Navigating the world of wine critiques is challenging for consumers. We in the industry can typically read [sift through] reviews and sniff out ulterior motives designed solely to chase clout or sell wines, but a casual customer doesn't often have such an attuned BS detector.
My benchmarks for a great wine critic are twofold: honesty, and brevity. A good review provides a truthful assessment of a wine—even when it may cause pain or embarrassment—and does so with an economy of words that avoids straying into tedium. A concise packaging of accurate, relatable descriptors is of far more use to consumers than niche references that drone on in perpetuity.
I also place a premium on critics who prioritize quality of their work over quantity. Having attended marathon tastings of sampling hundreds of wines in a day, I can comfortably say it's almost impossible to compartmentalize one's thoughts beyond a certain point. And my job was merely to determine whether a wine was sellable in my stores—I can only imagine how inaccurate my scores might be toward the end of such a session, trying to precisely grade such high volumes of bottles.
There are a decent number of wine writers I follow, who while our palates may not always be in sync, have my respect for meeting these criteria. Here are three of my favorites:
Jane Anson—covers mostly Bordeaux, but with the number of international wines being offered by Bordeaux négociants expanding the past few years, so is her coverage.
Tim Atkin—South Africa, Spain, and South America. He writes on a number of other regions as well, but his work in these areas is second-to-none.
Anne Krebiehl—probably the best resource I've come across for German wines; also writes on Champagne and, increasingly, English sparklers.
These three do exceptional work, and stay attuned to the inner workings of the regions and wines they cover—key, considering the frequency with which certain appellations change their wine laws. I find myself referencing this trio more than most.
I'd prefer to avoid bashing anyone in the replies, but all thoughts are welcome regardless, because I only want to know:
Who do y'all follow for wine insights?
Cheers!
by ItsWine101
40 Comments
Not only should you not follow them, you should avoid any and all scores/ratings. It’s all trash.
Suckling is the worst. He is literally charging people for points. In any other industry this would be a scam.
Jancis Robinson
The god mother of wine ratings by far.
Jancis Robinson, Kerin O’Keefe, Jeb Dunnuck, and Alessandro Masnaghetti
James Suckling (or “Jimmy” as I like to call him) speaks in such a unique way (which I find absolutely hysterical) that I love watching him talk about wine. I don’t use his opinions as a guidepost or directive of any kind, I’m just in it for the over-emphasis
Not a critic, he’s an importer, but I like to follow Kermit Lynch. He does a great job talking about underrated producers and regions. I feel like it is in a similar area as what content you are looking for from critics.
I hate Robert Parker with every cell in my body.
All critics suck, they’re trying to sell you something and it’s not in their best interest to give you anything new.
I like John Bonné and Levi Dalton.
The only real judgement of wine is the one performed blind. Anything else is potentially bullshit
A smaller publication but I do enjoy flipping through Meridith May’s publisher picks in the Tasting Panel.
as a Canadian I see a lot of reviews by Natalie MacLean and Anthony Gismondi and they are usually pretty good and fairly accurate, at least to my palate.
Nathalie McLean is great
Jancis and Vinous.
Dunnuck is my fave “mainstream” critic- he writes with consistent language, seems to have clear reasons for why he rates certain wines higher than others, and also just seems to really love wine in his notes.
Erin Larkin Is that amplified, clearly so enraptured by her favorite bottles, it’s really infectious to read. Always worth looking up her notes for Australian stuff.
I’m definitely a fan of Burghound and Jasper Morris for Burgundy.
However with all of these, I try not to read the details of the notes too much until after I try the wine for the first time. I love to read their impressions afterward. I might use them if I’m narrowing down a choice between two specific bottles, but I don’t look up ratings in the first place to choose my wines.
Robinson would be the one I trust the most if that means anything. I don’t read her ratings all too often but I often find that I agree with her.
