Netscape Forum Poll: My tasting skills

[Robin Garr]

How good a taster are you? Excellent, poor, or somewhere in-between? We'd like to find out how you think your own skills stack up, so in the confidential anonymity of the Voting Booth, please take a moment to click to our CompuServe/Netscape forum poll:

<b>Click here to vote</b>

I predict that your poll will find that wine lovers grew up in Lake Wobegon

Mark Lipton

[Robin Garr]

I predict that your poll will find that wine lovers grew up in Lake Wobegon

Dunno, Mark ... it might surprise you. We ran a similar poll a few years ago, and the results pretty much distributed across the range, although certainly the center of the bell curve was, um, "above average."

Robin
This reminds me of a poll of car drivers, where 90%+ described themselves as 'above average'. Not a big surprise I guess. I suspect this would be a better spread, but I suppose it's whether we compare ourselves to Joe Public or fellow wine enthusiasts.
regards
Ian

[Robin Garr]

Robin
This reminds me of a poll of car drivers, where 90%+ described themselves as 'above average'. Not a big surprise I guess. I suspect this would be a better spread, but I suppose it's whether we compare ourselves to Joe Public or fellow wine enthusiasts.

Well, the distribution of responses will still be interesting, and let's not underestimate the ego level of our participants ... note that the results are already distributed across all the options, although certainly pushed toward the high side.

I guess in this (and previous similar) polls, I'm more interested in seeing how the results come out than in crafting a question that will generate a perfect bell curve.

Remember, too, that we also offer this poll to all the 30 Second Wine Advisor readers, who may range across a wider spectrum of skills than WLDG gurus ...

Robin
This reminds me of a poll of car drivers, where 90%+ described themselves as 'above average'.

or this one: 90% of managers think they rank in top 10 percent (Monday, August 20, 2007, By Jackie Farwell, The Associated Press)

Of course, that one was a nonscientific (and hence pretty much meaningless) poll, but August is a slow news month, no?

I voted average, but the question of course is who am I comparing to? I was using as a base "wine geeks who post notes", and think of myself as in middle. But if the base group was everyone who drinks wine, then I should have voted above average. Not because of any physical gifts (at best I'm average), but years of taking notes and comparing wines (often blind) mean that I just have more experience.

I rate myself as below average, not only in this lofty company, but against wine lovers who don't post but clearly enjoy wine.

I practice lots of techniques to improve my skills -- taste with superior tasters, keep notes, post notes, clean glasses, refresh my basics using the Immer/Robinson approach, once a year review the flavor/aroma samples in the Vin de Nez kit Janet bought me -- but I find that most people I discuss wine find many more nuances than I do.

And, as Thomas Jefferson wrote, his ability to taste wine decreased with age.

Nonetheless, it's a great hobby and the source of great enjoyment.

Regards, Bob

PS. The closest analogy I can think of my lack of depth perception caused by seeing with only one eye. I do lots of things to increase my ability to judge distances, but my ability to do so is not good compared to people who see with two eyes. But seeing is one of the great joys of my life. B.

PPS. Re-reading that post demonstrates a bit of ego -- I probably should have rated my tasting skills as poor. B.

PPS. Neato. I changed my vote from Below Average to Poor, and Netscape changed the vote count. Pretty nifty work by the Netscape system Robin -- well done. B.

I voted "Poor" based on the skill level I perceive the rest of the Forumites to possess. But compared to most people I know in my daily life, I would be above average.

I voted "average" because I am "poor" compared to many here but "better" than the average non-geek.

My biggest caveat is that I sometimes have difficulty choosing wine on the sip or sample taste. I've had too many wines I enjoyed at the winery or tasting, only to find them confected oak soup when I get them home. That's the number one thing I need to "work on."

Had to give myself "average" as I know my wife has a better palate and several of my friends do also. Also have some wine drinking buddies that have bad palates but they will never admit it.

What I lack in palate I can make up with knowledge. Being a wine geek, as with many on this board, you know what to expect, have tasted many wines and therefore can more easily identify characteristics.

Walt

What, first of all, is meant by being a good taster? Is it being able to identify typicity of the great wine regions? If so, who determines what are the great wine regions?

Is it the ability to describe what is in the glass? If so, isn't that a combination of my first set of questions coupled with a great writing skill?

Frankly I don't know if I'm a good taster or not. And until someone manages to make me snap out of this strange view of the wine world, I won't even care because I enjoy very much what I drink - and this is what I think matters.

