that stays untouched.