Blind Wine Tasting: History, Science and How to Do It

Wine Science

Have you ever wondered if you could tell the difference between a $10 bottle and a $100 bottle without seeing the label? This is the central question behind blind wine tasting, a practice that seeks to strip away our biases to reveal the truth in the glass. At its core, blind wine tasting is the evaluation of wine without knowing its identity.[1] The goal is to judge a wine on its own merits, its appearance, aroma and taste, free from the influence of a fancy label, a high price tag, or a famous producer’s reputation.[1]

It raises an awkward question: how do you judge something so personal by objective rules? This guide covers where blind tasting came from, the Judgment of Paris, how professionals do it, what it does to your brain, and where it falls short.

Put Your Palate to the Test at SAWOL

Reading about blind tasting is one thing, doing it is another. The South Australian Wine Options League (SAWOL) is our monthly blind tasting championship at Septimus, where five wines are served completely blind and you score points for guessing the grape, region and vintage. It is the most enjoyable way to train every skill in this guide.

Join the next SAWOL round

Before blind tasting

Structured blind tasting is modern, but it grew out of centuries of changing attitudes to wine.

In the ancient world, wine was a centrepiece of social and religious life, not an object of critical study.[2] For Greeks and Romans, wine was shared from large vessels in communal celebrations filled with music and dance.[2] While early texts might differentiate wines by region, evaluation was based on simple preference, not a standardised system.[2, 3] This tradition of wine as a symbol of unity and status continued for centuries, but the formal act of comparative tasting was yet to be born.[2]

That changed in the Renaissance. As European commerce boomed, wine appreciation became a mark of sophistication among the wealthy.[2] The word “tasting” (dégustation) first appeared in writing in 1519, and the elite began hosting gatherings to critique their collections as well as drink them.[2, 3] This shift intensified during the Enlightenment, as the principles of reason and science were applied to the study of wine.[2] Thinkers like Carl Linnaeus helped create a more systematic understanding of the senses, and a more precise language for describing wine emerged.[3]

Technology helped too: the widespread adoption of glass bottles and reliable corks in the 18th century.[4] Before this, wine was unstable, stored in barrels and prone to spoilage.[5] The bottle and cork created a consistent, age-worthy unit. This innovation gave birth to the concepts of “vintage” and “typicity,” making it possible to collect, cellar and compare specific wines over time, which blind tasting depends on.[4, 6]

Why tasters went blind: competitions and fraud

Two things pushed tasters to go blind: fair competition and fraud.

Blind judging is older than you might think. The first recorded wine competition, “La Bataille des Vins” (The Battle of the Wines), was held by French King Philip Augustus in 1224. A priest judged 70 European wines, tasted blind to guarantee an honest verdict.[7] While later classification systems, like the famous Bordeaux Classification of 1855, were based on reputation and price, the precedent for impartial, competitive tasting was set.[8] Competitions created hierarchies of prestige, which in turn created the biases blind tasting now exists to remove.[8, 9]

Fraud was the bigger driver. For centuries, the adulteration and counterfeiting of wine were rampant.[10, 11] Pliny the Elder complained that even Roman nobles couldn’t be sure their wine was genuine.[10] In the Middle Ages, merchants were punished severely for selling “corrupt wine”.[10] The problem exploded in the 18th and 19th centuries, especially after the phylloxera epidemic destroyed Europe’s vineyards, making authentic wine a rarity.[10] Fraudulent practices included everything from using apples to make fake Champagne to adding gypsum and even beef blood to alter a wine’s character.[10, 11, 12]

Blind tasting became a commercial necessity. When a label couldn’t be trusted, the only reliable evidence was the liquid itself. Merchants tasted blind to judge the wine rather than the label.[13]

The 1976 Judgment of Paris

On 24 May 1976, a blind tasting in a Paris hotel upended the wine world.

At the time, French wine was seen as the best in the world.[14, 15] Wines from the “New World,” like California, were considered pleasant but inferior.[14] The event was organised by Steven Spurrier, a British wine merchant who, intrigued by the rising quality of California wines, decided to pit them against France’s best in a blind tasting to mark the American Bicentennial.[14, 16]

The judging panel was nine leading French wine experts.[14, 17] They tasted two flights of wine, Chardonnays and Cabernet Sauvignon-based reds, without knowing their origin.[14, 18] The judges guessed confidently, attributing complexity to France and simple power to California.[15]

Then the scores came in. A California wine had won in both categories. The 1973 Chateau Montelena Chardonnay and the 1973 Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars Cabernet Sauvignon had beaten some of the most legendary names in Burgundy and Bordeaux.[14, 19] The French judges were in disbelief, with some demanding their scorecards back.[14, 16]

The Judgment of Paris ended the idea of French supremacy, validated California as a world-class wine region, and inspired winemakers globally.[1, 14, 15] Fine wine could come from anywhere. Critics said the California wines would not age. At a re-tasting 30 years later, a California red came first again.[18]

