I'm at the crossroads.
After growing up (in a sense) with one scoring scale - the 20 point Australian wine show scoring - I'm seriously considering switching over to the 100 point format (for published tasting notes at least).
Some of the more regular readers of this website will notice that I have been toying with both scales for a little while now, so in a way I'm already half way there. Yet the question remains, should I be using the 100 point system exclusively? Is the 100 point system, which you'd argue is now the default scoring scale used in Australia, NZ, USA, South Africa & the rest, the most easy to understand of the points scores?
Now, I understand that lots of people have objections to scoring wines (and I totally respect the objections), but I don't really want to argue the merits of scoring wine per se, what I am more interested in is which system people like more (that is, which system would you prefer to see a wine scored in).
Personally, I think in terms of the 20 point scale, almost like it's my natural tongue, with the 100 point scale my second language, of sorts, and I translate as required between the two. So changing over to the 100 point scale is not to be taken lightly (even though you could argue that scores are trivial anyway). However, anyone can see that outside of the arch traditional bastions of British wine writing - Jancis Robinson, Decanter et al - 'my' scoring system is largely out of fashion, and actually may not be the best way to attempt to score a wine.
So please, tell me what you think. Should I stick to a score out of 20 and an equivalent out of 100, or would you prefer one or the other?