Malt Maniacs Awards 2009
Geplaatst: 01 Jan 2010, 15:25
Het is er al weer even de Malt Maniacs Awards 2009.
Belangrijk om in gedachten te houden zijn wel de relativerende aantekeningen. Onder anderen:
Why Don't We Show the Scores Below 80 Points?
Why don't we mention the lower scoring whiskies in the Malt Maniacs Awards?
One reason is that we have 11 judges and it really takes only one bad score to kill a whisky's chance of getting a gold medal. Similarly it is difficult to get a bronze medal if even one judge strongly disagrees. We have different palates and have different preferences, so a whisky has to give a VERY strong performance to get any medal at all. This means a lot of really good whiskies just don't earn a medal. Wouldn't it be a shame if this meant some people chose never to taste them? Our process screens out all but the strongest of the strong so we could really do a disservice to our readers if we gave the impression that some fine whiskies somehow just aren't that fine.
Belangrijk om in gedachten te houden zijn wel de relativerende aantekeningen. Onder anderen:
Why Don't We Show the Scores Below 80 Points?
Why don't we mention the lower scoring whiskies in the Malt Maniacs Awards?
One reason is that we have 11 judges and it really takes only one bad score to kill a whisky's chance of getting a gold medal. Similarly it is difficult to get a bronze medal if even one judge strongly disagrees. We have different palates and have different preferences, so a whisky has to give a VERY strong performance to get any medal at all. This means a lot of really good whiskies just don't earn a medal. Wouldn't it be a shame if this meant some people chose never to taste them? Our process screens out all but the strongest of the strong so we could really do a disservice to our readers if we gave the impression that some fine whiskies somehow just aren't that fine.
