WINETASTER ON 05/04/15 WITH 8 JUDGES AND 7 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2015 Richard E. Quandt, V. 1.65
A Vertical Tasting of Livio Sassetti Pertimali Brunello di Montalcino
FLIGHT 1: Number of Judges = 8 Number of Wines = 7
Identification of the Wine: The judges' overall ranking:
Wine A is 2001 ........ 1st place Wine B is 1997 ........ 3rd place Wine C is 2004 riserva ........ 4th place Wine D is 1998 ........ 7th place Wine E is 2004 regular tied for 5th place Wine F is 2000 tied for 5th place Wine G is 1985 ........ 2nd place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G Jerry 5. 2. 7. 6. 4. 1. 3. Jennifer 6. 7. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Frank 1. 3. 2. 4. 6. 7. 5. Ed 5. 4. 3. 2. 6. 1. 7. Burt 1. 4. 5. 6. 2. 7. 3. Bob 1. 3. 7. 6. 4. 5. 2. Zaki 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 3. 2. Dick 2. 3. 1. 6. 7. 5. 4.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F G
Group Ranking -> 1 3 4 7 5 5 2 Votes Against -> 25 31 33 40 34 34 27
( 8 is the best possible, 56 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 = 0.0826
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.6815. 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 0.6071 Burt 0.4183 Dick 0.1081 Zaki 0.0721 Frank -0.1261 Jerry -0.1429 Jennifer -0.5714 Ed -0.8289
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 A is 2001 2. ........ 2nd place Wine G is 1985 3. ........ 3rd place Wine B is 1997 4. ........ 4th place Wine C is 2004 riserva 5. tied for 5th place Wine E is 2004 regular 6. tied for 5th place Wine F is 2000 7. ........ 7th place Wine D is 1998 We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 3.9643. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.6815 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 0.79 for significance at the 0.05 level and must exceed 0.71 for significance at the 0.1 level Jerry Jennifer Frank Jerry 1.000 -0.429 -0.607 Jennifer -0.429 1.000 -0.179 Frank -0.607 -0.179 1.000 Ed 0.000 -0.214 -0.107 Burt -0.143 -0.143 0.393 Bob 0.393 -0.357 0.179 Zaki 0.536 0.036 -0.571 Dick -0.286 -0.071 0.786 Ed Burt Bob Jerry 0.000 -0.143 0.393 Jennifer -0.214 -0.143 -0.357 Frank -0.107 0.393 0.179 Ed 1.000 -0.857 -0.679 Burt -0.857 1.000 0.750 Bob -0.679 0.750 1.000 Zaki -0.607 0.464 0.500 Dick 0.000 0.143 0.107 Zaki Dick Jerry 0.536 -0.286 Jennifer 0.036 -0.071 Frank -0.571 0.786 Ed -0.607 0.000 Burt 0.464 0.143 Bob 0.500 0.107 Zaki 1.000 -0.393 Dick -0.393 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.786 Frank and Dick Significantly positive 0.750 Burt and Bob Significantly positive 0.536 Jerry and Zaki Not significant 0.500 Bob and Zaki Not significant 0.464 Burt and Zaki Not significant 0.393 Frank and Burt Not significant 0.393 Jerry and Bob Not significant 0.179 Frank and Bob Not significant 0.143 Burt and Dick Not significant 0.107 Bob and Dick Not significant 0.036 Jennifer and Zaki Not significant 0.000 Ed and Dick Not significant 0.000 Jerry and Ed Not significant -0.071 Jennifer and Dick Not significant -0.107 Frank and Ed Not significant -0.143 Jerry and Burt Not significant -0.143 Jennifer and Burt Not significant -0.179 Jennifer and Frank Not significant -0.214 Jennifer and Ed Not significant -0.286 Jerry and Dick Not significant -0.357 Jennifer and Bob Not significant -0.393 Zaki and Dick Not significant -0.429 Jerry and Jennifer Not significant -0.571 Frank and Zaki Not significant -0.607 Jerry and Frank Not significant -0.607 Ed and Zaki Not significant -0.679 Ed and Bob Not significant -0.857 Ed and Burt Significantly negative
COMMENT: This is the first time that the group tasted Pertimali. Despite many other earlier tastings of Brunello, this tasting of Livio Sassetti was the first the first time that many of the tasters experienced this wine. The wines were extraordinarily difficult to differentiate despite an almost 20-year time span betwen the youngest and the oldest wine in the tasting. There was almost no difference in the rankings of the group between the ordinary and riserva 2004. One member noted that the oldest wine was not only too difficult to distinguish by age from a tasting standpoint but also visually. It was noted the "encore wine" of 1975 was vibrant and would have scored well in the context of the earlier wines. It should also be noted that our generous host cooked for us Tuscan Polpettone, which was an excellent accompaniment to the wines.
Return to previous page