Jono Beagle's hundred point scoring system.
0-29/100 not worth bothering with
30-49/100 good wine but I wouldn't buy a case
50-59/100 very good showing grape and terroir character
60-69/100 excellent example of a wine from this country/region/grape
70-85/100 one of the very best wines that the region has to offer.
86-100/100 one of the very best wines you are ever likely to drink
OK, so I gather that you believe we all need a new way to grade wines, but let me see if I have this right. At the bottom, we have 30 different gradations of "not worth bothering with", correct? I suppose one must drink a lot of swill to be able to identify 30 different levels thereof. Dante only identified 9 levels of hell.
Meanwhile at the top, we have 15 different grades for "one of the very best wines you are ever likely to drink." What a wonderful life a person must have to taste so many of the greatest wines as to be able to rank them in 15 distinct tiers. And how exactly does such a wine, presumably from a region, propel itself beyond the 70-85 range where the very best wines of said region reside?
Moving on, based on your scores in this and other tasting notes here on BWE rated with your new system, all of which are above the 20 gradations set aside for "good but I wouldn't buy a case", does this mean you've bought a case of everything you've reviewed?
I'm just trying to discern what is added to the dialectic by yet another rating system...