Whiskybase
Badge

Whisky talk

Everything about whiskies

Whisky-Rating-System

Timo
Expert Junior Junior Expert
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 10:18 am

Dear Whisky friends,


First of all, rating the whisky is very subjective thing. There is no discussion about the taste.


But, I am wondering about some ratings for some drams. On whiskybase we have a range of 100 points in 4 different categories. Most of you guys seem to believe that a whisky with e.g. 60 points is not drinkable. If you use the whole range of 100 points, you can find good whiskies with 60 or 65 points. The best of using the whole range is, there is enough space for real good stuff. Too much whiskies who should rated with around 70 points, are rated with 85 or more.


Again, it is a very own rating. It belongs to your taste.


The sense of having a rating system for whisky and a possible objective one too, is, to rate good whiskies under 70 points. Some of you guys who probable tasted only a few whiskies, can`t overview the possibilities real good stuff has. So let us discuss a approximate objective rating system, who shows the whole range.


I am looking forward to your replies.


With kind regards,


Timo

MARS
Expert Senior Senior Expert
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 18:31 pm

All in all, when they are a few rates on a bottle the average is usually correct

Bachess
Super Administrator Super Administrator
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 21:57 pm

Not if everybody rates too high.

I agree with Timo. I think we all rate too high but it`s related to the rates given by the Maltmaniacs and Jim Murray. They have also rates above 90 points for good whisky and below 70 points for bad whisky.

Personally my rate system is:
0 - 60 points = not drinkable whisky
61-70 points = bad whisky
71-75 points = not so bad but I`ll dont drink it again
76-80 points = good drinkable whisky, i wouldnt buy it
81-85 points = good whisky
86-90 points = very good whisky, I would buy it if the price is right
91-95 points = Excellent whisky
96-100 point = i didnt find it but it must be out there happy

Signature Picture
Whisky
Specialist Specialist
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 22:16 pm

Yep, it is a personal score
As I look at myself, I score my good whiskies i tasted 5-10 years ago nowadays much less.
So I believe I have to taste a lot of reference whiskies before I can score whisky in a relative way.

Sometimes I see scores of 98+ for whiskies that are in my opinion not worth the score. And I am not questioning the score, but I would like to challenge the taster to find a few drams which will score even better. And, again in my opinion, it is relative easy to find better ones.

The scoring Menno does is like I am scoring my tasted ones.

Just my cents
Whisky


alectron
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 22:40 pm

Hey,
I too reckon the general ratings are way too high. But, for the demographic ratings on here to be of any use as a reference, people should be using a similar measuring system, otherwise the `dataset` of rates would become more and more meaningless as you would fist have to research each voters` rating philosophy, which becomes unpractical right away and therefore should be avoided in my opinion. It`s just the necessity if you want to compare & rate anything for that matter. If putting a number on a whisky taste does whisky (or anything else for that matter....) justice, that`s another very valid discussion...
When I joined whiskybase I had to adjust my personal rating system upwards to fit what is defined as the norm in online whisky `discussion` circles, i.e. the maltmaniac grading if you will. I had 70pts as the defining point for a good whisky, but if I would rate like that, no one would be able to understand my votes... so from then on went with the malt maniac grading, which still sees the 70s as something purchase worthy, but `above average` should be 80 or higher.  That said, I still buy & drink whiskies I rate with high 70s wink
This would be the MaltManiac ratings btw:
90 points & more - The sky is the limit! The most amazing malts money can buy; absolutely legendary `Aqua Vitae`.
85-89 points - Highly recommendable. This is the good stuff we crave, (almost) universally loved and appreciated.
80-84 points - Recommendable - plain & simple. You really can`t go wrong with these whiskies. Satisfaction guaranteed.
75-79 points - Better than average, but not something worth hunting down. There are better single malts available.
70-74 points - Below average, but not something that should be actively avoided either. Could do better, though.
Below 70 points - Hold it! A score in the 60`s or even lower is reason for extreme caution. it means: downright avoidable.

c.

