[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_post_title _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” meta=”off” featured_image=”off” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″][\/et_pb_post_title][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”]A score without context is noise. An 8.2 for a young Barolo means something completely different from an 8.2 for a Muscadet \u2014 unless you know how that score was reached.<\/p>\n
Here’s how I taste, why I make the choices I make, and what my scores mean for you as a reader.<\/p>\n
Temperature shapes everything. A white wine served too cold locks its nose shut. A red wine that is too warm loses structure and turns flat. I taste at controlled temperatures:<\/p>\n
I use ISO-standard tasting glasses as a baseline. For Champagne, I switch to a tulip glass \u2014 not a fl\u00fbte, which suffocates the nose. For specific styles (oxidative whites, heavy reds), I use the appropriate format.<\/p>\n
I taste in neutral conditions: no coffee, strong food, or fragrance in the hours beforehand. Lighting is neutral \u2014 no yellow-tinted artificial light that distorts colour assessment.<\/p>\n
I use the WSET systematic approach as a framework: appearance, nose, palate, and conclusions, not as a bureaucratic checklist, but because the sequence works. The nose tells you what to expect on the palate. The palate confirms, contradicts, or deepens it.<\/p>\n
Appearance<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 colour, clarity, depth, bead formation in sparkling wines.<\/p>\n Nose<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 primary aromas (fruit, floral, herbal), secondary (fermentation-derived: yeast, butter, cream), tertiary (maturation: oak, leather, earth, oxidative notes). I note intensity and complexity separately.<\/p>\n Palate<\/strong> \u2014 structure first: acidity, tannin (in reds), sweetness, alcohol warmth, body. Then the flavour profile and finish. Finish length is one of the most reliable quality indicators I use.<\/p>\n Conclusions<\/strong> \u2014 quality assessment, ageing potential, food pairing relevance, where applicable.<\/p>\n I use a 10-point scale with one decimal place.<\/p>\n A score always reflects value for money within its segment. An 8.0 for a \u20ac12 wine carries more weight than an 8.0 for an \u20ac80 bottle.<\/p>\n I taste non-blind for published reviews. That’s a deliberate choice.<\/p>\n My reviews aren’t clinical assessments \u2014 they’re stories. The context of a wine (who makes it, where, with what intent, why it matters) is part of what I want to convey. Blind tasting removes exactly that.<\/p>\n For personal calibration and study \u2014 WSET exercises, comparative tastings, horizontal flights \u2014 I do taste blind. It keeps me honest.<\/p>\n A score of 8.5 or above on VinoVonk is a wine I recommend without qualification. Not “maybe if you like this style” \u2014buy it.<\/p>\n Everything between 7.5 and 8.4 is solid. These are wines I drink with genuine pleasure, but where context \u2014 your taste, the occasion, the price \u2014 determines whether it’s right for you.<\/p>\n I publish scores only on formal wine reviews, not on event reports or tasting journeys.<\/p>\n Questions about how I assessed a specific wine? Drop me a message via the\u00a0contact page<\/a>.<\/em>The scoring system<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n\n
\n \nScore<\/th>\n Meaning<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n 9.0 \u2013 10.0<\/td>\n Exceptional. A reference wine. Taste it if you can.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 8.5 \u2013 8.9<\/td>\n Outstanding. A wine I actively recommend and buy myself again and again.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 8.0 \u2013 8.4<\/td>\n Very good. Clearly above average, with character and depth.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 7.5 \u2013 7.9<\/td>\n Good. Solid, enjoyable, worth the money. Not a revelation.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 7.0 \u2013 7.4<\/td>\n Correct. Meets expectations, nothing more.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Below 7.0<\/td>\n I rarely publish scores below 7.0. If I don’t like a wine, I usually don’t write about it.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n Blind or non-blind?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
How many times do I taste a wine?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n
What this means for you<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_code _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]