How professionals taste blind

Professionals taste blind in a set way. Different formats serve different purposes.[20, 21, 22]

• Vertical Tasting: Compares different vintages of the same wine from the same producer to see how weather affects a single terroir over time.[6, 20]
• Horizontal Tasting: Compares wines from the same vintage and region but from different producers to highlight stylistic differences.[6, 21]
• Single-Blind Tasting: Tasters know the grape or region but not the producer, which is ideal for judging how well a wine represents its “type”.[23, 24]
• Double-Blind Tasting: Tasters are given no information at all, a pure test of deductive skill.[23, 24]

The best-known method is the Deductive Tasting Method, championed by the Court of Master Sommeliers (CMS).[25, 26] It is a process of elimination, not a guessing game.[27, 28] Professionals use the Deductive Tasting Grid, a detailed checklist that guides them through four stages of analysis: Sight, Nose, Palate, and Conclusion.[29, 30]

1. Sight: Colour, clarity, and viscosity (“legs”) offer initial clues about age, grape, and alcohol level.[31, 32]
2. Nose: Aromas are categorised as primary (from the grape), secondary (from winemaking), and tertiary (from ageing), revealing hints about the grape, fermentation process, and oak influence.[32, 33]
3. Palate: This stage confirms the aromas and, most importantly, assesses the wine’s structure, sweetness, acidity, tannin, alcohol, and body.[31, 32, 34]
4. Conclusion: The taster synthesises all the evidence to deduce the wine’s origin, climate, grape, and vintage.[31, 33]

The WSET Systematic Approach to Tasting (SAT)

The Wine & Spirit Education Trust (WSET) is the other big name in wine education. WSET employs its own structured methodology, the Systematic Approach to Tasting (SAT), which is designed to help tasters evaluate and describe wines accurately and consistently.[35] While both CMS and WSET use blind tasting, their core objectives differ.

The WSET SAT is broken down into three primary components: Appearance, Nose, and Palate, followed by a final conclusion focused on quality.[35]

• Appearance: Tasters assess the wine’s clarity, intensity (pale to deep), and colour, which can provide clues about the grape, age, and winemaking style.[35]
• Nose: The evaluation begins by checking the wine’s condition for any faults. Tasters then assess the aroma intensity (light to pronounced) and identify specific aroma characteristics, categorising them as primary (fruity, floral, herbal), secondary (from winemaking, like oak or yeast), or tertiary (from ageing, like leather or mushroom).[35, 36]
• Palate: This stage confirms the aromas and assesses the wine’s structural components: sweetness, acidity, tannin, alcohol, and body. The interplay of these elements helps determine the wine’s balance and mouthfeel. The taster also evaluates the flavour intensity and the length of the finish.[35, 36]
• Conclusion: The final step in the WSET SAT is a quality assessment. Based on the balance, length, intensity, and complexity of the wine, the taster assigns a quality level: poor, acceptable, good, very good, or outstanding.[35]

Comparing Methodologies: CMS vs. WSET

The two systems want different things. The CMS Deductive Tasting Method is primarily focused on identification. It trains sommeliers to use sensory clues to deduce a wine’s grape, region, and vintage, a skill essential for restaurant service and inventory management.[37] In contrast, the WSET Systematic Approach to Tasting is focused on evaluation. Its goal is to train professionals to accurately describe a wine’s characteristics and make a defensible judgment about its quality, a skill vital for roles in wine retail, distribution, and education.[37, 38]

The Science of Blind Wine Tasting: What Happens in Your Brain

Blind tasting works because our brains are easily fooled. What we expect to taste shapes what we taste. Blind tasting is designed to cut that out.[1, 39]

• Colour Bias: In one well-known study, oenology students were given two glasses of the same white wine, but one was coloured with a flavourless red dye. The students described the dyed wine using classic red wine terms, their palates completely overridden by the visual cue of the colour.[3, 40, 41]
• Price Bias: We consistently rate wine more favourably when we’re told it’s expensive. Neuroimaging studies show that the pleasure centres in our brain actually become more active when we believe we are drinking a high-priced wine, so the wine really does feel better.[3, 42]
• Reputation Bias: The “halo effect” of a famous producer or region predisposes us to a positive review, a bias that blind tasting eliminates.[1, 43]

Flavour itself is a complex synthesis created by the brain, combining taste, texture and, most importantly, aroma.[44] The olfactory bulb, which processes smell, is directly linked to the parts of the brain that control emotion and memory.[44] This is why a certain smell can trigger a powerful memory. Taking away the label pushes the brain from that automatic, emotional mode into a slower, analytical one. Done often, it trains you to pay attention.[1, 45]

Professional Blind Wine Tasting: Competitions and Certifications

For professionals, blind tasting is the hardest test. It is the most challenging part of exams for prestigious certifications from bodies like the Court of Master Sommeliers and the Master of Wine institute.[23, 25] Passing takes knowledge as well as a good palate.[25, 46]

Major wine competitions are judged blind.[1, 9] The credibility of awards from events like the Decanter World Wine Awards depends on impartiality. By hiding the wines’ identities, competitions level the playing field, allowing a small, unknown producer to be judged on equal footing with an established icon.[9, 13, 47] A medal from a blind tasting is a strong marketing tool, signalling quality to consumers and helping new producers break into a crowded market.[13]

You do not need to be a professional to take part. In Adelaide, the South Australian Wine Options League (SAWOL) brings competitive blind tasting to enthusiasts every month at Septimus, with five wines poured blind and prizes for the sharpest palates.