Remember - whisky scores and impressions are highly subjective and situational by nature - so don't go and buy whisky according to someone else's taste...
ardpeat
Expert Junior Junior Expert
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 22:42 pm

bonsoir à tous.

lorsque nous "testons" un whisky, nous sommes tous conditionnés par 2 éléments.
1  le nom du whisky
2 les notes déjà établies par les "pro".
ces 2 éléments nous éloignent de notre propre perception et nous font attribuer une note subjective.
le moyen le plus sur que j`ai trouvé est tout simplement de déguster les whisky en aveugle.
un mélange de 3 whisky récemment achetés et non encore goûtés,associés à 2 ou 3 autres déjà dégustés et vous ne serez pas au bout de vos surprises.
slainthe 
BenNevis
Expert Senior Senior Expert
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 22:50 pm


Some people dont like peaty whisky so would rate Islay whisky low, Like me,  so i dont rate them. I like sherry matured whisky like Macallan so I tend to rate them high, But Macallan is the best wink

I use the same points system as Jim Murray

Signature Picture
alectron
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 22:59 pm

Quote by ardpeat

French to English translation
good evening everyone.
when we "test" a whiskey, we are all conditioned by two elements.
The name of a whiskey
2 notes already established by the "pro".
These two elements lead us away from our own perception and we are given a subjective score.
the most of that I have found is simply to taste the whiskey blind.
a mixture of three recently purchased whiskey and not yet tasted, associated with two or three others already tasted and you will not be at your surprises.
slainthe


Put through google translate since I don`t soeak french fluently enough.
c.

Remember - whisky scores and impressions are highly subjective and situational by nature - so don't go and buy whisky according to someone else's taste...
ardpeat
Expert Junior Junior Expert
Posted on 21-06-2011 at 23:07 pm

never forget that the best whisky is always the one we prefer.

st7
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 26-06-2011 at 21:32 pm

I use a "Grading system" very simular to Whiskyfun and the MaltManiacs, when rating a whisky and also determining if a purchase should be made.

60-69 p. = Rubbish. Only drinkable with coke and a lot of ice.
70-74 p. = Boring. Lacks complexity or balance. Don`t buy.
75-79 p. = Average. Life is to short. Don`t buy.
80-85 p. = Good. The price is crucial when considering a buy.
85-89 p. = Very good. Recommend a buy.
90-94 p. = Superb. A great buy.
95-99 p. = Excellent. A must have.
100 p. = The best whisky ever tasted. There can be only one happy    

Slainte Mhath - Soren, MWLSignature Picture
SomeMalts
Member Senior Senior Member
Posted on 29-08-2011 at 22:10 pm

I use a very simple system, more or less derived from the basic Buy/No Buy principle and can apply for bottles I own or future purchases.
No Buy/No Finish(I will not buy this whisky, it is scratched bad.When I own it, it is hard to finish)
No Buy/Will Finish(No potential buy, but will finish it if I owned it)
Buy (again) (at reasonable price I will buy it)
Buy Certainly (again) (still at reasonable prices)

I use two more categories, but they basically fall within the above groups: The ultrabad (legendary bad, like black bottle) and ultragood (potential buy,but the price is too high).

To me this is quite easy and covers everything, no fiddling with rating something 83 or 84 and less subjective.

Feusi
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 01-09-2011 at 10:05 am

Hi everybody


That`s the favorable of the whiskybase, that not all of the same opinion. For me there is no really bad whiskey, the one like more smoke, the other more sherry, moss, gum herbal honey, whatever. Do i review a whisky stored in a Chareau d`Yquem barrels higher than the port wine cask? Is a maturing of whisky for a few months uselful? A rating is always only a snapshot, well to not forget this moment and usualy it is not possible to take this snapshot twice....


And sometimes whisky is still "just" whisky, with a sip of water or on ice, isn`t it? Best together with friends! For me, the rule behind is "take a good dram and talk about it".


It`s exciting as some of the whisky opinion diverges dramatically and in others all are so close together. So it`s not easy to build an own opinion outgoing from many other opinions, but perhaps, this is should not be the goal?


So enjoy he next dram and have a look what others think about it.

Signature Picture
DramWhisky
Member Senior Senior Member
Posted on 07-03-2012 at 00:06 am

While I have not rated a whole lot of whisky on here less than 25 currently.  I have been slowly trying to shift my scores down the number line.  Although when doing 4x 25 point ratings, I consider anything over 20 to be enjoyable ( maybe that should be shifted to 15?), but as I have tasted some better and better whisky I have come to the conclusion that 24/25 should be flawless or perfect, but to get that extra point i.e. a 25/25 it must be perfect but have an additional Wow factor, that really makes you take note and keep you enticed.


