This year's MW exam

Last week, the fiendishly challenging Master of Wine examinations were held in three locations around the world: London, Sydney and Napa. As tradition dictates, the exam papers were made public not long after the last student's pen was laid down, and are reproduced below.

Having taken the exams myself in 2011 (practical and theory) and 2012 (practical only), I have every sympathy with the students who have the devotion and aptitude to reach this stage. It is the highest level of learning for a subject that gets more complicated every year. My sympathy increased upon reading the papers. They maintain the Institute's exacting reputation.

Several students I spoke with found the tasting paper on white wines, which is the very first exam of the week, especially tough. It is certainly not a kind paper, with precious few clues to glean from the structure of the questions. For example, when a pair of wines is introduced as from the 'same country and region but different single grape varieties' virtually no region can be ruled out.

In this case, the wines look distinctive, on paper at least – they were a Riesling and a Chardonnay from Marlborough – but I know too well how difficult it can be to remain calm and identify wines effectively, especially without the safety net of a more specific stipulation within the question. Dry Riesling is easily mistaken for Sauvignon Blanc or Grüner Veltliner, for instance, and Chardonnay is notoriously shapeshifting. 

The rest of the paper was similarly tricky, including an Assyrtiko and a Gavi – both brave choices for an examinee to make when all you are told is they are from different countries and varieties.

Perhaps this is only to be expected from an examination with such a tough reputation. Furthermore, the examiners are quick to point out that identification is only one part of the exam, and that many points can be gained by answering the questions on quality and style.

John Hoskins MW, who plays an important part in organising the exams, points out about the practical papers, 'Please note that with some of the less "obvious" wines, the emphasis of the question is not necessarily on origin and varietal. This obviously applies to Paper 1 wines 9-12 (although 11 and 12 might be considered "bankers"); and Paper 2 Wines 10-12 (with 10 again fairly straightforward). And for the toughest section (Paper 3 wines 7-12) a pass mark could easily be achieved on each wine if the attempt at origin was incorrect but logical enough to pick up points, as long as the other answers were fairly accurate.

'I say this because the natural tendency is for everyone to focus on the difficulty of nailing the wines, whilst in fact the exam now has much more emphasis on quality and winemaking assessments than in the past. As I have said in several exam reports, we haven't made the exam harder, but the wines get harder to spot as the wine world becomes more complex and winemakers more clever. So we have shifted our focus a little, as stated.'

However, picking up points on quality and style is not easily done if a candidate has misidentified the wine, nor does it account for the shaken confidence that can result from being faced with a flight of wines with so few clues.

At least the other two tasting papers were less punishing, as you can see below. I'd be amazed to hear how anyone can specifically identify a red Rully (any thoughts, Alex H?) but otherwise the red paper seems reasonable. In paper three, the Franciacorta would have been widely taken for champagne, I expect – but here the question restricted the three sparkling wines to one country, and the Prosecco and Lambrusco should have been enough to eliminate France.

Six different, non-fortified sweet wines from different countries were not easy, but probably had enough ringers in the line-up to allow for logical elimination and thus conclusions.

As for the theory papers, they largely conform to type. I passed my theory exam in 2011, and don't mind saying that I would not now be able to write such essays without significant revision. However, the questions do seem fair and comprehensible (typos notwithstanding, tut tut!), and all fall within the field of study as I remember it.

The results will be released in early September. Please do add your own thoughts about the exam using the comments field at the bottom of this article.