[alexh]

This article leans rather heavily on fallacious arguments. Taste is a weak sense -> Wine tasting is bullshit. On a subjective measure people varied within a range ( of only 8 points ) -> Wine tasting is bullshit. People are subject to anchoring effects -> Wine tasting is bullshit Other senses play a powerful role in perception -> Wine tasting is bullshit

Worrying argumentation. The studies themselves could be interesting though.

[homosaur]

The thing I got from the article is the idea that a wine is a set score like a 95 is arbitrary silliness and so much of the wine community is set up around things like that. I do think that savvy consumers and aficionados have realized this for ages and have grown out of simply looking at scores and more strongly consider pairings and preferences. I, for instance, only really pay attention to the first digit of the wine score. Most people that are well schooled can pretty easily tell the difference between a 70 and a 90, I think the bullshit factor comes in when you're trying to grade these out and say this bordeaux is a 95 but this one is a 91.

[acheron]

An article built upon fallacious arguments? On a Gawker site? I'm shocked, shocked.