At the same time the other day when writing up notes elsewhere for a whisky, I ended up giving my lowest rating ever a 53/100.  It would have been lower but the whisky actually had quite an alluring aroma to it.   If we were to use the full 100 point scale in which 50 is "average" this is still by far way to high.

Although a perspective on this from the viewpoint of someone who teaches and grades people on a somewhat regular basis. At least in the United States where 70-80 % is considered average, I have found that while its not unusual for people to score in the 60-70 range, and for those to be considered bad grades, but more unusual is when people score below 50% that you get the impression they actually tried hard to score that badly.
VaryingViewpoint
Expert Senior Senior Expert
Posted on 10-06-2019 at 06:48 am

Found this and thought it a good idea to share how to rate whisky as so much time and energy has been spent on the "Ridiculous ratings” topic with over 15,000 views, which seems not help curtail heads scratching ratings.

0-19   Paint brush cleaner.

20-29 Nail polish remover (not that I have ever used it, but my wife says it works great!).

30-39 Not drinkable.

40-49 Still not drinkable.

50-59 Junk in a bottle.

60-69 Barely whisky.

70-74 Someone out will like it, as there always a dog lover out there (no offence to dog lovers).

75-79 For cocktails or with coke.

80-82 Drinkable but would rather have a good beer (Innis & Gunn) .

83-84 Good but uneventful and not worth much time.

85-87 Almost very good but I would not pay more than $70cnd.

88-89 Very good and a buy at a reasonable price $90-$140cnd.

90-91 Excellent and a must have at a reasonable price of $150-$300cnd.

92-94 A true gem, not many around. Be thankful to have the opportunity in being able to have something so special.

95-96 Exceptional and willing to pay big bucks (with in reason) for such an experience.

97-98 Makes me feel unworthy and extremely fortunate to experience such a dram. 

98-99 The best of the best an unlikely to ever be topped (or affordable)!

 100   Possible, maybe? Like chasing a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Is there one?

  Edited on 10-06-2019 at 07:35 am
One life... Drink it well
mrgood
Expert Junior Junior Expert
Posted on 10-06-2019 at 19:35 pm

VaryingViewpoint wrote:

Found this and thought it a good idea to share how to rate whisky as so much time and energy has been spent on the "Ridiculous ratings” topic with over 15,000 views, which seems not help curtail heads scratching ratings.

whisky rating ideologies are as subjective and the whisky itself.  happy   I would argue this is too top-heavy. By this scale almost everything would be between 83 and 95. I think it would be just about right if you dropped the first two levels and proportionally skewed this scale's 30-100 to 0-100.

i.e.  

"Junk in a bottle."  this is a fail, must be less than 50

"Drinkable but would rather have a good beer" sounds more like a mid-to-low-70s than an 82

"Exceptional and willing to pay big bucks " more like low 90s than 96

lincolnimp
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 10-06-2019 at 19:53 pm

mrgood wrote:

VaryingViewpoint wrote:

Found this and thought it a good idea to share how to rate whisky as so much time and energy has been spent on the "Ridiculous ratings” topic with over 15,000 views, which seems not help curtail heads scratching ratings.

whisky rating ideologies are as subjective and the whisky itself.  happy   I would argue this is too top-heavy. By this scale almost everything would be between 83 and 95. I think it would be just about right if you dropped the first two levels and proportionally skewed this scale's 30-100 to 0-100.

i.e.  

"Junk in a bottle."  this is a fail, must be less than 50

"Drinkable but would rather have a good beer" sounds more like a mid-to-low-70s than an 82

"Exceptional and willing to pay big bucks " more like low 90s than 96


Still interesting to re visit this topic , I know that if I had some whiskies again they would be at least a few points lower some more.

The reason I like H2H so much is that it is better to gauge a score when in direct competition than on its own.

I scored this 92 in Dec 17 on its own but after a H2H  a few months back it went down to 87 points

https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/36055/glen-grant-1953-gm

My middle of the road score (MOTR) is 75 points which I give for a whisky that is perfectly drinkable but not particularly exciting.

