Cost per point as a buying strategy???

[Claudius2]

Folks
I have never been a lover of using a 100 point scale, though I do agree with at least some form of normative ratings, thus that is all I use here.
So the scale I use goes from DNPIM to outstanding.
I give very few wines outstanding ratings but many get very good or excellent.

Today I got (yet another) email from a local importer, who sells wine IB (in bond) and then you pay extra for the usual fees, freight, taxes, handling etc.
I just shook my head in dismay.
The scores were for Chateau Giscours, a wine I but with some frequency, and it compared Giscours with a handful of other Margaux wines.
The basis of comparison was COST PER POINT. Yes, they had decided to give it a score on a "cents per point" basis thus Giscours was 50.5.
Melescot was about 55, and the usual more famous wines (Palmer, Margaux) were of course canned by being more cents per point.
So now we have a new metric.

I have not ridden a motorbike for some years, and when I was younger, one of the local bike mags used a "fang factor" which was unabashedly simplistic and primitive - cost per HP. I even recall some of the bike brands using the "fang factor" in ads, just as the retailers and importers use the 100 point scale. Yet the magazine's editors only ever used it as a joke.

The reason I mentioned the "fang factor" is that the 100 point scale is no more informative and just as simplistic.
And I'm sure that the E1.69 Bordeaux AC referred to on another thread would be a winner on the new scale.
I feel sick......

[marcs]

LOL. I drank some delicious points with dinner tonight! Can I pour you some points?

Now that everything under the sun "scores" between 92 and 100 while price differentials are still in the hundreds or even thousands of dollars, it is very easy to make something look like a bargain on a "cost per point" basis

[Blanquito]

By this basis, Dunnuck and Suckling have done more to improve the QPR of wine the world over than any enologist in history.

[DavidG]

LOL. I drank some delicious points with dinner tonight! Can I pour you some points?

When it comes to drinking points, it’s really all about the producer. Dunnuck points are glossy and modern, Martin's more classic. Suckling’s are fat and flabby, Gilman's sharp and acidic. I could go on...

[rthomaspaull]

I have made postings about "sensible pricing of left bank red Bordeaux" and "modern classification of left bank red Bordeaux". I would pay $170 now for such a wine that I gave 100 points (This only happened once, years ago for under $35: good luck finding one for $170 now), while on an 85 point wine I would theoretically pay up to $36.52, but in practice could get such a wine (I don't buy such wines I score below 90.5) for far less .
$170/100=1.7 dollars per point, and $36.52/85 approximately = 43 cents a point, I think, so my "system" does not work at all well with yours.
I did find your theme interesting, though. rthomaspaull

[Claudius2]

Folks
I have tried several 100 point Australian wines from RPJnr and various other luminaries.
The 2001 Greenock Creek Creek Block Shiraz 2001 was one such wine and arguably one of the worst tasting wines I have ever tried. I sent the rest of the case to auction the next day (and I should thank RP for making a profit).

I see no relation between a 100 point GC Shiraz and the 1982 LLC which also got 100 points.
So what does this tell me? Not a lot actually despite the fact that it was the same taster.

Some May recall that I wrote about Wynns Coonawarra Cab Sav 2016 which consistently got scores of 97 to 99 and I thought it was a about 31/2 stars. Clearly the 2017 must be crap as it only got 96 points from James Halliday and Winefront. Maybe okay in the sauce.

So the best idea is to get to know the critics and largely rely on the descriptions of the wine.
Somehow I am getting cautious over the term “glossy” these days.

Actually the Fang Factor makes more sense I can verify the horsepower on a dyno.

[rthomaspaull]

deleted as redundant(unfortunately this happens a lot). rthomaspaull

[OrlandoRobert]

I have never once in my 28+ year illustrious career as a Bordeaux-phile with a yak palate, considered the value of points in my acquisition strategy. In fact, some of the Bordeaux that I have lots of, like Sociando Mallet and Magdelaine, are not or were not for years, darlings of the various so-called main critics. Some 100-point modern wines like Leoville Poyferre, Smith Haut Lafite, Pape Clement, Pontet Canet, are total passes to me, frankly, at any price point. The points are worthless to me as the modern stylization leaves me cold on these wines. I need soul, not points. I drink wine, not points.

