Awards: Valid or Not?
International Wine & Spirits Competition, International Wine Challenge, Veritas, Michelangelo, SAA. What do they all mean? Fiona McDonald investigates.Who hasn't walked into a wine shop or liquor outlet at some point and automatically gravitated to the bottles displaying a sticker of some sort?
Without shame I admit to having bought bottles of wine displaying gold medal stickers - and my reasoning was that if the judges of whatever show, competition or event had deemed it worthy of a gold medal, who was I to quibble? After all, it must be good.
And that is what it all boils down to. Speak to any wine retailer and they will say that - without fail - a sticker on a bottle sells wine.
"Without a doubt," said Caroline Rillema of Caroline's Fine Wines in Cape Town.
"It's something the customer can relate to. Everyone understands the concept of a gold, silver and bronze medal and they trust the quality of an award - any award."
After Jordan won the Trophy for the 'Best Bordeaux' with their 1998 Cabernet Sauvignon at the International Wine Challenge in London in September last year, the wine flew off Caroline's shelves.
"I sold 20 cases in four days. Before that it had been just another Cab on my shelf."
However, she said, awards don't work in isolation - consumers look for a package deal of an award winning product and a good price.
But what is the consumer to think when some bottles are festooned with award stickers? Should he blindly trust the judges of the various competitions? Are all competitions considered equal in status or repute?
On the local competition front, cellars vie for honours in the annual Veritas awards, Michelangelo, South African Airways selection and the Air France Preteux Bourgeois Classic. Internationally the most popular pair is the International Wine and Spirits Competition (IWSC) and the International Wine Challenge (IWC), both held in London.
One of South Africa's most experienced and prolific tasters Dave Hughes had the following to say: "A criticism of any competition is that it is only as good as the entries it receives. If the so-called top wines don't enter - for whatever reason - then how valid or representative is the award?"
As far as Hughes is concerned (and it's not just because he is the headof one of the judging panels), the International Wine & Spirits Competition is the most fair.
"They only award a single gold, silver or bronze medal in any category as opposed to the (International) Wine Challenge held across the river (Thames) where people enter because multiple gold and silver medals are given out."
At the IWSC, even if 10 wines achieve a gold medal score, only one gold, one silver and one bronze will be awarded.
What really sways Hughes is the quality of the judging, the endorsement of top international wine personalities and the fact that any winning entry has to stand up to rigorous scientific analysis - and in the past some producers have stumbled at this hurdle. Examples of"scandals" discovered by the IWSC include the addition of glycol to Austrian wines and an alcohol product to Australian wines some years ago.
"The anti-freeze scandal hit the Austrian industry hard and had the potential to do the same to the Australian industry a few years ago. But where the Aussies were so good was that their Trade Commission met with the organisers of the IWSC immediately, found out what their mistake was and in spite of the fact that this alcohol product was widely used to smoothe out the wines, decided that it was unacceptable internationally and wasn't in the rules - so they put a stop to it immediately - across the industry."
Some of the top names in world wine endorse the IWSC: Current President is Warren Winiarski of Stags Leap; Vice Presidents include Robert Mondavi, Jean Hugel, Madame May de Lencquesaing of Pichon Longueville, Robert Drouhin, Baroness Philippine de Rothschild of Mouton Rothschild and Italy's most noble men of wine, Piero Antinori and Marchese Leonardo de Frescobaldi.
"The interesting thing is that in Europe some of the top producers are entering the IWSC - the top Italians and top Bordeaux - not necessarily first growths, but the super seconds and thirds. And the Champagne houses face a lot of competition around the world so many of the Grand Marques enter every year." The 2001 results show Champagne names like Heidsieck, Lanson, Pommery and Jacquart prominent among the entries.
Criticism of the International Wine Challenge includes that many of the judges have little experience, there are many of them and that too many medals are awarded.
Competitions such as the Michelangelo Awards which are held locally utilising Office International de la Vigne et du Vin (OIV) rules and judged by a high proportion of overseas experts, also catch a bit of flak.
Under OIV rules, only 30% of entries are awarded medals and each wine is judged individually. So a single wine is brought to the judge, he scores it and it is removed. A second wine is brought out, judged and so forth. Other competitions - such as Veritas - utilise flights of wines, usually eight or 10 at a time so there is a certain amount of comparison.
Hughes is of the opinion that a wine winning great accolades can happen once as a fluke, but ultimately the consistently good wines will perform well across the spectrum.
One shining example of this - initially written off as one of those flukes - is Boland Cellar. Not only did they win the IWSC trophies for Best Cabernet (1999 Boland Cabernet Sauvignon), Best Shiraz (1998 Boland Shiraz) and Best South African producer, but Altus le Roux was heralded as the Robert Mondavi Winemaker of the Year. At the same competition Vergelegen was awarded the Château Pichon Longueville Comtesse de Lalande Trophy for the best blended red wine. Kanonkop's 1999 Pinotage won the KWV International Trophy for the Best Pinotage.
Following three months later was the announcement that South Africa had again done well at the International Wine Challenge.