However, I feel that Robert Parker is really misunderstood in a way. His faible for bold reds which then found its way into recipe wines overshadowed a) what he did for the wine industry besides that and b) how unaffected he was by big names back when he tasted himself, especially in the 80s when not every vintage was another summer heat record… the man never shied away from criticism.
nowadays he still has some strong people working for him. Stephan Reinhardt in Germany for example is a really good name and I have talked to him a few times.
Best approach is to pick an outlet and use that one to regularly reference; keep in mind, certain publications use various writers/reviewers so try to dial in one source
Burghound—Allen Meadows
Find the critic who’s tastes most align with yours. I think this is how you should approach subjective criticism for any field really.
To give you an example: I like action movies and comedies. I dislike horror and romance. So, if you like horror, and dislike comedy, you shouldn’t listen to me.
Similarly, different people have different tastes and preferences when it comes to what they would like to drink. Find the critic who’s tastes and preferences align with yours.
u/hannahcrosbie
Jancis is the GOAT
Gary V
The team at The Wine Front who cover mainly Australian wine does an incredible job. Gary Walsh, Mike Bennie, Kasia Sobiesiak, Curly Haslam-Coates and Campbell Mattinson.
New Zealand wine reviewing needs a bit of work, but I find Stephen Wong at The Real Review a reliable new voice to follow.
I find he Cellartracker reviews to be far more accurate than the critics. I don’t believe you can accurately evaluate as many wines as they claim to.
William Kelley is perhaps the most important tastemaker in wine today, one of the few (only) critics whose opinion actually move markets, in that his favored producers quickly become very hyped and allocated. Whether you’re playing that game or not, worth monitoring. His winemaking background adds a lot of value as well.
I appreciate Jasper Morris for his open-minded approach to Burgundy and deep producer relationships. His system of grading wines with both stars (for value) and points (for absolute quality) is the most useful scoring system I’ve come across
If your palate aligns, John Gilman is THE authority on properly-aged wines and has a refreshingly outsider perspective on what constitutes quality. I’ve had many incredible wine experiences picking up under-the-radar bottles on his recommendation (e.g., Bordeaux vintages that everyone else writes off, like ‘62 and ‘78).
Mosel Fine Wines is a great resource for Germany. Their palates tend to discount drier wines (preferring the pradikats) but if they rate a GG highly, it’s definitely insanely good. It’s also free.
Halliday are my go to for Australian
None. Shop by importer and your own taste. With that said. Suckles is the worst.
Tanzer
Jancis Robinson is my queen
The key to wine ratings is to find someone that has a similar palette as you. If you prefer more fruit forward wines then someone that is focused on balance and food pairings is not for you.
Once you have found someone that fits your likes then see how they judge wines. Make an adjustment for points. They may rate wines a few points higher or lower than you.
Also, be aware who is tasting the wine many companies have multiple tasters. You may have different views of different people within the same company.
I find Matt Horkey and I have similar thoughts on wines.
Noble Rot is the only wine writing I can stomach these days.
I like Lettie Teague’s wine columns in the WSJ. Too many critics only want to talk about and review the unicorn wines that I’ll never taste. She’s more likely to talk about wines in my normal price range.
Parker, Vinous, and Jeb Dunnuck.
I’ve always been a fan of Wine & Spirits magazine.
Critics are good for affirmation, if you need it. Otherwise, trust your local wine merchant and follow your own palate.
I’m a big fan of u/hannahcrosbie
Allen Meadows/Burghound
Audrey Frick from Jeb Dunnuck is outstanding for Italian reviews and I love William Kelley for Champagne and Burgundy reviews. Vinous also has a great read on Burgundy.
In Australia, winefront is probably the best – Campbell Mattinson, Gary Walsh, Tyson Stelzer.
All very straightforward people, and 89 is seen as a good score. I’m sure a few people here are bored of hearing me bang on about how a 51 should be seen as a good score, but it’s a start.
Big fan of Stephen Tanzer how he rates wine.
Galloni also matches my tastes.