-O-

What, first of all, is meant by being a good taster? Is it being able to identify typicity of the great wine regions? If so, who determines what are the great wine regions?

Is it the ability to describe what is in the glass? If so, isn't that a combination of my first set of questions coupled with a great writing skill?

I guess it's possible to read question as referring to ability to identify regions (or alternatively grape varieties). But I think that most here were answering more about the skills to isolate or assess various components of a wine. Iis this wine tannic? Is it oaky? Acidic? Bretty? Is it more red or black fruit? Does it seem high alcohol? Is it light bodied, full-bodied, or in between? Etc. All of which are part of identifying grapes or regions, but only the basic physical steps. I'd consider myself below average in physical abilities, but think I've probably achieved the median by paying attentions to several thousand wines.

I don't think the second pargraph (ability to describe) is part of the question, as I would think that is one's ability to write tasting notes, which is separate from "tasting skills."

I personally just enjoy posting my notes because they give me a chance to reflect, to discusss (and disagree) about wines, to learn, and provide a record of what I liked (and who I drank it with, and with what food). I'm under no illusion that I'm a great taster who can identify or describe better than others. But that's the joy of an amateur site - we can all state our opinions (and get shot down if we get too full of ourselves, as I can).

[Robin Garr]

What, first of all, is meant by being a good taster? Is it being able to identify typicity of the great wine regions? If so, who determines what are the great wine regions?

Is it the ability to describe what is in the glass? If so, isn't that a combination of my first set of questions coupled with a great writing skill?

I expect these are rhetorical questions, but as a reminder, all these weekly polls are casual, light-hearted and non-scientific, and most of all, <i>self-defining</i>. "Good taster" depends on what it means to you. The two real purposes of the poll are (1) to make us think about some aspect of wine and (2) to prompt conversations about it. If that's happening here, then my work is done.

Frankly I don't know if I'm a good taster or not. And until someone manages to make me snap out of this strange view of the wine world, I won't even care because I enjoy very much what I drink - and this is what I think matters.

And of course you are completely correct.

Well, the population I compared myself to included only me so I had to select average.

I guess I've been tasting wine for going on fifty years now and I don't think either my tasting skill or sense of taste has improved one iota. It all still tastes like wine and falls into one of two categories, i.e. more, please, and I think I'd rather have a beer.

What has improved is my ability to describe better what I taste and smell and see. I think I've built up a more conscious reference library of colors, tastes and smells through the years along with the words that go with them.

I expect these are rhetorical questions [...]

No, they're not. I'm trying to provoke discussion on whether it is as subjective a matter as I implied.

"Good taster" depends on what it means to you. The two real purposes of the poll are (1) to make us think about some aspect of wine and (2) to prompt conversations about it. If that's happening here, then my work is done.

But if it is just what it means to each participant, wouldn't this be so subjective as to be meaningless? 1) you succeeded in, 2) I didn't mean them as rhetorical questions so you succeeded there also!

-O-(no, I'm not trolling at all .... )

For my money, it is as subjective as you imply, Otto.

For example, I write my tasting notes primarily for myself, so that I can try to put my subjective impressions into words, which has immediate value.

It has additional value over time as I re-read them, and see what once I knew, or thought I knew. Often I form an impression of a wine years later, quite different from what my impression was originally -- and that by reading the words in a different way.

Finally, I gain by posting and getting better informed folks to tell me what I've got wrong as an objective matter, but also how their subjective reactions differ -- or are similar -- to my own.

In a fundamental sense, I'm delighted I'm not a good taster -- it must be a great burden -- I wonder if it's fun to drink wine as an "excellent" taster. Somehow that competitive element seems out of place in a purely subjective field like enjoying wine.

Of course, for critics, or wine makers, or retailers/wholesalers/importers or many others involved with wine in various ways, that competitive element is probably very powerful and helpful in their endeavors.

Regards, Bob

What, first of all, is meant by being a good taster? Is it being able to identify typicity of the great wine regions? If so, who determines what are the great wine regions?

Is it the ability to describe what is in the glass? If so, isn't that a combination of my first set of questions coupled with a great writing skill?

Frankly I don't know if I'm a good taster or not. And until someone manages to make me snap out of this strange view of the wine world, I won't even care because I enjoy very much what I drink - and this is what I think matters.

-O-

Otto,
I will be glad to clear this up for you.