[rthomaspaull]

Oddly enough the only red wine I ever gave 100 was the 1982 LLC (enjoyed with family on the last day of 1999). rthomaspaull

[rthomaspaull]

deleted as redundant (I am really bad with computers). rthomaspaull

[AKR]

LOL. I drank some delicious points with dinner tonight! Can I pour you some points?

When it comes to drinking points, it’s really all about the producer. Dunnuck points are glossy and modern, Martin's more classic. Suckling’s are fat and flabby, Gilman's sharp and acidic. I could go on...

That's a really good thumbnail guide to critics!

[Racer Chris]

My wine buying strategy certainly includes cost per point as one of the criteria.
Not in an absolute sense, but relative to other available wines.
And not using professional critic scores, but drinkers' scores, particularly my own.
Best QPR is below $0.20 per point. My most expensive purchase comes in at around $2.84 per point.

[rthomaspaull]

Years ago the best value wine I ever had was about 3 cents a point. My most expensive recent purchase was about $1.03 per point. rthomaspaull

[DavidG]

My wine buying strategy certainly includes cost per point as one of the criteria.
Not in an absolute sense, but relative to other available wines.
And not using professional critic scores, but drinkers' scores, particularly my own.
Best QPR is below $0.20 per point. My most expensive purchase comes in at around $2.84 per point.

Yes, QPR is key to my purchasing decisions as well. Mostly it’s what I think a wine is worth, but I’ll take other opinions into account, friends' and sometimes critics', if it’s a wine I don’t have an opportunity to try before buying. But never points in isolation as a determinant of the quality portion of QPR.

[JimHow]

Years ago the best value wine I ever had was about 3 cents a point. My most expensive recent purchase was about $1.03 per point. rthomaspaull

Enjoying your alternate perspective, RT, we welcome you to BWE.

[stefan]

David, I love your description of the critics' points. You should do one for each regular BWE contributor.

[DavidG]

No way, Bill, you guys are my friends! And I depend on your notes way more than the critics.

[stefan]

Yes, but we want to know what our points mean!

[Blanquito]

Yes, but we want to know what our points mean!

Yes, we all need a tasting-note-style haiku from DG!

[DavidG]

Yes, but we want to know what our points mean!

For that, grasshopper, you must watch and learn:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x23dchh

[DavidG]

Yes, but we want to know what our points mean!

Yes, we all need a tasting-note-style haiku from DG!

Leaves of autumn fall
Within my glass they linger
This wine is mature

[Blanquito]

Vines twine in the day
Matter and light will transform
Toast with sun and stone

[rthomaspaull]

I really must be more careful about my mathematics. The best value wine I ever had (by a wide margin) came in the mid-1950s on the Costa Brava in a goatskin. I worked out the equivalent price per bottle as about 2.5 cents U.S., so the price per point was about 0 .03 cents (the wine was certainly not great but it was refreshing). Of course with inflation it would be more currently. rthomaspaull

[Claudius2]

Oddly enough the only red wine I ever gave 100 was the 1982 LLC (enjoyed with family on the last day of 1999). rthomaspaull

The 82 LLC was an excellent wine but some other 82’s were better to my palate including Margaux, Pichon Lalande, HB and LMHB, Mouton and a handful of right bankers particularly Petrus.

As for Leoville Barton I note the discussion on another thread and 82 LB was better younger than now. Last tried a year ago the 85 and 90 were considerably better.

Cheers
Mark

[rthomaspaull]

To Claudius2 re 1982 LLC: Robert Parker wrote (to paraphrase him) that wine scores can vary up to about 4 points depending on one's mood, and I was certainly in a good one that evening. Yet I sipped my wine over a fairly long time and totally enjoyed it. I envy you for the many great wines you have had. I do not think I have had an official first growth since the late 1970s or maybe very early 1980s, due to considering the increase in their prices far too great. rthomaspaull

[rthomaspaull]

I have had the 1982 Pichon Lalande but it was from bottles with red stains on the labels. I took a chance on them at just over $10 a bottle! My wife and I found all the wine delicious, but I only gave it about 95 rather than 100, so there may have been slight damage. rthomaspaull

[JimHow]

I've always given the 1986 Pichon Lalande the slight nod over the 1982.
Likewise, the 1986 Mouton the slight nod over the 1982.
I give the 1982 Gruaud a slight nod over the 1986.