WINETASTER ON 10/04/10 WITH 8 JUDGES AND 8 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2010 Richard E. Quandt, V. 1.65
FLIGHT 1: Number of Judges = 8 Number of Wines = 8
Identification of the Wine: The judges' overall ranking:
Wine A is Catena Zapata, Catena Alta 2006 ........ 5th place Wine B is Trapiche Cristina y Bibiana 2006 ........ 3rd place Wine C is Enrique Foster Limited Edition 2003 tied for 1st place Wine D is Achaval Ferrer Finca Mirador 2005 ........ 8th place Wine E is Achaval Ferrer Finca Altamira La Consulta 2002........ 7th place Wine F is Trapiche Frederico Vilafañe 2006 ........ 4th place Wine G is Achaval Ferrer Finca Altamira 2000 tied for 1st place Wine H is Catena Zapata Argentino 2006 ........ 6th place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G H John 8. 3. 4. 7. 6. 5. 1. 2. Mike 2. 3. 1. 5. 6. 7. 4. 8. Bob 2. 6. 1. 8. 7. 3. 4. 5. Jack 3. 1. 2. 4. 7. 6. 8. 5. Burt 5. 6. 7. 4. 8. 3. 1. 2. Ed 6. 7. 4. 8. 3. 5. 1. 2. Orley 4. 6. 7. 3. 2. 1. 8. 5. Dick 6. 1. 3. 7. 4. 5. 2. 8.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F G H
Group Ranking -> 5 3 1 8 7 4 1 6 Votes Against -> 36 33 29 46 43 35 29 37
( 8 is the best possible, 64 is the worst)
Here is a measure of the correlation in the preferences of the judges which ranges between 1.0 (perfect correlation) and 0.0 (no correlation):
W = 0.0960
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.6143. Most analysts would say that unless this probability is less than 0.1, the judges' preferences are not strongly related. We now analyze how each taster's preferences are correlated with the group preference. A correlation of 1.0 means that the taster's preferences are a perfect predictor of the group's preferences. A 0.0 means no correlation, while a -1.0 means that the taster has the reverse ranking of the group. This is measured by the correlation R.
Correlation Between the Ranks of Each Person With the Average Ranking of Others
Name of Person Correlation R Bob 0.4311 John 0.2530 Dick 0.1687 Mike 0.0719 Ed 0.0120 Jack -0.1437 Burt -0.1916 Orley -0.8982
The wines were preferred by the judges in the following order. When the preferences of the judges are strong enough to permit meaningful differentiation among the wines, they are separated by -------------------- and are judged to be significantly different.
1. tied for 1st place Wine C is Enrique Foster Limited Edition 2003 2. tied for 1st place Wine G is Achaval Ferrer Finca Altamira 2000 3. ........ 3rd place Wine B is Trapiche Cristina y Bibiana 2006 4. ........ 4th place Wine F is Trapiche Frederico Vilafañe 2006 5. ........ 5th place Wine A is Catena Zapata, Catena Alta 2006 6. ........ 6th place Wine H is Catena Zapata Argentino 2006 7. ........ 7th place Wine E is Achaval Ferrer Finca Altamira La Consulta 2002 8. ........ 8th place Wine D is Achaval Ferrer Finca Mirador 2005 We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 5.3750. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.6143 We now undertake a more detailed examination of the pair-wise rank correla- tions that exist between pairs of judges. First, we present a table in which you can find the correlation for any pair of judges, by finding one of the names in the left hand margin and the other name on top of a column. A second table arranges these correlations in descending order and marks which is significantly positive significantly negative, or not significant. This may allow you to find clusters of judges whose rankings were particularly similar or particularly dissimilar. Pairwise Rank Correlations Correlations must exceed in absolute value 0.74 for significance at the 0.05 level and must exceed 0.64 for significance at the 0.1 level John Mike Bob John 1.000 -0.167 0.071 Mike -0.167 1.000 0.476 Bob 0.071 0.476 1.000 Jack -0.214 0.595 0.190 Burt 0.476 -0.429 0.048 Ed 0.643 -0.286 0.238 Orley -0.667 -0.548 -0.310 Dick 0.405 0.524 0.143 Jack Burt Ed John -0.214 0.476 0.643 Mike 0.595 -0.429 -0.286 Bob 0.190 0.048 0.238 Jack 1.000 -0.452 -0.667 Burt -0.452 1.000 0.333 Ed -0.667 0.333 1.000 Orley -0.214 -0.190 -0.357 Dick 0.119 -0.286 0.095 Orley Dick John -0.667 0.405 Mike -0.548 0.524 Bob -0.310 0.143 Jack -0.214 0.119 Burt -0.190 -0.286 Ed -0.357 0.095 Orley 1.000 -0.500 Dick -0.500 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.643 John and Ed Not significant 0.595 Mike and Jack Not significant 0.524 Mike and Dick Not significant 0.476 Mike and Bob Not significant 0.476 John and Burt Not significant 0.405 John and Dick Not significant 0.333 Burt and Ed Not significant 0.238 Bob and Ed Not significant 0.190 Bob and Jack Not significant 0.143 Bob and Dick Not significant 0.119 Jack and Dick Not significant 0.095 Ed and Dick Not significant 0.071 John and Bob Not significant 0.048 Bob and Burt Not significant -0.167 John and Mike Not significant -0.190 Burt and Orley Not significant -0.214 Jack and Orley Not significant -0.214 John and Jack Not significant -0.286 Mike and Ed Not significant -0.286 Burt and Dick Not significant -0.310 Bob and Orley Not significant -0.357 Ed and Orley Not significant -0.429 Mike and Burt Not significant -0.452 Jack and Burt Not significant -0.500 Orley and Dick Not significant -0.548 Mike and Orley Not significant -0.667 John and Orley Significantly negative -0.667 Jack and Ed Significantly negative
COMMENT: These wines were incredibly similar and all were very delicious but not very interesting in the bouquet, although not unpleasant. They would be good wines with steak, rich cheeses and patés. These are very interesting wines, according to one participant, and they are not cheap and cheerful and they are serious wines. They seem to mature successfully at an early age and hold their plateau. It is interesting to note that the three most expensive wines ranked at the bottom of our rankings. There seemed to be no pattern favoring the relative younger or older wines. In any event, it would be interesting to see what happens to these wines in another ten years or more. Overall, a great start for the new season.
Return to previous page