There are two main scoring systems – the traditional UK 20-point system and the 100-point system developed by Robert Parker in the US. Decanter magazine has used both systems in recent years and also grades wines into descriptive bands, which enables the systems to be compared:
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​​​​​​​Note that, ignoring faulty wines, the systems are effectively 7.5-point and 30-point systems. Wine critics using the 20-point system typically score in 0.25 steps, making that an effective 30-point system too. Not all critics would agree with the Decanter bands above – Jancis Robinson is a well-known low scorer and, at least in the 16-18 band, her scores will tend to be a point lower than would fit the descriptions above.

The 20-point system is easier to use, so that is what is suggested on the club’s tasting sheets. A summary of how it is applied is given in this table:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​Appearance is a “hygiene factor” – award the full 3 points unless there are obvious problems (e.g. cloudiness, browning). For nose and palate, it is helpful to benchmark a 16.0 wine which just makes the “Recommended” grade – i.e. no faults but not especially exciting. Start with 5.5/7 for the nose and 7.5/10 for the palate and then adjust each up and down according to how they undershoot or exceed your expectations of a 16.0 benchmark wine. Finally check that the total makes sense – e.g. is a wine you’ve scored 14.0 really only “fair” and is your 19.5 score really one of the best wines you’ve ever tasted? Nearly all wines tasted at the club, apart from the odd faulty specimen, can be expected to fall in the 15-19 range and you should query scores outside that.

Tasting is inevitably subjective but try to judge a wine for what it is – it’s unfair to mark a wine down just because it’s in a style you don’t personally care for. That is, you should, for example, be judging if a wine is a good example of a sauvignon blanc, even if you don’t particularly like sauvignon blanc.
​