Anything over 90 points is just degrees of excellence

It is difficult to re gauge and change your scoring system on here as your  current scores will not correspond or make any sense but if I had my time over again I would utilise the full scale much more, that said I always try to find a positive in any whisky to try & balance out but alas it is not always possible



VaryingViewpoint
Expert Senior Senior Expert
Posted on 10-06-2019 at 23:28 pm

mrgood wrote:

VaryingViewpoint wrote:

Found this and thought it a good idea to share how to rate whisky as so much time and energy has been spent on the "Ridiculous ratings” topic with over 15,000 views, which seems not help curtail heads scratching ratings.

whisky rating ideologies are as subjective and the whisky itself.  happy   I would argue this is too top-heavy. By this scale almost everything would be between 83 and 95. I think it would be just about right if you dropped the first two levels and proportionally skewed this scale's 30-100 to 0-100.

i.e.  

"Junk in a bottle."  this is a fail, must be less than 50

"Drinkable but would rather have a good beer" sounds more like a mid-to-low-70s than an 82

"Exceptional and willing to pay big bucks " more like low 90s than 96

Well mrgood I didn't think my personal rating scale was here to be rated.wink I have to admit I did go out of my way to have a very thorough description from 1-100 (even though 70% of the scale is almost never used) as I do feel one needs to use the full scale in some capacity even if it's just to give some understanding of what could possibly rate less than 50.

Since you went out of your way to critique mine I would love to see yours.happy 

  Edited on 11-06-2019 at 03:21 am
One life... Drink it well
mrgood
Expert Junior Junior Expert
Posted on 11-06-2019 at 19:37 pm

VaryingViewpoint wrote:

Since you went out of your way to critique mine I would love to see yours.happy 

Careful what you wish for.

0-19 - hydrochloric acid.  watch your insides fall out.

20-29 - urine in a rusty can, carefully aged and bottled in a sweaty shoe. 

30-39 - I'm blind!!! 

40-49 - epic fail, tae th' lavvy wi' ye! 

50-59 - drink mix. A good gift for that cheap-ass sh*t-rat moocher brother-in-law. 

60-69 - it's tolerable, but only drink enough to give it a rating, then add cola... lots of cola. 

70-74 - good for getting sh*t-canned. It's drinkable but only at supermarket blend prices.   

75-79 - At least they gave it the ole college try. supermarket single malt level or young/NAS standard release.

80-82 - pretty good, but not awe-inspiring. 

83-84 - now we're approaching real quality. 

85-86 - As a stingy buyer, this is probably the threshold where I'd be happy to buy another. 

87-88 - Fantastic, I'd drink this again and again. looking forward to a revisit 

89-90 - Wowzers Penny! heavenly stuff, could sit and ponder this all day long. 

91-94 - We're now in the upper echelons. price is no object. Hard to find and even harder to afford. 

95-96 - A grand ole monster. A thing of utter beauty.  The mass production methodologies of many distilleries now makes me wonder if this level is becoming increasingly unattainable. 

97-98 - well nigh impossible. If such a thing exists I haven't found it yet. 

99 - orgasmic, better be wearing edible undies because you're gonna to mess yourself. 

100 - mighty Aphrodite cider, nectar of the gods. You'll not find this beyond the halls of Olympus.

VaryingViewpoint
Expert Senior Senior Expert
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 02:02 am
mrgood wrote:

VaryingViewpoint wrote:

Since you went out of your way to critique mine I would love to see yours.happy 

Careful what you wish for.

0-19 - hydrochloric acid.  watch your insides fall out.

20-29 - urine in a rusty can, carefully aged and bottled in a sweaty shoe. 

30-39 - I'm blind!!! 

40-49 - epic fail, tae th' lavvy wi' ye! 

50-59 - drink mix. A good gift for that cheap-ass sh*t-rat moocher brother-in-law. 

60-69 - it's tolerable, but only drink enough to give it a rating, then add cola... lots of cola. 

70-74 - good for getting sh*t-canned. It's drinkable but only at supermarket blend prices.   

75-79 - At least they gave it the ole college try. supermarket single malt level or young/NAS standard release.

80-82 - pretty good, but not awe-inspiring. 

83-84 - now we're approaching real quality. 

85-86 - As a stingy buyer, this is probably the threshold where I'd be happy to buy another. 

87-88 - Fantastic, I'd drink this again and again. looking forward to a revisit 

89-90 - Wowzers Penny! heavenly stuff, could sit and ponder this all day long. 

91-94 - We're now in the upper echelons. price is no object. Hard to find and even harder to afford. 

95-96 - A grand ole monster. A thing of utter beauty.  The mass production methodologies of many distilleries now makes me wonder if this level is becoming increasingly unattainable. 

97-98 - well nigh impossible. If such a thing exists I haven't found it yet. 

