The Wine Knows

Over on Vinography, a blogger went on a rant about the ridiculousness of state fair wine competition results - and wine judgings in general. This was one of the many reactions to the Two Buck Chuck Chardonnay that scored a double gold at the California State Fair last month. While it's an interesting read, it's pretty obvious the author has not been involved in many (or any) wine competitions.

I judge a dozen or so competitions per year and track another 20, so I am pretty aware of the quality of various judgings.

But there are a few different kinds of wine competitions - and it's important to know how to use their results. I will break those down here.

Good competitions: Dozens of high-quality competitions are held throughout the country, primarily on the West Coast, where most of the American wine industry is focused. The largest are the Los Angeles International Wine & Spirits Competition and the San Francisco International Wine Competition. These kinds of judgings use wine professionals, including winemakers, marketers, retailers, wholesalers, wine stewards, writers and other folks who generally make their living tasting and evaluating wine.

I judge several of these kinds of competitions, including L.A., Riverside, Long Beach, Grand Harvest Awards and San Francisco Chronicle. I would say about one-fourth of the judges are the same people who make the circuit and are highly sought after. These are folks like Mike Dunne of the Sacramento Bee, Ann Littlefield of Napa, Calif., Wilfred Wong of Beverages and More in San Francisco and Dan Berger of Santa Rosa, Calif., a wine writer who also runs two international competitions.

When someone asks me to look at the results of a competition (usually a winery that won a gold medal at it), I check out who the judges are, and that helps me determine what kind of judging we're looking at. For example, the Denver International Wine Competition is a judging I was directed to by a Washington winery that fared well there. Nothing against this competition, but I know exactly one of the 21 judges involved, and that doesn't bode well. Thus, I am reticent to include the results of this competition until I know a little more. If I were to start a competition, the first thing I'd do is secure at least a half-dozen top judges from California who bring a reputation of quality.

Bad competitions: There are a lot of goofy judgings out there, and I've participated in a few. One in particular was for a wine festival on the Oregon Coast. Two of us were experienced judges, but the other three include the president of the local chamber (a car dealer) and a couple of other businessmen. The wines were brought out in water goblets - and one at a time because there weren't enough goblets. Thus, we weren't able to taste comparable wines side by side.

I call these "dip-sh*t judgings," and the results should be roundly ignored.

So, too, should anything called a "consumer" judging because these results generally are created from festival-goers walking around and voting for their favorites. Since the wines aren't tasted blind, such results are bogus at best.

Regional competitions are usually pretty reliable, but again, look at the qualifications of the judges. Such competitions as the Washington State Wine Competition, Oregon State Fair, Okanagan Fall Wine Festival Competition and Northwest Wine Summit have long histories and good judges. But a county fair or local wine festival put on by a Rotary club likely don't.

How to use competition results. Once you've determined what competitions are worth following, using the results can be a way to find some terrific wines. Any wine that wins a gold medal in a legitimate competition probably is worth seeking. Only 5 percent of wines get golds, and double golds are rare because that means all four or five judges agreed on gold (that doesn't happen much). Wines winning silver also should be looked at because only about 15 percent of wines earn a silver. Bronze medals make up about 30 percent of the entries, thus the judges determined these wines were above average.

Look for trends across competitions. For example, the Barnard Griffin 2006 rosé of Sangiovese has won multiple gold medals this year in top competitions. This definitely is a wine worth seeking.

Competition results vs. critics' scores. This is a hotly contested topic amid wine professionals. Scores from Parker and Spectator sell a lot of wine. Scores from Tanzer, Decanter and Enthusiast are secondary but important. Regional publications such as ours can create awareness and help move wine on a local level. Look at how a publication scores wines. For most, it's one person's opinion. Others (like Wine Press Northwest) use a panel, much like a competition.

Most of the time, the competition results and critics' scores line up pretty closely, but there are variations, too. This occurs, I believe, because most critics taste wines open - meaning they are looking at the label or even tasting with the winemaker as they judge. Meanwhile, good competitions are extremely strict about tasting blind (at L.A., judges are warned to stay out of the staging area and told they will be sent home and never asked to return if they break this rule).

Bottom line. With the thousands of wines produced even regionally (much less in California, France, Italy, Australia, etc.) you simply cannot taste everything to make buying decisions. Use competition results as a filter, a tool for selecting wine.

If a wine gets a good medal, a good score from a wine publication and is recommended by a trusted wine merchant, you're in pretty good hands, even if you haven't had the opportunity to taste the wine yet.

If you're visiting a winery and like a wine that won silver at a good competition, buy the wine. If you don't like the wine even though it won a gold medal and scored a 90 from Parker, then you probably won't like it any more when you get home with it.

Trust yourself.