A good taster is someone who can pick up different flavors when drinking wine. Somebody that picks up blueberry or green pepper or asian spice or any other characteristic in a wine better than most. This is a function of taste buds, not wine knowledge. A good or super taster may pick up green pepper but have no knowledge that CF from the Loire may exhibit this flavor. I on the other hand I am an average taster but know far more than the average person on what different wines from diffferent regions taste like. I am far more apt to identify a CF from the loire once I detect green pepper than detect green pepper and have no idea where the wine comes from as a super taster with little knowledge would do. I would like to now appologize for all the CF lovers but wanted to pick on a wine that is not something I particularly enjoy drinking.

Walt

A good taster is someone who can pick up different flavors when drinking wine. Somebody that picks up blueberry or green pepper or asian spice or any other characteristic in a wine better than most. This is a function of taste buds, not wine knowledge.

But again, this is tied so intimately to a specific jargon of wine that has become to some extent accepted en masse in the wine world. But though these scents do have a source in that they are molecularily similar to the actual components, why is this a "better" taster than someone e.g. who is able to pick up all these nuances but hasn't experienced blueberry or green pepper and therefore can't legitimately use those words to describe a wine? Once again it comes to knowledge of a specific jargon and the verbal skills to be able to use that jargon which amount to being a "skilled taster". And here, troll that perhaps afterall I am, I cannot accept this and continue to believe that there is no such thing. Except each for ourselves.

-o-

But there are objective things that some tasters are better at identifying than others. Acidity/ph levels, oak aging, grape varieties, tannin levels, alcohol levels, presence & levels of brett or tca , etc are all things that can be objectively measured. And some people (not me) are better than others at recognizing those things. Others are not as good.

And, as Thomas Jefferson wrote, his ability to taste wine decreased with age.

Let's look at the bright side. This means that the older we get the cheaper the plonk we will be able to enjoy.

Nonetheless, it's a great hobby and the source of great enjoyment.

That sums it up nicely and, to my mind, is all that is really important. I got into wine "seriously" because I didn't want to buy a pig in a poke so I learned how to read labels. The rest is, uh, history!? (The only subject in which I ever got a D besides penmanship.)

PS. The closest analogy I can think of my lack of depth perception caused by seeing with only one eye. I do lots of things to increase my ability to judge distances, but my ability to do so is not good compared to people who see with two eyes. But seeing is one of the great joys of my life. B.

As someone who is red-green colorblind with little or no peripheral vision, not only do I confuse my friends with Doppler Effect affected color descriptions but have a habit of bumping into them at the same time. Still I enjoy. Solipsism can be a wonderful thing.

It all boils down to whether we are pursuing this thing called wine because it makes us happy or if we are just trying to impress the girl nextdoor, something which I like to refer to as œnanism.

A good taster is someone who can pick up different flavors when drinking wine. Somebody that picks up blueberry or green pepper or asian spice or any other characteristic in a wine better than most. This is a function of taste buds, not wine knowledge.

But again, this is tied so intimately to a specific jargon of wine that has become to some extent accepted en masse in the wine world. But though these scents do have a source in that they are molecularily similar to the actual components, why is this a "better" taster than someone e.g. who is able to pick up all these nuances but hasn't experienced blueberry or green pepper and therefore can't legitimately use those words to describe a wine? Once again it comes to knowledge of a specific jargon and the verbal skills to be able to use that jargon which amount to being a "skilled taster". And here, troll that perhaps afterall I am, I cannot accept this and continue to believe that there is no such thing. Except each for ourselves.

-o-

Otto,
There is not a right or wrong with wine. My point is, and I think what Dale is saying, some people are better at tasting and identifying flavors. I am OK but not that good. Regardless I know a lot more about wine than 98% of the people, forum member excluded, and can more easily identify regions, wines and quality. This comes from wine drinking experience, not a great abililty to taste. IMHO some people are excellent tasters but that does not mean they understand wine. I do not think I am a poor taster but when sitting at a table with a lot of people and sampling different wines, some are better at picking out flavors, fruits and characteristics than I am.
Walt

I voted "average".

There some things that I can pick out of wines, but not with the depth and detail of folks I know. Sometimes the tastes and smells are apparent, and sometimes they are a stretch.
This is with about 10-12 years of trying.

I can paint broad strokes with tasting. I can pick out a Cab Sauvignon from a Pinot Noir, etc., but ask me regions, sub-regions and the like - forget it. I have friends and acquaintances who can do this - I'm jealous.

I guess I've been tasting wine for going on fifty years now and I don't think either my tasting skill or sense of taste has improved one iota..

Really? Are you exaggerating? No improvement?

Is that because you haven't put my effort/analytical attention into the wine drinking process?