Wine competitions have received tremendous amounts of criticism, whether it’s from unreliable results, results that seem odd, and results that the experts don’t like. Or, as the co-author of a study of competition failings told me, “Consumers should disregard results from wine competitions, because it’s a matter of luck whether a wine gets a gold medal.”
Can wine competitions fix these problems and become more reliable? This is especially relevant given the recession, when wineries reduced the number of competitions they entered. This has led to a shakeout in competitions, and those that don’t adapt to the new conditions, where wineries want more value for their entry fees, won’t make it. I can’t emphasize this enough: Wine competitions are at a crossroads, where their results are increasingly irrelevant to consumers and less important to ever more wineries. The millions of people who buy Cupcake Red Velvet probably don’t even know competitions exist.
Hence the need to make the results more statistically valid, and the Wine Curmudgeon’s five suggestions, based on more than a decade of judging, to do that — after the jump: