I guess even the experts cant agree when it comes to the complicated drink of wine (mostly man-made complications). I wrote recently about my very intoxicating experience at a blind-tasting session. Thing is, u arent supposed to get intoxicated at a tasting.

A researcher has found that wine judges cant really tell what they’re tasting. There’re inconsistencies in their judging, although they’re sober. There’s a short article on this on Drinks International.

It's confirmed - paperwork & booze cant mix

Quote: “Robert Hodgson created a stir earlier this year when he claimed that individual judges in the California State Fair Wine Competition often rated the same wine differently.” (Blind-tastings.)

I think when they say shite like “exhibits extraordinary purity, and beautiful sweet blackberry and cassis notes along with hints of graphite, camphor, and a subtle, but intense meaty character”, then they’re probably talking cock. They might as well swallow d goddam wine rather than spit during tastings. Fuckin wastage. They are people starving around d world man.

At least then they’ll get drunk. And instead of rapping about aromas of red ink and goddam goat leather, they’d say, “O yeaaaaaaaa, i liiiike this one. Hit me again! *Buuurp!* It’s a ffff-fff-fuckinggggg good wine!”

Easy enough to understand.

The manner in which the judge says “fucking” determines the level of the wine’s quality.

Well, I guess u just need to sound cool (superb tips here), and u can pass off as a pro!