skwid: Great. But...

How can 1 be a "great" Programmer, Lawyer, Doctor, Accountant, Scientist, Researcher, Chef, etc..., etc..., etc...., w/o a College Degree/Education?

Why would I, then, take his words/recommendations over Jones, ojeffso, & etc... Why, because he publishes a magazine? Why, because he has a "name" now? Why, because everyone else does?

...My answer to that in NO.

If/when I come for an Interview, the 1st thing they ask me (even after 10 years of experience)--- "got a college degree???" Hmmmmm...Formal Training?!?!?

...Just making a point folks. Programmer, Wine Critic, Wine Maker, Account, Etc... (show me the background training)...

LCC,

It is not just the value of the degree/certification, it is also the value of the institution granting it. A bachelors degree in computer science from Lower Podunk Community College does not rate the same level of respect/salary as one from MIT. And so it goes with wine.

That is, there does exist a method for proving one's expertise at wine discernment, as well as the ability to write about/describe those observations. It is called the Master of Wine certification, and it is exceedingly rare and exceedingly difficult to obtain. People the likes of Jancis Robinson and Michael Broadbent are holders of the MW.

Think about it, how many people on this or any other fora, or for that matter, any Wine Spectator writers, do you know could obtain this certification based upon their experience? It has been said that although Parker could probably pass the test with ease, he would never attempt it for should he fail it on his first attempt, it would be the kiss of death to his business. Probably same could be said about WS writers.

MW is hardly a guarantee of a taster's acumen.

Didn't someone compare the MW to a meterologist title? Of course the MW does take a lot of work and one has to learn a lot about wine. But it seems to be very British in it structure and there is more emphasis on having a lot of knowledge about all the different types of wines than evaluating the quality of wine. It appears that one has to be able to distinguish the different aspect of wine, including discerning aroma and taste, but it is like teaching people how to paint using proper techniques. Almost everyone can be taught to paint, but only the truly talented can create great works of art.

In short, I agree with you Jones.

"MW is hardly a guarantee of a taster's acumen."

Any more than any degree is a guarantor of mastery of anything. It is an indicator however, of a person's education on a subject to the point where the teaching institution can confidently issue a certification of meeting a level of standards.

Does obtaining a medical degree guarantee that the individual is a great doctor? No. Would I go to someone for health advice who had not obtained an MD? Hardly.

Does obtaining a law degree insure that the individual is a great attorney? No. Would I retain representation in court by someone without a JD and admission to the bar? Not likely.

And likewise with matters artistic. Do I value the viewpoint of an art critic with a PhD in Art History over someone who simply "knows what they like" in art? Yes.

Would I value the opinion of someone with an MW over someone who simply "knows what they like" in wine? Absolutely.

The secondary market disagrees with you. The WA and the WS move markets much more than Decanter (a periodical rife with MW holding "proven experts") and no one at either WA or WS have MW designations. So few MWs have been granted that the designation, just like the Certified Master Chef designation, have little credibility in the marketplace. Few care if the chef at the restaurant they want to have dinner at is a CMC or even went to cooking school ("Thomas Keller are you a CMC? No, well I guess I don't need to have dinner at the French Laundry after all. What designations do you hold Mr. Trotter? None? Well I guess I don't need to eat at Charlie Trotters either. What about you Alice?") just like few care whether Parker has a MW or not (or for that matter whether Helen Turley, Heidi Barrett, Michel Rolland, or Aubert De Villiane ("Wow I guess those people don't know anything about wine either and at a minimum not nearly as much as as any MW one can find for example Rosemary George.") do either).

Comparing an MW to a JD or an MD is simply not an apt comparison. Hundreds of years and multiple institutions took part and stand behind the development of the MD and JD degrees. One insitution that has granted less than 1000 designations in its entire existence stands behind the MW.

L_C_C

I had some great programmers on my staff, that did not have a college background, but had great experince, and took a few seminars. Had a few college grads that I couldn't wait to terminate, as they had no practical experience. The programs were more elaborate than required.

Some of the worlds graetest scientests, artists, never had college either.

Our society has become too oriented to 'education' not skill. Thus those with a great "taste" of food and wine maybe able to ellict proper form. As Jones said, implied, just cause you passed a few courses, you may bot have the proper skills.

Yes. BUT, they are few & far between---in any profession.

I met very few programmers that are GOOD programmers (or any other profession) that did NOT have a College Degree. That degree does Not tell all, but tells A LOT.

I would NOT go to a doctor w/o a degree or a lawyer or any professional person.

BUT, Jones is correct. The ONLY way Parker & these "so-called" Experts matter is in the Secondary Market. WHY, because they carry a "name" now. And, most people follow "names" & "rating" blindly. Most, but Not All. So, if a person is concerned about making $$$ on these Wine (go for the names/ratings). If NOT, these "so-called" Experts & Rating are (a lot of times) B.S.

