As sake asserts itself in markets around the world, there are more and more tasting contests that tally up evaluation scores and award medals. This spring, I participated as a judge in three within the span of a month. Each had hundreds and hundreds of entries. There were even more in which I did not participate during the spring, and more I hear about pretty much year-round. Certainly, there are some on the horizon, as other groups and organizations jump on the bandwagon.
Working through the large volume of tastings this spring, I was vividly reminded of the idea that if you look for trouble, you will find it. If you try to find something wrong with the glass of sake in front of you, it will almost magically appear. This typifies the judging in many of these contests, and it is a two-edged sword. Surely, it guarantees that only very good sake get through. But it also dictates that only a small representation of the sake world will receive accolades.
Contests like this–for all beverages, not just sake–are run in one of several different ways. In some, upward of 40 judges will all taste each sake alone, with no interaction or influence from other judges, and assess a score. The final score is an average of them all. In others, a panel will taste and discuss a sake’s merits and flaws, and give a score as a group after discussion. Most contests have two or more rounds to determine medal winners.
I personally think that, at least in sake’s present state, such events are good for sake. They make sake more appealing to consumers by demonstrating that sake is a premium beverage worthy of appraising at this high level. And they do a great job of providing experience to judges around the world who will promote sake even further. Really, there is almost nothing to complain about with these contests. Almost.
Regardless of the method used, judges are basically tasting and smelling a sake to look for faults. “What,” they ask as they sip, “might be wrong with this sake?” Judges usually assess aromas, flavors, balance and overall enjoyability. The faults they try to pinpoint include inconsistencies, lack of balance, and flavors or characteristics that stand out too much. Again, if they look for trouble, rest assured they will find trouble.
In other words, when we judges look for faults, what might normally be perceived as character or uniqueness is all too often unceremoniously thrown into the fault category. The same sake dinged by judges in a contest may often have a legion of core fans, or fare very well when on a table with food, or in particular situations. Sake with just the right amount of quirkiness or idiosyncrasy might be engaging and downright appealing to many. But the chances of it showing well at tasting contests are not high. Even if one judge scores it high, most will not, and it will therefore get overlooked.
Remember, in these contests sake are tasted in rapid succession, with no food, and are expectorated. When is the last time you drank like that? How much could that tell us about how a sake will go with grilled fish, or cheese, or tomato-based sauces, or arugula, or even a hamburger? Sometimes, good sake needs at least a quirk or two.
To be sure, the sake that do well and win medals very much deserve it. They are quite good, and very often the top sake in many of these contests are familiar names: i.e., sake that is already popular in the market. The fact that positive appraisal by many judges matches the reality that they are already popular is somehow reassuring.
But the sake that do well in such events are not by any stretch the only sake worth drinking. There are many good examples of this. Sake with some maturity–wherein the flavor ripens and has more meat on its bones–may be judged as too heavy. Maturity in sake is often hit with the “oxidized” label in contests; even if true, it is not necessarily a fault in sake.
Slight woody essences, too, are not necessarily a fault in sake, but rarely do they get through the gauntlet of contest judges. Grain-like aromas, prominent acidity, borderline cloying umami-infused sweetness and rich, smoky earthiness are not likely to be found in medal-winning sake either. Judges–including myself–rarely let sake with these characteristics through with high scores.
I reiterate that these contests are, all in all, very positive for the sake world. I am in full support of them, and honored when I am invited to participate as a judge. The results are relatively dependable and helpful in many ways. So yes; check them out and look at results.
On top of that, push your own envelope. Step outside your sake comfort zone, and trust your own preferences. If you find a quirky sake–or any sake–appealing, trust that and get to know a whole bottle of it. That will be more educational than anything else you could do. If you look for trouble, you’ll find it. If you look for character and appeal, sake becomes more enjoyable overall.
