What Good Are Ratings?

[cowdery]

Tom,

You're being unfairly hard on comic books.

[Jono]

Well, in a similar vein, most of us would agree on a broad rating of 7s, 8s, 9s and 10s for looks...be it men or women...and though the exact rating may differ I bet a large % would be within 10 pts. So, there is probably value in identifying the best from the average and bad. Once you find a reviewer with a similar palate the reviews carry more weight. I cannot tell you if a 87 pt whiskey or wine etc. is worse than a 91 pt but I assume both are good.
A 74 pt product should be noticeably worse than a 85+. General agreement is probably valid with some outliers expected.
I only pick up 2-4 flavor notes in most whiskey or wine so the pantry list of notes usually just adds color. I am not saying they don't exist, but most are passing experiences that come and go quickly in the overall taste. I think the mind can create an expectation and the note will be found if searched for in the mix.

[camduncan]

Tom,

You're being unfairly hard on comic books.

Too funny Chuck, too funny!

[Tom Troland]

Chuck,

You caught my bias, I never did like comic books although I always enjoyed Mad Magazine.

Despite my comments about whiskey reviews, I do read them avidly. And I respect the whiskey knowledge of people like John Hansell, Jim Murray, Paul Pacult and yourself (even though you are not primarily in the business of reviewing whiskeys). If a new whiskey release comes out, and it is expensive, I'm more likely to try it if respected reviewers rate it highly. But I don't give much weight to the exact numbers on their scales nor to their words of description unless they are funny.