Many influential critics and publications, such as Wine Enthusiast, also conduct their rated tastings blind to ensure the integrity of their reviews.[43, 48] This allows them to discover high-quality, value-driven wines and hold famous estates accountable when a vintage falls short of its reputation.[47]

Quality Control in State-Run Markets

Where governments control liquor sales, blind tasting is used for quality control. State-run or provincially-run monopolies, such as the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB), the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO), and Quebec’s Société des alcools du Québec (SAQ), decide what reaches the shelf.[49, 50]

The LCBO, for example, has a Quality Assurance department that performs both chemical analysis and sensory evaluation on products to ensure they are safe, authentic, and compliant with regulations.[51, 52] A key part of this is the Vintners Quality Alliance (VQA) Ontario system. For a wine to bear the VQA seal, it must pass a blind sensory evaluation by a trained panel. This tasting is not to award medals, but to screen out faulty wines and confirm they meet the minimum quality standards for their category, ensuring they fulfil consumer expectations based on the label.[53]

These organisations also use tastings to engage with the public. The LCBO and the PLCB’s “Fine Wine & Good Spirits” stores host in-store tasting events where vendors can introduce their products directly to consumers.[54, 55] While these are often promotional, some are structured as educational blind tastings, allowing customers to evaluate wines without preconceived notions and discover new preferences based purely on taste.[56]

The limits of blind wine tasting

Blind tasting has its critics. The first problem is reliability. Scientific studies, most notably by Robert Hodgson at the California State Fair wine competition, found that expert judges are inconsistent. In his experiments, the same wine presented to the same judge multiple times could receive wildly different scores, swinging from a gold medal to a mediocre rating in a matter of minutes. Only about 10% of judges were consistently able to score the same wine similarly.[57, 58] This suggests that competition results may have a significant element of random chance.[57]

The deeper criticism is philosophical. By stripping a wine of its identity, blind tasting also removes the context needed for a true aesthetic evaluation.[59, 60] A wine is more than sensory data; it’s an artefact with a story. You can’t judge if a wine is a “typical” example of its region if you don’t know the region.[47, 61] You can’t assess a winemaker’s style without knowing the winemaker.[59, 61] And you can’t judge a wine’s value for money without knowing its price.[47, 60]

Blind tasting is fair. Sighted tasting gives context. You need both.

From Hollywood to TikTok: Blind Tasting’s Cultural Impact

Film and TV have made blind tasting famous. The 2013 documentary Somm portrayed the Master Sommelier exam as a high-stakes, dramatic feat of sensory genius.[40, 62] The 2008 film Bottle Shock brought the Judgment of Paris to a mass audience, though it took some artistic liberties with the facts.[1, 63, 64] More recently, the 2022 documentary Blind Ambition followed four Zimbabwean refugees who formed their country’s first-ever team for the World Wine Tasting Championships, framing the practice as a vehicle for personal triumph.[65]

Today, blind tasting has found a new home on social media. A new generation of sommeliers and influencers post short, casual blind tasting videos on TikTok and Instagram, turning it into a game.[62] On these platforms, the goal isn’t always to be right. In fact, creators find that videos where they guess incorrectly often generate more engagement, as their vulnerability makes the wine world feel less intimidating.[62]

It makes wine less intimidating. For producers, blind competitions level the playing field.[13, 47] For consumers, the practice empowers them to trust their own palates, free from the influence of price and marketing.[66] It encourages curiosity and gets people to focus on what’s in their glass, and builds confidence.[62]

What blind tasting is good for

Blind tasting is neither a perfect measure of quality nor a parlour trick.

As training, nothing beats it, sharpening the senses and building a rigorous, analytical framework for evaluation.[25, 67] In competitions, it remains the only credible way to ensure fairness.[9] It has also challenged wine’s hierarchies.[14, 47]

Yet, it is a flawed instrument. It can be unreliable, and its focus on objectivity can come at the cost of a deeper, more contextual appreciation for wine as a product of place, time, and human intent.[57, 59, 60]

It will not give you a final answer. It will make you honest about what is in the glass.

Ready to test your own palate? Join us for the next round of SAWOL at our wine bar in Adelaide’s East End, and see what you can taste with the label hidden.