Gary and Kathy Jordan accepted the trophy for 'best Bordeaux' for their 1998 Jordan Cabernet Sauvignon, while Charles Back accepted the trophy for best Great Value Red for a 1999 Spice Route Pinotage and a gold medal for Fairview's Primo Pinotage.
Here's the producer perspective on competitions: "Wine competitions will always be a tool, and the more international they are, the more marketing opportunities they provide," said Eddie Turner, Vergelegen's marketing manager.
"It also remains a tool that must be used cautiously… as the inherent nature of wine judging will not deliver the same results from competition to competition or from year to year.
"At Vergelegen we generally place less of a marketing emphasis on competition results, having seldom placed the award winning stickers on bottles. Third party endorsement by the media is important and this is preferable to us blowing our own trumpet.
"Another important aspect of wine competitions for us is the fact that they do provide a platform where we are given the opportunity to assess the quality of our wine against international and local competition." Something both Boland and Fairview agree with - especially since South African wines are competing for shelf space in international markets.
"We are making wine for the international market and tend towards taking the international results more seriously."
Kathy Jordan acknowledged the value of awards and results to cellars.
"The whole reason we enter competitions is to improve both sales and provide credibility for the consumer. It's by winning competitions or awards that the consumer determines what is good or not," she said.
"If people simply tasted the wines and made up their own minds about the quality it would be great, but they don't - so competitions are there to guide them.
"Obviously the IWC award was great not only for us but for South Africa as well. There have been a lot of rumours of South Africa flogging bad wine and those have been scotched by South African producers doing so well at both the IWC and other competitions. We're beginning to build a reputation for quality.
"We believe we should have a South African national wine show such as Veritas and that everyone should enter. If your wines do well, use the information for marketing; if not, forget about it and move on. It doesn't mean you've made a bad wine - just that it didn't necessarily perform well on the day."
Jordan also has sympathy for the judges: "We're only human, and to taste a line up of 100 wines and to judge them equally is almost impossible.
Both Charles Back of Fairview and Altus le Roux stated that they relished competition - comparing how their wines fared, particularly internationally.
"Any winemaker wants to pit himself against other cellars and wines," said Le Roux. "It's useful to gauge how you're doing in terms of quality.
"It also means that the consumer has an idea of the general quality of the cellar and what it's capable of. It's almost like a stamp of approval."
Back agreed. "I like competing. But one show result is not enough to make a difference. You need a track record and to look at your failures as much as your successes. So I use competitions as a barometer of our progress."
He believes the IWC has the largest commercial appeal. "It's widely supported and accepted by retailers in the UK and the consumers trust it. It's quite credible as competitions go."
Michelangelo gets his nod locally because "of an exciting panel of international judges", along with SAA "with varying results" but his wines aren't entered into Veritas.
"Not because I don't believe in it, I do, but because of their stock requirements. I would definitely enter if the conditions were different - or they made it easier for me to enter!" Back quipped.
One point he emphasised was that none of his wines are "manufactured".
"We have a firm policy that we don't make any show wines." Also interesting to note that another firm policy is not to attach any of their award stickers to their bottles - like Vergelegen!
"The only exception was an export order for Sainsbury's who insisted that our IWC results went on the Pinotage they stocked.
"So what you see is what you get with Fairview and Spice Route." While Altus le Roux likes to compete, he is of the opinion that there are too many shows and competitions - and that consumers are becoming confused.
"They'll see a picture in the newspaper of a guy posing with a huge silver trophy having won it at a Young Wine Show or a regional show - but will they ever see that wine? It's a young wine and may never make it to the bottle. There are too many shows and too many medals handed out.
"It's good to win awards, but people must be realistic. You can't always expect to do well.
"The IWSC is a fantastic competition - not just because Boland did so well last year! South Africa is now an international player and you have to see how you measure up against the international competition - and that's why the IWSC is so good because of the calibre of the opposition.
"I've definitely found that the IWSC opens doors for your product.
The information below was compiled by wine writer and taster, Angela Lloyd, and carried in GRAPE magazine's December edition.
Veritas Awards
Objective: "To act as a guideline for the consumer", says Chair Danie de Wet.
Judges: 100-plus local winemakers, wine buyers, journalists, marketers and other industry people, who (bar CWMs) have passed the Cape Wine and Spirit Education Trust tasting test. A small contingent of foreign judges has participated since 2000 (& this year).
Entries: Entries have more than doubled since 1991, now near 1 500.
Almost exclusively local wines, which have to be bottled; 100 cases (12 x 750ml) must be in stock when results are announced.
Procedure: Panels of 7 rate categories based on colour or style of wine; Pinotage, Port-styled and Cap Classique are among those judged by 'specialists'. Each judge has the choice of six scores; - 14, 15, 16, 17 and 17+.
Discussion now allows for controversial wines to be brought back to the panel to seek consensus.
Awards: Double gold medal (scores of 17+ from at least 5 judges); Gold - medi-an point of 17; Silver - 16; Bronze - 15.
Pros: The only National Wine Show for finished wines. Shunned by some producers, it receives support from the industry generally, suggesting it could become a benchmarking event.
