WINETASTER ON 03/05/12 WITH 8 JUDGES AND 8 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2012 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 Mas de la Dame La Stele 2001 ........ 8th place Wine B is Ch. La Verrerie 2001 ........ 6th place Wine C is Ch. de Pibarnon 2001 ........ 5th place Wine D is Ch. Val Joannis Les Griottes 2001 ........ 2nd place Wine E is Ch. Simone 2001 ........ 4th place Wine F is Domaine de Trevallon 1999 ........ 3rd place Wine G is Bandol Tempier, Cuvée Classique 2003 ........ 1st place Wine H is Domaine d'Eole Cuvée Lea 2003 ........ 7th place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G H Frank 7. 8. 4. 1. 3. 6. 2. 5. Ed 7. 6. 4. 2. 8. 3. 1. 5. Orley 8. 6. 4. 2. 3. 1. 5. 7. Zaki 7. 4. 6. 3. 5. 1. 2. 8. Burt 5. 7. 8. 1. 2. 4. 3. 6. Bob 3. 8. 5. 7. 4. 6. 2. 1. Mike 7. 3. 5. 4. 8. 1. 2. 6. Dick 4. 2. 6. 1. 5. 7. 3. 8.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F G H
Group Ranking -> 8 6 5 2 4 3 1 7 Votes Against -> 48 44 42 21 38 29 20 46
( 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 = 0.3266
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is quite small, 0.0107. 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 Zaki 0.7306 Orley 0.7186 Ed 0.6910 Frank 0.6228 Burt 0.5000 Mike 0.4072 Dick 0.1905 Bob -0.4072
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. ........ 1st place Wine G is Bandol Tempier, Cuvée Classique 2003 2. ........ 2nd place Wine D is Ch. Val Joannis Les Griottes 2001 --------------------------------------------------- 3. ........ 3rd place Wine F is Domaine de Trevallon 1999 4. ........ 4th place Wine E is Ch. Simone 2001 5. ........ 5th place Wine C is Ch. de Pibarnon 2001 6. ........ 6th place Wine B is Ch. La Verrerie 2001 7. ........ 7th place Wine H is Domaine d'Eole Cuvée Lea 2003 --------------------------------------------------- 8. ........ 8th place Wine A is Mas de la Dame La Stele 2001 We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 18.2917. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.0107 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 Frank Ed Orley Frank 1.000 0.524 0.476 Ed 0.524 1.000 0.405 Orley 0.476 0.405 1.000 Zaki 0.262 0.619 0.714 Burt 0.667 0.238 0.500 Bob 0.167 -0.048 -0.500 Mike -0.024 0.762 0.405 Dick 0.238 0.190 0.024 Zaki Burt Bob Frank 0.262 0.667 0.167 Ed 0.619 0.238 -0.048 Orley 0.714 0.500 -0.500 Zaki 1.000 0.476 -0.476 Burt 0.476 1.000 0.000 Bob -0.476 0.000 1.000 Mike 0.810 0.000 -0.381 Dick 0.357 0.381 -0.500 Mike Dick Frank -0.024 0.238 Ed 0.762 0.190 Orley 0.405 0.024 Zaki 0.810 0.357 Burt 0.000 0.381 Bob -0.381 -0.500 Mike 1.000 0.167 Dick 0.167 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.810 Zaki and Mike Significantly positive 0.762 Ed and Mike Significantly positive 0.714 Orley and Zaki Significantly positive 0.667 Frank and Burt Significantly positive 0.619 Ed and Zaki Not significant 0.524 Frank and Ed Not significant 0.500 Orley and Burt Not significant 0.476 Frank and Orley Not significant 0.476 Zaki and Burt Not significant 0.405 Orley and Mike Not significant 0.405 Ed and Orley Not significant 0.381 Burt and Dick Not significant 0.357 Zaki and Dick Not significant 0.262 Frank and Zaki Not significant 0.238 Frank and Dick Not significant 0.238 Ed and Burt Not significant 0.190 Ed and Dick Not significant 0.167 Frank and Bob Not significant 0.167 Mike and Dick Not significant 0.024 Orley and Dick Not significant 0.000 Burt and Bob Not significant 0.000 Burt and Mike Not significant -0.024 Frank and Mike Not significant -0.048 Ed and Bob Not significant -0.381 Bob and Mike Not significant -0.476 Zaki and Bob Not significant -0.500 Orley and Bob Not significant -0.500 Bob and Dick Not significant
COMMENT: One person said, with humour, that the sausage rolls won. The group was particularly pleased to taste what to us was a unique group of wines. One member wondered whether the fact that these are wines with which we are not terribly familiar enabled us to rank the wines without distinct stylistic preferences. Note that there was much more agreement concerning the ranking of wines than is usual in the group. There were slight differences in tannin and acidity. While it was expected that the Tempier and the Trevallon would rank very high, the Val Joannis was a surprise, a relatively less known wine.Our host purchased most of these wines at the vineyards. The Mas de da Dame was the vineyard painted by Van Gogh during his stay at St. Rémy in 1889. The Pibarnon is well known for its amphitheater-like vineyards overlooking the Mediterranean at Toulon. The Ch. Val Joannis in the Luberon is well known for its famous garden, which is well worth a visit.
Return to previous page