99 - orgasmic, better be wearing edible undies because you're gonna to mess yourself. 

100 - mighty Aphrodite cider, nectar of the gods. You'll not find this beyond the halls of Olympus.

It's a very good one, mrgood! I like it more than mine. Really.happy

One life... Drink it well
lincolnimp
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 10:07 am

mrgood wrote:

VaryingViewpoint wrote:

Since you went out of your way to critique mine I would love to see yours.happy 

Careful what you wish for.

0-19 - hydrochloric acid.  watch your insides fall out.

20-29 - urine in a rusty can, carefully aged and bottled in a sweaty shoe. 

30-39 - I'm blind!!! 

40-49 - epic fail, tae th' lavvy wi' ye! 

50-59 - drink mix. A good gift for that cheap-ass sh*t-rat moocher brother-in-law. 

60-69 - it's tolerable, but only drink enough to give it a rating, then add cola... lots of cola. 

70-74 - good for getting sh*t-canned. It's drinkable but only at supermarket blend prices.   

75-79 - At least they gave it the ole college try. supermarket single malt level or young/NAS standard release.

80-82 - pretty good, but not awe-inspiring. 

83-84 - now we're approaching real quality. 

85-86 - As a stingy buyer, this is probably the threshold where I'd be happy to buy another. 

87-88 - Fantastic, I'd drink this again and again. looking forward to a revisit 

89-90 - Wowzers Penny! heavenly stuff, could sit and ponder this all day long. 

91-94 - We're now in the upper echelons. price is no object. Hard to find and even harder to afford. 

95-96 - A grand ole monster. A thing of utter beauty.  The mass production methodologies of many distilleries now makes me wonder if this level is becoming increasingly unattainable. 

97-98 - well nigh impossible. If such a thing exists I haven't found it yet. 

99 - orgasmic, better be wearing edible undies because you're gonna to mess yourself. 

100 - mighty Aphrodite cider, nectar of the gods. You'll not find this beyond the halls of Olympus.


91-94 , not sure all whisky in this price bracket is unaffordable in the very short term but one thing is for sure on this site when a whisky gets some high scores the price seems to shoot up quickly and people stop opening them, it is no coincidence?

95-96, totally agree with your comments the likes of us mere mortals getting hold of anything at this score now is just about impossible but I would put the mark at 93p for this. (unless you want to fork out a hefty sum for a sample, if you are lucky enough to find one)

It is my view generally now that any whisky over 92-93 points now is pretty much hoarded by purchases the whole ethos for whisky is meant to be drunk in many cases stops when the whisky is deemed  this good, just look at the multitude of high scoring and rarer bottles where all are showing as closed?

  Edited on 12-06-2019 at 10:08 am
Slàinte Mhath
Administrator Administrator
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 10:38 am

91-94 , not sure all whisky in this price bracket is unaffordable in the very short term but one thing is for sure on this site when a whisky gets some high scores the price seems to shoot up quickly and people stop opening them, it is no coincidence?


Agreed. At least in my own ratings, the range above 90 points does not necessarily mean 'hard to afford'. This logic seems to persist among some whisky drinkers also vice versa, rating some malts higher merely because 'they were expensive'. Think again!

“There is no such thing as bad whisky. Some whiskies just happen to be better than others.” (W. Faulkner)
lincolnimp
Connoisseur Connoisseur
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 11:24 am

91-94 , not sure all whisky in this price bracket is unaffordable in the very short term but one thing is for sure on this site when a whisky gets some high scores the price seems to shoot up quickly and people stop opening them, it is no coincidence?


Agreed. At least in my own ratings, the range above 90 points does not necessarily mean 'hard to afford'. This logic seems to persist among some whisky drinkers also vice versa, rating some malts higher merely because 'they were expensive'. Think again!


or merely scoring higher because they were older, or scoring high merely because everyone else has and going with the flow to not look out of place, the list goes on. wink

mrgood
Expert Junior Junior Expert
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 15:57 pm

Slàinte Mhath wrote:

lincolnimp wrote:

91-94 , not sure all whisky in this price bracket is unaffordable in the very short term but one thing is for sure on this site when a whisky gets some high scores the price seems to shoot up quickly and people stop opening them, it is no coincidence?

