Judgment of Paris (wine)

By the early 1970s, the quality of some California wines was outstanding but few took notice as the market favored French brands.

An overall ranking of the wines preferred by the jury was also established in averaging the sum of each judge's individual grades (arithmetic mean).

Ranking lower were Meursault Charmes Roulot 1973, Beaune Clos des Mouches Joseph Drouhin 1973, and Batard-Montrachet Ramonet-Prudhon 1973.

Rank Wine A 30th anniversary re-tasting on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean was organized by Steven Spurrier in 2006.

As The Times reported "Despite the French tasters, many of whom had taken part in the original tasting, 'expecting the downfall' of the American vineyards, they had to admit that the harmony of the Californian cabernets had beaten them again.

[12] The pearl anniversary was held simultaneously at the museum Copia in Napa, California, and in London at Berry Bros. & Rudd, Britain's oldest wine merchant.

[11] The panel of nine wine experts at Copia consisted of Dan Berger, Anthony Dias Blue, Stephen Brook, Wilfred Jaeger, Peter Marks MW, Paul Roberts MS, Andrea Immer Robinson MS, Jean-Michel Valette MW and Christian Vanneque, one of the original judges from the 1976 tasting.

[12] The results showed that additional panels of experts again preferred the California wines over their French competitors.

Another official French authority, the Office national interprofessionnel des vins (Onivins), rates the 1971 vintage as "excellent".

[13] The horrified and enraged leaders of the French wine industry then banned Spurrier from the nation's prestigious wine-tasting tour for a year, apparently as punishment for the damage his tasting had done to its former image of superiority.

"[14] The New York Times reported that several earlier tastings had occurred in the U.S., with American chardonnays judged ahead of their French rivals.

[3] It also "gave the French a valuable incentive to review traditions that were sometimes more accumulations of habit and expediency, and to reexamine convictions that were little more than myths taken on trust.