Case/Point: WS rated '99 Silverado Cab a 91. I tasted it @ Silverado, it is barely drinkable. I would rate is an 84 @ most. I am being very generous. And, they rated '97 Arrowood a 90. Hmmmmm, a 90. That is a "WOW" Wine (all the way).

I can go on & on where I disagree with these "Experts", & sometimes agreed. But, now knowing/learning what I learned, I can see why...

dr. x-man: Perhaps I should re-examine you earlier statements.

...But, may be, I am being too hard on these guys. They do deserve some credit. Will their Ratings (alone) make me buy 1 bottle of Wine. It NEVER did, it NEVER will. Just my opinion/approach to this. And, even w/o ever following their Rating, I have some of the highest rated/best Wines.

For me, I will continue on my path (buying via friends/forum member recommendations). It works for me. But, learning what I learned in this Thread. It just reassures me that I was on the correct path (in the 1st place).

FYI (just a point): A friend that has a "pretty big" Cellar (that contains all, if not most, of the highly rated & not so highly rated Wines), almost never bought a Bottle solely on Ratings alone.

The role of the secondary market has no relevance to the point I am making. And I am not alluding to the education/certifications of the artist/chef/winemaker/programmer who actually *creates* the work in question. I am referring to the person who critiques such work.

Which is, that someone who has demonstrated the study of a body of knowledge to point of obtaining a recognized certification/degree has more credibilty to critique that field than someone who has demonstrated little or nothing.

Do I value the critique of a new building by a Professor of Architecture over that of a construction contractor? Yes.

Do I value the critique of a new novel by a PhD in English Literature over that of someone who listens to Books On Tape during the daily commute? Yes.

Do I value the critique of a new Subwoofer system by someone with an advanced degree in Audio Engineering over someone who just listens to a lot of music at home? Yes.

Do I value the critique of a newly-released Bordeaux by a Master of Wine over someone who simply has wine with dinner every night? Yes.

In all the cases above, it is not just that I value the expertise demonstrated by the advanced amount of subject study, but in the overwhelming majority of cases, it is the ability of the expert to *convey and describe* the underlying fundamentals of their critique regarding the flaws and successes of the work in question.

I take no formal position in this discussion because I don't have enough experience in dealing with a person who has obtained a MW to speak from experience. I would like to say that the ability to move secondary markets does not make some one right or an expert. Stock analysts move markets all the time with bogus ratings that do little except fill their own deep pockets. Uninformed people move secondary markets by buying on the same information that the informed seller had in advance.

If in fact MW can identify wines grape place and reasonable age based oon a few sips then they must have a reasonable sense for the quality of a wine. But again I am not familiar with the test and the specifics of obtaining the degree.

TCK

The MW is a funny "degree" (cause it's not a degree at all). Its a title bestowed after people have passed a certain degree of wine knowledge through practical and theoretical knowledge. I've got four friends who have MW's and three and myself who are studying for the title. Interestingly the man who hasn't passed it has the most general knowledge of all of us. He was failed based on spelling and grammar structure (so you can see I've got a long way to go) not because of Wine knowledge.

It is very "English" in the sense of the Old Boy community. It is however one of the hardest acheivements to get in the world of wine (over 90% fail in their first three attempts).

Also of interest it isn't a formal qualification ie not recognised formally by Qualification Boards or University's although in practise I believe it is highly regarded and respected (and with good reason)

Having an MW doesn't gaurantee you a person with a great ability to convey score or otherwise but I can gaurantee you they have damn good palates. The practical breaks down like so-
-Identify Varietal (% of mark)
-Identify region (% of mark)
-Identify vintage (% of mark)
-identify producer (% of mark)

To pass your practical you need to score 85 or above as an average of all the wines. Your practical has ten wine to twenty wines. They often use obscure or not well known regions to truely test the ability of the applicants.

This is followed by a dissetation(sp? see I'm in real trouble) which must be on a an aspect of wine culture.

The final exam is based on one three hour test in which a person has to identify several wines placed before them and then write an long long essay(over 1500 words) on any aspect of wine choosen by the examiner. Imagine getting some obscure varietal of Croatia or the like as your essay question.

This doesn't outline the full level of commitment one must make. From NZ I have to travel to Australia at least three times a year, and twice to the UK within three years., for practical assessements and effectively chemistry exams. At the moment I'm working on the Practical side before I even commence with actually signing myself on for going for the MW.

As for a "formal" training for a wine taster I think only opening one up to a level of expirience is necesary. Being a wine taster doesn't require a degree like chemistry or engineering or medicine because it is a subjective (as Jones so wisely wrote) topic not an analytical one.

