I would appreciate opinions on comparing the AWS 20 point scoring system with popular 100 point systems. I found that each publication has different meanings for scores in their 100 point scale. A 90 in one system is a silver, in another a gold. It is truly arbitrary. Wine Spectator tasters review wines on the following 100-point scale: · 95-100 Classic: a great wine · 90-94 Outstanding: a wine of superior character and style · 85-89 Very good: a wine with special qualities · 80-84 Good: a solid, well-made wine · 75-79 Mediocre: a drinkable wine that may have minor flaws · 50-74 Not recommended A possible correlation from aws 20 point scale to 100. This gives AWS silver medals 90 – 93 points and golds > 94. Your thoughts? 20 = 100 19.5 = 99 19 = 98 18 .5 = 97 18 = 96 17.5 = 95 17 = 94 16.5 = 93 16 = 92 15.5 = 91 15 = 90 14.5 = 89 14 = 88 13.5 = 87 13 = 86 12.5 = 85 12 = 84 11.5 = 83 11 = 82 10.5 = 81 10 = 80 <10 = who cares?
I typically correlate the AWS with the WS/WA ratings the following way: 100 = 20 97 = 19.5 95 = 19 93 = 18.5 90 = 18 87 = 17.5 85 = 17 87 = 16.5 80 = 16 ...............and so on. I just interpolate from my score, based on 20 point scale to the 100 point scale. Hope this helps.