Why Some Wine Drinkers Trust The Wine Advocate Over James Suckling

In the modern wine world, two names tend to dominate conversations around scoring: James Suckling and The Wine Advocate. Both use the same 100-point scale, both shape opinions, and both have loyal followings. Yet among collectors, merchants, and run-of-the-mill oenophiles, there is a clear sense that The Wine Advocate remains the gold standard, while Suckling’s scores are taken with a grain of salt—or even shunned.

Before going any further, there is the matter of one of our customers who refers to Suckling as a “pig.” This is not a derogation of his palate. It is simply a joke based on his surname. Childish? Yes. Funny? Hell yeah.

All jokes aside, the real divide between the two critics begins with history. The Wine Advocate didn’t just enter wine criticism—it "invented" the modern framework for it. When Robert Parker launched The Wine Advocate in 1978, he created a scoring system rooted in independence, free from the influence of industry interests. The system eschewed flattery and mandated rigor. The 100-point scale wasn’t a gimmick; it was a standard for seriousness. The Advocate built its authority on depth, erudition, and a willingness to call it as it sees it, with no concern for producers.

James Suckling, by contrast, came into prominence during the era of lifestyle content and media globalization. His work emphasizes accessibility, sociability, and immediacy. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. In fact, Suckling has helped make wine feel less intimidating to a new generation of drinkers. But it also means his scoring tends to be abundant and enthusiastic. He tastes a tremendous volume of wines very quickly and is known for awarding high scores more readily than The Wine Advocate. In short: he awards 97s like Steph Curry drops 3s—frequently.

This has led to skepticism toward Suckling’s scores. When a wine receives 97+ from The Wine Advocate, supply tightens, prices move, and collectors pay attention. The score carries weight because it signals seriousness and circumspection. A similar score from Suckling can certainly help sell wine, but it is not always treated with the same weight. For instance, Suckling just named Margaux’s 2020 Château d’Issan his #1 wine on his Top 100 list for 2025, but the wine is not going out of stock. We honestly wish it would, because we are sitting on 11 bottles at the time of this entry.

It is helpful to understand what Suckling’s evaluations tend to favor. They often prize wines that are polished, fruit-forward, and ready to enjoy sooner rather than later. The Advocate, on the other hand, speaks to cellars. It privileges architecture, texture, and longevity.

To be fair, accessibility matters. Wine should not live only in the vaults of collectors, and Suckling’s approach has made room for conversation, personality, and enthusiasm in a way The Wine Advocate has never tried to. Suckling is hip especially with his trademark wire-rimmed specs. But both are relevant regardless of eyewear. However, it was Parker who built the scoring system that determines how the world prices, ages, trades, and judges wine.

So the next time someone at your table announces, with great seriousness, “Parker gave it 98,” you’ll understand why the room goes still. And if someone else mutters something about a “pig,” well—just know it’s not slander. It’s just a technicality, and a pretty good one at that.