Scoring Wine

Scoring helps you to focus on each attribute of the wine individually. By practicing scoring you will be better able to describe characteristics you find attractive in a wine and this will help you communicate when selecting wines from a retailer or restaurant. When reading scores in magazines I think the tasting notes are much more significant that the number assigned. Every one's palate is unique so don't let the critics tell you what you should like or reject. This is the general scoring criterion we came up with for the WSG tastings, it is basically a compilation of several other scoring systems.

When Scoring, ½ points are permissible if wavering between definitions. It is difficult being objective when enjoying wine is as emotional as it is physiological. Try and be objective and rate each category individually without letting a specific attribute color the rest of your scoring.

Clarity & Appearance (1 point)
Brilliant, star bright, crystal, leggy=1
Translucent, slightly dull, pearling=.5
Cloudy, hazy, sediment, watery=0

Color (1 point)
Typical for type and age, vivid=1
Nearly correct, attractive, lively=0.5
Off, colorless=0

Aroma & Bouquet (4 points)
Varietal, characteristic, complex, flowery=4
Fruity, pronounced, developed=3
Clean, pleasant, scented, delicate=2
Fleeting, underdeveloped, simple, elusive=1
Defective, off, sulferous, vinegary=0

Total Acidity (2 points)
Balanced, appropriate=2
Slightly low or high, tart=1
Flabby, insipid, raw, harsh, vinegary=0

Sweetness (1 point)
Appropriate and balanced=1
Sweet edged, slightly lacking=. 5
Cloying, syrupy, lacking=0

Body & Texture (3 points)
Appropriate, firm, velvety, silky, sound=3
Nearly correct, smooth, even=2
Slightly thin or heavy=1
Clumsy, thin, empty, coarse, rough=0

Flavor & Taste (4 points)
Complex, mature, varietal, luscious=4
Fruity, robust, multilayered=3
Agreeable, clean, simple=2
Lacking, green=1
Chemical, stemmy, hollow=0

Finish (2 points)
Appropriate for age, enticing, lasting=2
Nearly correct, tappering=1
Harsh, withered, absent, astringent, hot=0

Overall Quality (2 points)
Noble, elegant, inspiring, grand=2
Charming, graceful, skillfully made=1.5
No exceptional features, characteristic=1
Flawed=0

Wines scoring 18 to 20 I consider outstanding, memorable and worth seeking out for the cellar, I would say one in 20 wines earns this rating in our club (we tend to be a bit harsh). A 14 to 17 point wine is well crafted and without major flaws, I'd buy these again if the price is reasonable. a wine scoring 9 to 13 is acceptable but in some way flawed, I wouldn't get cranky drinking it but would not purchase again. Anything 8 and below is flawed and generally unpleasant in some manner, these wines can and do make me irritable and whoever produces and releases them is without integrity....OK, that may be a little brutal but still holds some truth.

Chef's Dinner at cafe Artemis

Last night I attended a five course chef's dinner at cafe Artemis in Helena, MT. Each course was paired with a french wine and a California or Washington wine of like style/varietal to compare and contrast the new and old world. The wines were expertly presented by Kevin Hamlin of George's Distributing and Martin Richard of cafe Artemis. It was a great evening of conversation, wonderfully prepared food and interesting observations on food and wine pairing.

For starters: Roederer Estate 25th Anniversary Anderson Valley Sparkling Wine(Estate Brut NV). Excellent and affordable traditional sparkling wine. This wine tasted like it had spent some time in the cellar, biscuit/bread undertones, light caramel, polished and reserved.

Appetizer: Pheasant and Pistachio Pate. Served with a red onion and orange marmalade, stoneground mustard and arugula. Beautifully prepared pate, nice firm texture, perfectly seasoned, complemented and balanced by the mustard, marmalade and arugula. Paired with Chateaux Landerau 2005 Entre deux Mers (Semillon, Sauvignon blanc and Muscat) and Amavi 2006 Semillon, Columbia Valley. The Bordeaux had a complex nose of mineral, pear and citrus. Picked up a little fig on the mid palate, nice acidity and rounded finish. The Amavi was pretty one dimensional on the nose and palate, pear and pear with a little honey crisp apple, short finish. By itself I far preferred the Bordeaux but the Amavi's simple focus lifted the pate another level.

Soup: Lobster Bisque with creme fraiche and chives. Plush and velvety texture, perfectly tender lobster, a touch of heat on the finish. No wine pairing.

Fowl: Artemis Duck a L'Orange with braised Belgian endive, candied kumquats and fresh watercress. Nicely rendered and crisped skin, delicately sauced. This was a very nice take on a classic. Paired with Domaine de Fondreche 2005 Nadal, Cotes du Ventoux and Morgan 2006 Cotes du Crow's. Both are near 50/50 Grenache and Syrah. The Nadal was the more complex wine of the two, it had more structure, slightly brighter acidity and more grip with supple tannins. On the palate I picked up Cassis, currant and just a hint of mushroom, nice long finish. The Cotes du Crow's was much more fruit focused with actual "grape" flavors detected, weak tannins, short finish, quaffable wine. The surprise for me was with the duck pairing, the fruit stepped up with the Morgan and made this a more enjoyable wine paired with food than by itself. The Nadal was steady and the tannins worked well with the fat of the duck. Both were well matched to the course.

Meat: Wellington of Beef Tenderloin with Chanterelle mushroom duxelle, spinach and beef essence. A classic dish, nicely executed with and unctuous beef essence that really made the dish stand out. Everything worked here including the wine pairings, two Cabernet Francs. From France we had the Domaine de Paullus 2004 Chinon and from Napa the Lang & Reed 2005 Napa Valley Cabernet Franc. Both were classically crafted Cab Francs and veggies ruled on the nose. The nose on the Chinon had an obvious pickle component that mellowed to dill with time in the glass. Green pepper, asparagus, dark chocolate, dark fruit and a little dirt were also present on this really interesting and enjoyable nose. The Lang & Reed had that V8 veggie cocktail going on and I like that also in a Cab Franc. They both had decent structure, tannins and a nice finish but I preferred the Chinon both by itself and with the Beef Wellington. If you haven't drank much Cabernet Frank I would recommend that you start now, It is a kinder and gentler Cabernet Sauvignon with more vegetable components going on. It's not for everyone but you won't know until you try it.

Dessert: Warmed Brie with baked pears, fresh grapes, candied walnuts and honey. What an awesome finish to the meal, for me this was near perfect. The salty funk of the brie, intensity of fruit in the pears, crisp tang of the grapes, meatiness of the walnuts and throttled back sweetness of the honey sing together on the palate. Paired with a Domaines Schlumberger 2004 "Fleur" Gewurztraminer from Alsace and a Balleto 2006 Gewurztraminer from the Russian River Valley. The Schlumberger brought lots of pear with a touch of old school medicine (I like this aroma), it was big, round, buttery and slightly sweet. The Balletto had elements of pear and apple followed by a bit of pineapple. It was more crisp with snappy acidity and less residual sugar than the Schlumberger. They both paired quite nicely with the brie plate in very different ways......maybe you should order both with dessert your next time out.

Throughout the courses, the chefs, Executive Marc Jorgensen and Sous Eric Potuzak, showed focus, restraint and precision in executing a menu. Each dish was seasoned perfectly and conservatively allowing the ingredients to take center stage. The courses built nicely through the evening, never overwhelming with excess heaviness. Marc's sauces and reductions are masterful, he builds layers of complexity without convoluting the dish with extraneous ingredients and garnishes. It was a memorable dinner, beautifully plated, paced and presented. Kudos, cafe Artemis, for bringing haute cuisine to Helena, Montana.