Cons: Always controversial. Despite attempts to improve the system, progress is far from smooth. Among the many criticisms are: too many medals awarded; seven judges per panel does not encourage accountability; the tasting' test requirement does not take into account familiarity with local or international wines; some respected judges are not invited as they are neither CWMs nor have passed the tasting exam.
South African Airways Awards
Objective: To choose the best wines to serve on board.
Judges: 12, competent local palates' and recognised international wine people.
Entries: Increase annually: 820 wines from 150 producers in 2001. Economy Class entries may be tank samples.
Procedure: The panel looks for wines that will show well at 10 000m; mainly rounded tannins and bright fruit, though finesse, delicacy and complexity are also desirable attributes. The top wines are then rated and ranked. (The Chair may forward an overlooked wine with a good track record to this final round).
Awards: Trophy winners and runners-up are the top-rated wines in each of the red, white, Cap Classique and Port categories.
Pros: A guaranteed sale and broadly based publicity ensures that participants include most top producers. The strength of, particularly, the international panel, gives the process credibility, publicity, and feedback to the winemakers.
Cons: The judging schedule has reached saturation point. Stamina and ability are severely tested, and the possibility of a gem (especially one with no track record) being overlooked increases. SAA has to approve the price as well, meaning some selections do not make it on board.
Michelangelo International Wine Awards
Objective: To identify South African wines with international appeal.
Judges: Of the 12, 11 are foreign winemakers or wine writers. Convened by Sue van Wyk, CWM.
Entries: Only SA wines, despite the title; now at 600 entries.
Procedure: Wines served individually in classes. Rated on a 100-point scale, the median score dictating the result. Discussion follows major divergences of views. Top 10 wines retasted, scored and ranked.
Awards: Judged according to the rules of the OIV (Office International de la Vigne et du Vin): only up to 30% may receive medals, and no more than 10% may get gold. Top wine receives Grand Médaille d'Or.
Pros: South African wines are exposed to a spectrum of international palates. For the Michelangelo hotel chain, it offers an opportunity to acquire the top wines.
Cons: Most judges are drawn from countries with whom SA does little trade. A member of a hotel chain organising a wine competition is seen as opportunistic, having mostly to do with the purchasing power after the event. Little coverage or credibility abroad.
Air France Classic Trophy
Objective: To encourage classic wines with elegance, balance and longevity.
Judges: 12 French-educated palates - writers, sommeliers or winemakers.
Entries: Increased to 436 in 2000. No stock requirements; the wine has only to be bottled and certified.
Procedure: Judged in broad white, red, sparkling and dessert categories. The final round is also served by category, without discussion. Scoring out of 20 with an extra five points for classic attributes.
Awards: Top 10 reds, 5 whites, a dessert and sparkling wine are identified. The top wine in each category receives a prize; winners in white and red categories get air tickets to France.
Pros: The competition's specific objective as well as the experienced French judges, suggest the results should provide benchmarks for local winemakers. The competition has opened doors for SA wines in France, and been noted in French publications.
Cons: What happens if Jean-Vincent Ridon, the sole driving force, leaves? Not much coverage.
International Wine and Spirit Competition
Objective: To promote excellence in wines, spirits and liqueurs.
Judges: Panels of about 9, made up of Masters of Wine, prominent members of the trade, and knowledgeable consumers from all over the world. All go through an induction process and a trial judging day before being officially appointed. Trade judges have to declare any commercial interests to pre-empt conflicts of interest.
Entries: 3500 in 2001 (23% up on 2000).
Procedure: Judging is carried out over three months. Wines initially tasted by country/region, style/variety, and vintage. Chemical testing aims to determine any illegal additions, how long a wine will age, stability, or just poor winemaking.
Awards: Winners are limited to one Gold (85+ points on a scale of 100), one Silver (75+), and one Bronze (65+) in each category, these go forward for national and international awards. Those achieving more than 70 points may be "Commended". 24 international trophies, including Winemaker of the Year: 17 national trophies; 7 other industry trophies.
Pros: Internationally representative, professional organisation, democratic judging.
Cons: Though international in name, the results suggest a strong New World bias. Top wines from traditional countries seldom feature among the medals - thus diminishing prestige of international trophies.
International Wine Challenge
Entries: The world's biggest wine competition, entries have risen from 20 in 1984 to 9 339 in 2001.
Judges: MWs, key wine buyers, wine writers and international winemakers. After taste assessment sessions, members of the public may be invited, as associate taster prior to full judge.
Procedure/Awards: Panels comprise mix of disciplines. Round 1 - wines tasted according to origin and variety in small flights; any eliminated, retasted by a super juror. Around 66% eliminated or awarded Seal of Approval. Round 2 - awarding of bronze, silver and gold medals. Super jurors retaste for trophies, awarded, only if the standard is deemed sufficiently high, to various wine styles, also Winemakers of the Year in specific categories. Wines of the Year selected from gold or silver medallists, have to be widely available and affordable.
Pros: Representative of multiple the global vineyard, the scope of styles and prices add to consumer appeal. Limited awards suggests every medal winner worth trying.
Cons: Few top Old World producers enter. The number of entries means some gems, often the subtle European style, slip through the net.
