A 96-point score puts a wine in rare company: the small slice of what a critic tastes in a year that they judge genuinely exceptional, not merely very good. It is a useful filter, not a guarantee that you will love what is in the glass.
What the number measures
Most scoring descends from Robert Parker's 100-point scale at the Wine Advocate, awarding points for balance, concentration, typicity and length. James Suckling, Antonio Galloni at Vinous and the Decanter panel all use something similar, but each number reflects one taster's or one panel's judgement against a wine's peers, tasted at a particular moment. It says nothing about whether you will prefer it to a wine scored four points lower.
Why scores diverge
The same wine can pick up a 94 from one critic and a 98 from another. Some favour ripeness and power, others structure and restraint, and a wine tasted young from barrel can score differently once bottled. None of this makes a score wrong, only partial.
Using a score well
Treat 96+ as a shortlist, not a verdict. From there, weigh the producer's track record, the vintage's character in that region, and whether the style suits what you actually like to drink. A Bordeaux or Burgundy at this level is usually built to age, so check the drinking window too. Our sommelier recommendations are a useful counterweight, since they come from tasters who know your taste, not just the wine.
FAQ
Does 96 points mean this is one of the best wines in the world?
It means a critic rated it highly against its peers in that tasting: a strong signal, not an absolute ranking, and no verdict on your own taste.
Why do critics disagree on the same wine?
Palate, method and timing all differ, and a single taster's score reflects personal style more than a panel's average does.
Should I buy on score alone?
No. Use it to narrow a large field, then weigh producer, vintage and style. A lower-scoring wine that matches your taste always drinks better than a higher-scoring one that does not.