What surprises me in this tasting, is that the Grover Viognier Clairette which scored higher, and is the lower priced than any of the “awarded” wines, is only worth an “Honourable Mention”.

Also compare the low scores with the higher scores of Steven Spurrier.

Does this mean that the BT tasters weren't as good as Spurrier? Group tastings are always difficult. Do you average the scores and is that a reflection of the quality of the wine? What about when some people are better tasters than others?

While I compliment the publication for this initiative and the importance given to wines as a product, I have the following points to make:

1. According to the article, "BT More got eight experts from around the country" to rate Indian wines. In my understanding, and also looking at the profile of the people, it seems that they were chosen because they are based in Delhi, and are definitely not a true representation of experts from all over the country.

2. The UC Davis 20-point rating scale is not as precise as other 20-point ratings like Jancis Robinson & Decanter. It is, in fact, rather vague compared to the others.

The scale describes wines between points 9-13 as “standard wines with neither outstanding character or defect”. The same comment is repeated for wines with points between 13 -17. In effect, all the wines between points 9 -17 are standard wines with neither outstanding character or defect. This does not allow precise judging.

This is my opinion and maybe the judges had their reason to follow this system. In that case, in the blind tasting, some international wines should also have been included to understand where Indian wines stand.

I repeat, it is easier to understand the Jancis Robinson and Decanter rating system.

Over the last 6 months I’v been following various stories and hearing lot regarding wine competitions in India. Must confess, each time it is becoming increasingly confusing to understand which competition is better then the other? After all, the same companies are participating everywhere with different outcomes in each event??? Efforts are always made to suggest how the tastings were under scrutiny from XYZ panel of judges, how the wines were blind tasted etc but what puzzles me the most is that no one has pointed about the genuiness of wine that was actually sent by companies from their winery. How difficult is it for a winery to use another wine into one of their bottles, brand it under their name and send it for tasting? I’m not suggesting that this is happening but why isn’t anyone taking this issue and addressing it. I know at least 2 companies that have never participated in any competition because of this concern.
Perhaps this issue has already been addressed in the past, either ways, its about time that we started thinking ‘’SERIOUS CREDIBILITY’’ to score points with the end-user to decide which wine is a true winner in the crowd, after all.

Anyone listening out there...

Happy Working

I think sending of bottles is same for other competetions all over the world like IWSC , Decanter, International wine challenge. If the same results were from there nobody would have asked about the "SERIOUS CREDIBILITY".At the end of the day these awards only are not going to make or break a future of the wine brand.It will be quality only. Its hight time we appreciate the people who are taking initiatives to hold these events.And i can tell the reason why these people are giving explation is the question marks like this?

so dont worry much just drink the wine you like.