Do you give a corked bottle a score? What if its not"corked" but just not right?

ERMD wrote:Do you give a corked bottle a score? What if its not"corked" but just not right?

I believe the CT option for this is spoiled. If you think its just off do to some bottle variation then just don't score it.

cortot20 wrote:I believe the CT option for this is spoiled. If you think its just off do to some bottle variation then just don't score it.

But if you don't score every bottle, does the score really count.
Lets say we score thunderbird, 5 of us think its is undrinkable, 2score 80 and 3 score it at 90. Is it really an 87?

ERMD wrote:But if you don't score every bottle, does the score really count.
Lets say we score thunderbird, 5 of us think its is undrinkable, 2score 80 and 3 score it at 90. Is it really an 87?

I don't score any bottles, I just write notes and there are plenty of other folks that do the same thing.

My point is that the scores are a waste of time when you try to average them.

cortot20 wrote:I don't score any bottles, I just write notes and there are plenty of other folks that do the same thing.

My point is that the scores are a waste of time when you try to average them.

I'm the same - only with rare exceptions do I score a bottle at CT.

In my notes I usually comment as to where I think it belongs on the verbal scale - below average, good, very good, etc., and I indicate a band (such "rated good to very good, 82-86).

I think I grade on what most people would consider a tough curve (though it seems normal to me). An unremarkable wine but with no defect is going to be "average"; if my reaction is "meh", that's where it's going to be. Anything that has some decent character or traits is going be "good". "Very good" is a very good score coming from me, and that means it was very enjoyable. Almost nothing makes it to "excellent".

So when I put wines into a scoring bands my bands seldom go higher than 87 on the top end and only very rarely go as high as 89 on the upper end.

I score all bottle on CT, but for my reference. I ignore almost all other numerical scores including "professional." The descriptions can be quit helpful, though.

kylemittskus wrote:I score all bottle on CT, but for my reference. I ignore almost all other numerical scores including "professional." The descriptions can be quit helpful, though.

The only scores I pay attention to are the ones from people I've identified as favorites (and you're on that list, BTW). Otherwise I pay attention to tasting notes where it looks as if the person has an actual palate and has taken time to provide a reasonable description.

But back to how you would score a flawed bottle, I think it would have to remain un-scored and noted as flawed if it is atypical of other non-flawed bottles of the same.

rjquillin wrote:But back to how you would score a flawed bottle, I think it would have to remain un-scored and noted as flawed if it is atypical of other non-flawed bottles of the same.

Totally agree.

ddeuddeg wrote:Totally agree.

x2

I have seen some people choose "flawed bottle" on CT and still give it a score which doesn't seem right.