Agreed. At least in my own ratings, the range above 90 points does not necessarily mean 'hard to afford'. 

true but you have to be exceedingly lucky, for two reasons.  first, most producers/bottlers are reasonably well-versed in their product.  They know when they've got a gem and nowadays they will tend to price accordingly... because they're saavy and know that as soon as it gains a reputation people will pay... which brings me to the second reason.  Word gets out very quickly now.  If there is a superb whisky at a low price, it will not last long, people will rush to get it and get it in quantity... in that regard I guess it pays to have good shop connections.

(edit: I'm speaking mostly of single-cask bottles here.  My experience has been that the real quality stuff tends to be single cask... and the few standard ranges that do rate that high are usually pretty pricey... sigh, they didn't used to be)

  Edited on 12-06-2019 at 16:07 pm
robain
Moderator Moderator
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 16:42 pm

Slàinte Mhath wrote:

lincolnimp wrote:

91-94 , not sure all whisky in this price bracket is unaffordable in the very short term but one thing is for sure on this site when a whisky gets some high scores the price seems to shoot up quickly and people stop opening them, it is no coincidence?


Agreed. At least in my own ratings, the range above 90 points does not necessarily mean 'hard to afford'. This logic seems to persist among some whisky drinkers also vice versa, rating some malts higher merely because 'they were expensive'. Think again!


This is very much noticeable if you take them on a blind tasting, i've rated 300-400€ bottlings on blind tasting with 81-83p. Even a 35yo Highland park.


I think also that alot of people drink with their eyes and hype. "this have to be good because of this or that" rather then to drink something unexpected.


Also for me i favour Glenrothes so i probably rate it a point or two higher than anyone else should. This is normal i would say.


But in general yes, people do rate higher then they should.

I look back at my ratings 2,3,4 or even 5 years ago and can sometimes wonder... "why?"

My Collection My Market
VaryingViewpoint
Expert Senior Senior Expert
Posted on 12-06-2019 at 18:05 pm

mrgood wrote:

Slàinte Mhath wrote:

lincolnimp wrote:

91-94 , not sure all whisky in this price bracket is unaffordable in the very short term but one thing is for sure on this site when a whisky gets some high scores the price seems to shoot up quickly and people stop opening them, it is no coincidence?

Agreed. At least in my own ratings, the range above 90 points does not necessarily mean 'hard to afford'. 

true but you have to be exceedingly lucky, for two reasons.  first, most producers/bottlers are reasonably well-versed in their product.  They know when they've got a gem and nowadays they will tend to price accordingly... because they're saavy and know that as soon as it gains a reputation people will pay... which brings me to the second reason.  Word gets out very quickly now.  If there is a superb whisky at a low price, it will not last long, people will rush to get it and get it in quantity... in that regard I guess it pays to have good shop connections.

(edit: I'm speaking mostly of single-cask bottles here.  My experience has been that the real quality stuff tends to be single cask... and the few standard ranges that do rate that high are usually pretty pricey... sigh, they didn't used to be)

I agree with all these points by mrgood and Slàinte Mhath. I'm still finding 89-91s in the $95-$150cnd rang, and if you know where to look and when these land in your area you have about a week to purchase them. After the shelves are bare these high value/quality (i.e. Springbank & Longrow CS) bottles easily double if not triple in price within a couple of months. So there are still bargains out there, just more work and time to get them.

I think the issue is cobbling 91-94 as a rang (IMHO), to me 90-91 is a great dram and can still be acquired at an affordable price point at the retail level, 92-94 is much harder to find, as a discerning drinker it really takes a "WoW" factor to push me into that rating scale. And like what mrgood said about "producers/bottlers are reasonably well-versed in their product. They know when they've got a gem and nowadays they will tend to price accordingly... " finding this kind of quality (even if one is willing to pay a higher price point?) is very difficult these last 10 years or so. Unfortunately, this 92-94+ rating rang has been butchered by many, but mostly by Jim Murray's books and all that follow his lead. 

Maybe someone should put up Jim's rating scale on how NOT to rate whisky, and why. 

  Edited on 13-06-2019 at 00:49 am
One life... Drink it well
You need to join this group before you can add a reply

Whiskybase

Whiskybase is founded in 2007 with the goal to create the biggest resource of whisky information in the world. A community driven website built by and for whisky enthusiasts.  




Whiskybase B.V. 
Zwaanshals 530 
3035 KS Rotterdam 
The Netherlands 

KVK: 52072819
VAT: NL850288836B01

Copyright © 2018


Forgot your password?

Login