For example in the spring of 2003, when France had refused to join the US led invasion of Iraq, such was the degree of anti-French sentiment in the United States, that Parker felt it prudent to delay his tasting trip until long after the wines had been released en primeur. (Interestingly, this decision threw the Bordeaux market into a mild state of panic. Knowing that they had what could charitably be described as a “modest” vintage on their hands, and with no Parker scores to guide their pricing, the Bordelais released at remarkably low prices.) However, this year was different — this year we had “Martin scores”.

For anyone wondering what all the fuss is about, herewith a little background. Robert Parker is an American wine critic, and I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that his is probably the best known name in the global wine trade. A former lawyer, Parker first published his now famous newsletter in 1978, Initially called the Baltimore-Washington Wine Advocate, it was renamed in 1979 as the Wine Advocate. In it, Parker not only gave quite detailed tasting notes, but more significantly he scored the wines he tasted out of 100. This 100-point scoring system (since adopted by many other critics) was relatively easy to understand, and gave his readers an instant guide as to a wine’s overall quality, without them necessarily having to read the notes.

Parker’s reputation as a taster and critic was cemented by his early recognition of the 1982 Bordeaux vintage, which he felt was superb. This was in stark contrast to certain other critics, and members of the trade, who initially dismissed the 1982s as being too ripe, and too lacking in structure to ever merit being called a great vintage. Those who followed Parker’s advice and bought long in 1982 have been richly rewarded, as the wines have, for the most part, been sensational. They have also, not unnaturally, become extremely expensive, tradable commodities.

In the 1980s it is universally acknowledged that far too many chateaux were resting on their laurels, and selling wines that were well below par. Parker never pulled his punches, and where he saw mediocrity, particularly as a result of lazy winemaking practices, he was ruthless in his criticism.

A combination of such criticism, coinciding as it did, with increased competition from the New World in Bordeaux’s traditional export markets, has led to a dramatic rise in the overall quality of its wines in the last 25 years.

By the time the 2000 vintage was released in the spring of 2001, Parker’s star was at its zenith. With all the hype of the great millennial vintage, the wine trade and consumers alike were champing at the bit to get their hands on the wines with the highest Parker scores.

In the weeks before his scores Were released, there were unsubstantiated rumours that Parker was particularly fond of Léoville-Barton that year. Demand was huge — we could have sold our allocation five times over such was the waiting list. for this much loved chateau, and when the score was eventually published (a spread, 96 to 99 points out of 100), the opening price of £360 per dozen doubled overnight. And therein lies the rub, A high Parker score no longer just meant adulation and affection from wine lovers; it meant that people could make money out of this en primeur business. From then on many, if not most, of the Bordeaux Crus Classés would not dare release their Wine Without first seeing their Parker score. In the early 2000s, on the given day, Bordeaux négociants and British merchants would sit in their offices in the very early hours of the morning, waiting for the latest Parker scores to be faxed over from the United States.

Unlucky chateau-owuners would release hurriedly at a low price to try and sell their poorly-rated wines before their neighbours woke up. Those
lucky enough to be blessed with a score in the mid-9Qs (or above), could afford to sit back and see how their neighbours’ wine sold, before cashing in at what they felt was a justifiably higher price.

For better or worse, the wine trade, and particularly the part involved in making, selling and buying Bordeaux, would hang on Parker’s every word, Indeed, Berry Bros. & Rudd Fine Wine Buying Director, Max Lalondrelle, is quoted on Parker’s Wikipedia page as saying, “Nobody sells wine like Robert Parker’. Traditional UK merchants, such as ourselves, could still persuade our customers of the benefits of a certain vintage or chateau, in spite of a less-than-perfect score; however, in markets such as the United States or the Far East, where his scores were taken as gospel, if Parker was cool on a particular year (2005 springs to mind) it could drastically affect the success of a vintage in that market.

Robert Parker is a great taster. Whether you agree with the style of wine that he likes is subjective, but it is beyond doubt that he has a rare ability to summarise the quality of a wine and a vintage with uncanny accuracy. This ability means that he is a pied piper for many wine lovers, and it may take his many loyal followers some time to trust their new Bordeaux guru. Neal Martin also has a great palate and has been de facto successor to Parker since he first joined the Wine Advocate in 2006, however, he has a more “European palate” than Parker, and it remains to be seen how his notes and scores will go down with Parker’s readership. Where once Neal was an interesting counterbalance to Parker’s opinion, his is now the only opinion.

And so it was, on the evening of 30th April, just as most of the UK wine trade were considering their commute home, Neal Martin’s appraisal of the 2014 Bordeaux vintage was uploaded to eRobertParker.com. At the same time, Robert Parker’s scores on the recently-bottled 2012 Bordeaux vintage also appeared, Which report to read first?

As a merchant, with very few 2014s on the market thus far, it Would have made sense to go straight to the Parker scores, to see how the 2012s had faired — after all, there may have been some stock available on the market, that could be hoovered up before the wine merchants already on their way home realised they were sitting on some highly-scored (and possibly under-priced) stock. I don’t know if it was out of patriotic loyalty, a natural affinity to back an unknown quantity, or if it was sheer curiosity to see how my notes tallied up alongside his, but I couldn’t wait to read Neal Martin’s report.

I don’t know how many of my colleagues would admit to this, but I’m afraid that after five minutes I had shelved Neal’s incredibly detailed notes (promising myself to go back to them as soon as time permitted) and was attending to the altogether more shallow business of seeing where our 2012s fitted in to the Parker firmament. I had been after a quick guide, a snapshot of what Martin felt about the 2014s. I had also expected to be able to arrange the wines into a straightforward list (yes, probably in order of their score) of all the wines regardless of commune. In short, I was after a Robert Parker style vintage report.

A quick glance at wine forums and message boards today, suggests that “eBob” subscribers are unanimously in favour of Martin’s report. The comments are all positive; the commentators also point out that never before have they seen such comprehensive background analysis on a vintage. There are copious notes on the growing season, the state of the market, the wines themselves and each commune has its own detailed assessment as well — there is a colossal amount of information to absorb: and that’s before you even look at the scores. The reaction to Martin’s 2014 report in the UK trade has been positive too, however, I sense there has already been a shift away from the fervour that might have greeted Parker’s scores in a similar vintage. Ch, Mouton Rothschild and Ch. Lynch Bages both came out before Martin’s scores were posted. The wines were sensibly priced, and we sold out of both at the opening price. I’m not sure it would have made a difference to how well they sold, had they been released a day or two later.

To some extent Martin was setting out his stall for the future, The year 2014 is an interesting vintage and there was a lot to write, but I sense he was really saying, “Lock — this is how | propose to do these en primeur reports. They will be measured, considered and should be taken, at least for now, merely as a guide.” Martin is clearly passionate about Bordeaux, and he wants to give his readers the best, most. considered information he can. He himself says that en primeur reports can be “misleading snapshots” which should only be seen as “the first image slipped into the photo album”. He states plainly that he will be revisiting these wines time and again, and that only in time will we really see how the wines have turned out.

There were some interesting surprises in the 2012 Parker report. It was never a vintage that would move the market, but for a brief few hours, Parker’s top-scoring 2012s became the focus of the Bordeaux trade. There is clearly life in the old dog yet, and as long as he continues to score wines that are “in the bottle”, there will always be a frisson of excitement that goes with the release of those scores, Over time, Martin’s scores might elicit the same degree of excitement, but for now, his report has probably had exactly the effect he hoped for — it can be judged on its own as a well-written, comprehensive assessment of an embryonic vintage. It won’t create a market, but nor will it ruin it.

Find out more on bbr.com/
bourdeaux2014