Tastings and spoofery

[jcskinner]

Wouldn't surprise me, Michael.
But that doesn't necessarily detract from their efficacy as a tasting panel, oddly enough. If their job is to construct and maintain a flavour profile for Powers, a pot still blend, then they could well (or certainly some of them could well) be beyond their comfort zones even in dealing with something like a single malt Scotch.
At Guinness, there were some people couldn't do the stouts and some people couldn't do the lagers. They had perhaps narrow palates that worked well in some areas, but not so well in others.
Similarly, if people are used to working with something like Powers, I wouldn't necessarily expect them to be expert noses for Scotch. Having said that, many of the Guinness panel were from the South African wine industry, so generally the skills of nosing and tasting would be transferable, with only retraining on a particular flavour profile required to move between tasting wine, whiskey or beer.
I wouldn't underestimate peer influence either. That's something taste panels can fall into very easily. It only takes one mouthy influential panellist to say something like 'This tastes like an Islay to me' and others will blindly agree or follow if unsure.
That's why its best to get panellists to taste without external influence (dim lighting, no communication with others, lab conditions etc). Not possible in the sort of educational classes you would have been involved in giving, though.
Glad to hear you sorted them out with an Ardbeg, though!

[brettie vedder]

interesting thread. i am somewhat new to the whiskey world. ive only been drinking it for about 5 years, but i can give some of my own thoughts on this. i find whiskey reviews to be entertaining, but i NEVER take them seriously. i also will NEVER read a review on a whisk(e)y until after i try it myself. after all, its my body thats doing the drinking. i think its neat to taste myself and then compare my tasting notes to the "professional" tasters. i know there are good honest tasters out there, but i also imagine there are plenty of shady ones out there as well. sort of like good cop, bad cop. and i cannot help but think that some of these tasters are being paid off to write up a good review, much like the restaurant industry critics do. lets face it, most people in this world are controlled by money. its a shame, but its the reality. the moral of the story for me is to just enjoy a whiskey on your own and dont worry about what others say about it. i can see how ex tasters could be offended by this, but every person has their own opinion and is entitled to it. im sure nobody was trying to irritate people by posting about this. hell, if someone finds paddy's to be more enjoyable than redbreast 15yo, more power to them, lol

[jcskinner]

Hands up - I've been a restaurant critic too.
I can honestly say that the phenomenon of being paid to write good reviews doesn't happen in this country. Perhaps the likes of New York or London are different matters. But from what I've read, even there (and the former New York Times restaurant reviewer recently published a book on the lengths he went to in order to remain unknown by restauranteurs) the reviewers strive very hard to be honest and loyal primarily to their readers.
Are there some bogey whiskey tasters out there? I couldn't put my hand on my heart and swear there aren't. Certainly, there have been some developments (specifically one where a whiskey blogger got hired as a brand ambassador for a certain Scotch) that disturbed me greatly in terms of the potential trustworthiness of some tasters.
But I'm still not convinced that all (or very nearly all) of the prominent whiskey tasters aren't offering their heartfelt and trained opinions on the whiskeys they taste, unadulterated by commercial or other influences.
I can only concur that everyone ought to be guided primarily by their own palate, and more than that, should seek to develop it and explore it as a sense and as a conduit to sensory experiences.
Most people ignore their palates and noses, and hence have highly undeveloped senses of taste and smell. As whiskey connoisseurs, we are engaging in a substance that bulges with taste, even the most bland blends.
So I would definitely urge everyone to be their own taster, to develop their own noses and palates and use them to be their primary guide in tasting and enjoying whiskey.

[brettie vedder]

the bottom line for me is i dont trust anyone but myself, lol

[IrishWhiskeyChaser]

I certainly believe all the top well know whisky tasters are honest and beyond reproach. Even the likes of Murray who has created whiskies like Knappogue and then rated them in the 90's. Some people find it unacceptable for Murray to rate his own creation so highly ... but that does not logically compute to me. Why would he create something that is .... ok. It is totally obvious that he will create a whiskey that he believes is brilliant and score it accordingly.

However there is always going to be bias no matter how objective a taster tries to be. Human nature dictates that people will have slight favourite and may judge them accordingly. I actually think John Hansel has a positive bias towards Irish Whiskey which is a good thing for promoting Irish whiskey but he very rarely sees faults in any Irish Whiskies. I find this unusual as even I as an Irish Whiskey lover have likes and dislikes.

[brettie vedder]

I certainly believe all the top well know whisky tasters are honest and beyond reproach. Even the likes of Murray who has created whiskies like Knappogue and then rated them in the 90's. Some people find it unacceptable for Murray to rate his own creation so highly ... but that does not logically compute to me. Why would he create something that is .... ok. It is totally obvious that he will create a whiskey that he believes is brilliant and score it accordingly.

However there is always going to be bias no matter how objective a taster tries to be. Human nature dictates that people will have slight favourite and may judge them accordingly. I actually think John Hansel has a positive bias towards Irish Whiskey which is a good thing for promoting Irish whiskey but he very rarely sees faults in any Irish Whiskies. I find this unusual as even I as an Irish Whiskey lover have likes and dislikes.

well said, well said, well said. your the bull, your the bull, your the bull!

[Whiskey Pilgrim]

Kaixo Chicos,
With the "Standard" accepted system of tastings,which is not an exact science i agree its a bit iffy, but the lads & lassies in the perfume bizz have it sussed.And a couple of Scots or Anglo-Scots types have borrowed from the perfume bizz and have put together a "sniff box"behave guys !!a box of sents and aromas which are in whisk(e)y.
Basically one can check at any given time ones nose,wheather its off calibre etc.
So in effect one can now smell musky grass etc and all those strange odor descriptors which are often used and more often than not miss-used ..these lads are on to something here,check it out...slainte