Jeremy,

An absolutely excellent dissertation on the range, scope, and trials of obtaining the coveted MW certification.

Of course, you would agree that those who have demonstrated a lack of respect for this designation are flippant because they feel their palates are far superior to those who have done the hard work to obtain this certification, and that they each would certainly easily pass it brilliantly on their first attempt.

Crisesmode, in general, a designation that requires some knowledge and skills does mean something. The degree the requirement tests the key knowledge and skills generally determines how useful that designation is in determining how capable the person is in what you want to know. I'm glad that Jeremy explained some of the requirements of a MW here. This was also explained to some degree in the Parker BB. The conclusion of the Parkerites is that is it a difficult designation to attain, and they respect the people who have received it. But, the majority did not believe that a knowledgeable group of wine lovers with a MW was any more knowledgeable than a knowledgeable group of wine lovers without.

I think others said it better, but I think the best thing to do is to listen to the people that you have calibrated your own tastes to. You may not always agree with them on all wines, but IMO it is a better guide than blindly following an opinion just because someone published his/her opinion in a glitzy magazine or has a designation like a MW. In the WS Forum, there were people that I followed very closely and there were a lot that I just simply ignored.

This has been an interesting philisophical discussion. In real life, when something is truly important, it tests one's beliefs in their philosophies.

Opinions that move markets is real life. It is not always a good indicator of the value of the opinions, but when someone puts their own money down, it does say something. Last week a business partner told me that her sister has breast cancer. Part of our business is related to the early detection of cancers and we have people that know a lot of about this subject. I have high respect for the medical profession. But one of the biggest disappointments in my life is seeing the reluctance of Western Medicine to learn from Eastern Medicine and other alternative methods. When someone close to you faces a life threatening situation, it will test your values. Do you rely totally on Western Medicine (which is excellent for trauma, but cannot cure a simple cold)? Do you rely on Eastern Medicine? How about wholistic healers? In my personal experience, the only people who have been able to cure my asthma (I can't even spell it) despite dozens of trips to medical doctors, has been an accupuncturist (immediate temporary relief) and a chiropractor (permanent relief). When I had a serious condition, the only person who cured me was a wholistic healer. Yes, I know that many, if not most, are either fakes or not effective. But the people with the right degrees could not help me.

When I think back, the most important lesson I learned in college was to question the validity of any authority or position. When you do that, you find that respect is much more important than authority or position.

Very well stated, GATC. As an aside, I have always been skeptical of alternative medical treatments in the past. I have terrible allergies, (cats, dogs, mold, pollen, grass, etc.) and was suffering during a visit to my brother in LA. His friend, Todd, is a chiropractor. We were returning form a day of golf and I was sneezing relentlessly. He gave me an adjustment when we got out of the car, (kinda scary if you've never had it done to you) and within 2 minutes my sinuses were clear, sneezing ceased and I was breathing normally. I now am a believer.

As far as the Master of Wine designation, it is something special. That being said, it isn't the end all of wine appreciation or wine judgement. This coming from someone about to embark on the introductory classes of the MW program. I begin WSET Advanced Course in Jan (and will be reporting on it in a series of articles for VinoCellar). I know that Jones has regard for the program as he has expressed here that he would one day consider trying to obtain the distinction. There are other very valid viewpoints regardless of distinction. Find the one that matches yours and run with it.

jb

JB,
Well said.
How can the desire for knowledge be a bad thing?
The desire to study an area of your life that has become such a joy is like a wish come true.
Enjoy wherever it takes you, no matter how far.. or not.
Seems to me we could have some fun with you and TCK, who appear to be the two 'most-willing-to-study-and-learn' members of this forum.
I hope to be one of the ones lucky enough to 'sponge' off what you learn and share.
Go for it!

Bump... This is the thread that Short is talking about. Took place early in VinoCellar's birth. Very interesting conversations...

Wow.
This is some very good discussion.
I particularlly liked the excerpt of R. Parker's and his explanation of his rating system. I personally think that to equate the numbes assigned to the grades we all received during school days is excellant and makes perfect sense to me.
That is why dropping off at an "85" makes no sense. An "85" is a solid B. That, while it may not put you on the honors list, is a passing, and is a respectable grade. To not give a rating is basically shirking duty and being a bit lazy IMHO.
A "C" is an average grade and thus a "75" might denote an average wine.

I'll pour over this thread again, and congrats to all the posters on this one. Good for you.

Worthy of a bump up from the Vinocellar Vaults...

Many more recent folks may not have dug deep into the Vinocellar Vaults to see this quite extensive discussion.

Any new comments?