FIVE INEXPENSIVE POURS WORTH TRYING
In the spirit of good value try some of these sub-$9 bottles the LCBO has to offer
As a wine critic, it’s very easy to lose sight of the price of a bottle of wine. Why? Because I don’t have to pay for the wines I taste. They’re offered as samples. It costs me nothing to taste, say, 25 of bottles of wine at a go that range from $10 to $100 or more — something I do on the regular. This is part of the job.
But price matters. After all, is it fair to judge an entry-level wine by the same yardstick as one of such fine craftsmanship, provenance and all the rest that it sells for a stratospher- ic amount? Is Barefoot Merlot, which sells for $10.95, even the same animal as Petrus from Pomerol, Bordeaux that sells for thousands of dollars a pop and is also a Merlot?
Some would say, yes; the argument goes, scoring must be absolute. But I disagree; I think apples-to-apples is a more fair approach. Otherwise it’s far too easy to overlook simpler, more inexpensive wines altogether.
So yes, I score bottles to reflect value for money relative to comparable wines. That means a $10 bottle is scored to reflect how clean, complex, concentrated and balanced it is relative to others at that price. Then I qualify the score with a tasting note and bits of information I think matter, within my allotted word count. In June last year, I wrote a column here that clarified exactly how I arrive at a score — to help readers understand the process.