WTN: 1998 Ernst Bretz Bechtosheimer Klosterberg Riesling Beer

• 1998 Ernst Bretz Bechtosheimer Klosterberg Riesling Beerenauslese - Germany, Rheinhessen (3/27/2006)
  A bargain BA usually isn't. No lucky suprise here. The cork had soaked through some, so this might be more mature than expected. Color was a bright and clear golden yellow. Promising notes of ripe peach and white flowers on the nose. Taste, however, was one dimensional--sweet, cloying and short. The acidic backbone was missing and there was just the slightest hint of stone. A wine to quaff while the the mind is occupied otherwise.
  
  Ap nr 032 00
  10.5% (85 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

Dan, do you score your wines on a 100 point system?

If so, how do you weigh the various elements?

85 points sounds pretty high for the wine you describe, although I tend to be very disappointed if the aroma is promising, but the taste is disappointing. I hate the let down from the early promise.

Regards, Bob

[David M. Bueker]

I have frequently seen Bretz touted as a good source for value dessert wines. Unfortunately every one I have tried has been not worth the bargain cost. They are usually too sweet/sticky with poor balalnce.

And they all get worse with age.

Bob--I do use a modified 100 pt scale. To me 85 is a little above average wine. This was ok quaffer at the price ($12) that started promising but ultimately needed backbone and was, for me, too sweet. It didn't taste badly and had no obvious winemaking flaws.

I've seen scales that put above average around 82 and average in the 70's, but it seems there is a points drift going on and to many now a score in the 70's is something you should pour down the drain.

I try to avoid the 50+5+15+20+10 formula for a couple of reasons. One is my (mostly dormant) math background has a hard time accepting the 50 fudge factor. But the main concern, again for me, is the concept that certain types of wines can never score above 90. I tend to adjust those wines on peer group and qpr factors which will cause an upward drift on the formula.

Actually I think the old 20 point scale worked better. So what do you do?

My "system" was designed because I would buy a wine because I recognized it in the retail store, get it home, and realize I remembered it because we hated it. :-)

I was learning Word (having been a Word Perfect user for years), and decided on a simple search system -- 1*, 2*, 3*, 4*, 5*. That way I could search through the wine diary from time to time and print out the 4* and 5* wines and carry that with me. If I "recognized" a wine and it wasn't on the list, I wouldn't buy it.

A bit later I read Broadbent and realized he had a five star system. So I was forced to define my terms -- Broadbent was kind of a hero after hearing him speak before a wine auction in New York City and after reading a couple of his books and a number of his Decanter 's mcolumns.

Here's my system -- still useful for sorting purposes, but not much else:

1* -- Hateful - do not drink.

2* -- Drinkable if nothing new or better is not available.

3* -- Average.

4* -- Buy more -- lovely.

5* -- My heart! Buy a piece of the vineyard!

Regards, Bob

1* -- Hateful - do not drink.

2* -- Drinkable if nothing new or better is not available.

3* -- Average.

4* -- Buy more -- lovely.

5* -- My heart! Buy a piece of the vineyard!

That's pretty similar to my own 5 point scale, as it seems that encompasses about all the variation I can quantify with numbers.

1. Avoid at all costs.

2. Drink at parties if nothing else available.

3. Drink at restaurants if well priced and nothing else available.

4. Buy more if you get a chance.

5. Buy more now.