Ratings...what are they worth anyway?

I came across a wine a few weeks ago that I liked enough to bring in to the shop. It's a reasonably priced Tempranillo from Spain called Casajus VS. After I bought some, I wandered over to the interwebz to do a little checking on what others think of the wine (not that I really care). To my (lack of) amazement, I found the opinions varied in extremis. To wit, The Wine Spectator, that bastion of editorial integrity, basically hated it (to the tune of a whopping 78 on their supposed "100 point" scale wherein no wine ever scores below a 75). The Wine Advocate, on the other hand, decided it was heaven-sent, declaring it worthy of a near-classic rating of 92 points, which is quite high for a $24 bottle of wine. Perhaps they had a nice meal at Casajus.

So, who's right?

I'll let you think about it for a minute.

Still thinking?

The answer, I'm sorry to say, is immaterial. Now, I'm not going so far as to say that the only opinion that matters is your own (though I have in the past said that very thing when caught in moments of unguarded hyperbole). I do think, however, that unless a wine is to be considered universally classic, or great, or whatever, no consensus is necessary.

I have customers that are score hounds, buying only "90+" wines (or whatever). Many of them trust one publication but not another, with no discernible pattern to said predilection. None of this is to bash that kind of wine buying, or the writers who guide it. Hell, I read all of the wine rags. I do think that it's important to remember how subjective the whole thing is, though.

So, while I won't say that any wine some random schmuck likes is great, I will say that if you really want to know what's good, you may want to try it for yourself. Here's what we're tasting this week.