🗓️ Day 16 - Prädikatswein & VDP
+ styles fermented in mid-range temperatures
💪 Warm up time
The answer to this warm up question is at the end of today’s entry.
⏳ Past exam question
Question three from the October 2020 exam
What are the weaknesses of the German Prädikatswein system? (40% weighting) How has the Verband Deutscher Prädikatsweingüter (VDP) tried to address these weaknesses? (60% weighting)
I answered a question similar to this for my seating in October 2023. You can expect questions like this will show up again. They are detail-oriented and requires assessment and applied knowledge. 100% WSET Diploma bread and butter 🥲
💡 Examiner’s report
© Wine & Spirit Education Trust
This question should have only been attempted by candidates who were confident in their understanding and knowledge of the topic. Unfortunately, many did not have the level required and this resulted in more candidates failing than passing.
There were two parts to this question and candidates who were not clear on the weaknesses of the German Prädikatswein system were unlikely to successfully answer the second part, how the VDP has addressed these issues. In the main, papers were well structured with two sections written relevant to the separate questions asked. A number of candidates attempted to write a single answer focussing on the individual weaknesses of the Prädikat system and how the VDP attempted to overcome each one. Both approaches could be successful although the former was the more logical approach. Most candidates understood that the main weakness of the Prädikatswein system stems from the use of must weight as the major criterion. Once this was identified, it was then relatively straightforward to link this to the resultant weaknesses, such as consumer difficulties understanding actual quality, geographical integrity and final style. These were identified by a number of candidates, but not all.
There was a good amount of accurate information regarding the German Wine laws. However, this was sometimes to the point where it ceased to be relevant to the question asked. For instance, a large number of papers had extensive detail on the different Prädikat levels and whilst this showed good knowledge, it did not necessarily address the question. The question asked about the weaknesses, not the rules, of the system. Candidates must think about what the question is asking and consider if what they are writing is answering it as set. Not doing so is a very common issue - whilst material offered may be related to the topic that is being asked about, it is only worth including if it helps answer the question. In a similar vein, the pitfall of being overly descriptive was common. A high number of candidates wrote about subjects such as the terraces of the Mosel, the picking of Eiswein grapes, high production costs etc, comments which, although they showed knowledge, were not details deemed necessary to pass this question.
The best papers identified the issues/weaknesses and then explained why/how the Prädikat system allowed this to happen. For example, most candidates identified that there is a weakness of the first three levels of Prädikat because they can legally range in the final sweetness of the wine, and that this might not be shown on the label, thus causing confusion to the consumer when purchasing the wine.
However, some candidates would simply state that the system was confusing the consumer. Whilst the weakness was identified, not enough detail or evidence was given to support the assertion. More detail was required to support the argument as this would help demonstrate a sound understanding of the subject.
Generally, candidates who had a good grasp of the VDP were more successful at passing the paper. The VDP section of the question received a heavier weighting, but a number of candidates wrote more about the Prädikat system. Candidates should be mindful of the weightings given. The vast majority of candidates correctly highlighted that the VDP quality system is based on the method used most widely across other parts of Europe, namely geographic designations and the Cru hierarchy of Burgundy. Alongside this geographic classification were production rules and the use of Prädikat terms for defining sweet and dry wine. The most common errors in accuracy were in the detail of the VDP regulations and the understanding that VDP producers can make dry and sweet wines. Many candidates thought they only produce dry wines.
It was not uncommon for candidates to make errors in recalling relevant terminology. Terms such as Gutswein, Ortswein, Grosses Gewaches and Grosse Lage were often written incorrectly. Candidates should remember that accurately recalling and spelling wine terms and names is important. Some candidates wrote at length about the marketing and educational role of the VDP. Whilst this was worth noting it is not one of the key issues and too much time spent on this was misguided.
Sounds like lots of students just paniced and filling in the space with whatever they could remember from rest of Germany chapter (eg. terrains of the Mosel).
Let’s not do that. Not answering the questions will lose you marks. Answering the questions with irrelevant information will also lose your marks 🤧
🥁 Answer to today’s warm up question
Alsatian Sylvaner is actually fermented at low temperatures to preserve aromatics. Gewurztraminer, on the other hand, is usually fermented at mid-range temperatures in Alsace.
Revise these minor styles
Alsatian Sylvaner & Gewurz: WSET Diploma in Wine D3 textbook p65
Dolcetto d’Alba: textbook p262
Grillo: textbook p313
Hunter Valley Semillon: textbook p548
