If that is the case, then I have a far more comfortable understanding of what is being asked, though in some ways, it makes it a much more challenging hypothetical for me. The way the question was posed before, I exercised the logic that at its absolute best, an 80 point coffee could never be more than an 80 point coffee, regardless of how exceptionally it was roasted, but a 90 point coffee, even if roasted poorly could still (but wouldn’t necessarily) fall sufficiently above the 80 point mark, and that would be the gamble I’m willing to take.

With a modified understanding (the choice between two coffees that would score an 80, but for different reasons) I suppose that I would definitely side with you in terms of what cup I would want to sit and drink or recommend a customer, as I agree with the notion that I’d rather present an ideal expression of a particular coffee than a coffee that has fallen victim to process.

Thanks for taking the time to respond, and not taking offense to what may have seemed a harsh characterization of how you worded your question, I was merely frustrated by my inability to adequately quantify the grounds of the hypothetical.

We talk about 90 point / 95 point coffees regularly, but in the cup they are only 90/95 point coffees if they are treated in that manner in all the intermittant steps (roast / grind / brew etc).

Perhaps shoehorning point scoring into roasting is a bit facetious, but the intention was just to draw the comparison, with something we are familiar with.

By your logic the “score” can exceed the quality of the roast? I don’t think so. When I drink a coffee that has obviously been roasted without adequate care or attention all I can taste are the flaws. I can maybe appreciate what the coffee might have tasted like, but that only serves to compound the insult.

I would much prefer to taste an ok coffee that has been handled as well as possible. Then I taste that coffee, not the flaws.

Of course in an ideal circumstance, I would prefer the 90+ point coffee with a comparable roast, but where’s the fun in asking that question?

Without going on a complete tangent, I would prefer the coffee with the potential to score a 90 roasted at an “80 point roast” (still specialty caliber roast right?). To me, this is a simple answer, because this coffee, still would seemingly have the potential to score somewhere above 80, something you could never say of the coffee with the potential to score an 80. As I read things, the potential 80 point coffee with any roast short of a theoretical 100 would fall below the “specialty” line, whereas the potential 90 point coffee likely wouldn’t.

A mediocre coffee, with a great roast, is still a mediocre coffee. You can do anything you want to with an okay pulp natural Brazil, but the chances are that it’s still just going to be pretty dirty, with some hints of nuttiness.

At the same time, a slightly over or under roasted coffee won’t betray the true characteristic of it. An amazing Kenya with a tint darker or lighter roast might still bring out amazing grapefruit acidity and currant notes.

So it’s hard to judge it too, based on a case by case study. How bad is an 80 point roast? In my mind, not so bad. Not to discount roasters or the amazing stuff they do…

All hail the impending roasting renaissance!!!