WINETASTER ON 10/05/15 WITH 8 JUDGES AND 9 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2015 Richard E. Quandt, V. 1.65
A Vertical Tasting of Heitz Martha's Vineyard
FLIGHT 1: Number of Judges = 8 Number of Wines = 9
Identification of the Wine: The judges' overall ranking:
Wine A is 1987 ........ 2nd place Wine B is 1998 ........ 6th place Wine C is 1999 ........ 8th place Wine D is 1985 ........ 9th place Wine E is 2001 ........ 4th place Wine F is 2002 ........ 5th place Wine G is 1997 ........ 1st place Wine H is 2003 ........ 3rd place Wine I is 2005 ........ 7th place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G H I Orley 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9. 2. 6. 1. Dwight 2. 9. 5. 4. 6. 1. 3. 7. 8. Ed 7. 6. 8. 5. 2. 4. 9. 1. 3. Bob 2. 1. 5. 6. 8. 3. 7. 4. 9. Dean 2. 8. 3. 9. 1. 5. 4. 7. 6. Mike 6. 2. 8. 7. 5. 4. 1. 3. 9. Zachy 3. 8. 7. 9. 4. 2. 1. 5. 6. Dick 6. 7. 8. 4. 2. 9. 3. 1. 5.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F G H I
Group Ranking -> 2 6 8 9 4 5 1 3 7 Votes Against -> 31 45 49 51 36 37 30 34 47
( 8 is the best possible, 72 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 = 0.1349
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.3742. 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 Zachy 0.7563 Mike 0.3347 Dean 0.2167 Dwight 0.1177 Dick 0.0333 Bob -0.2008 Ed -0.2259 Orley -0.3303
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 1997 2. ........ 2nd place Wine A is 1987 3. ........ 3rd place Wine H is 2003 4. ........ 4th place Wine E is 2001 5. ........ 5th place Wine F is 2002 6. ........ 6th place Wine B is 1998 7. ........ 7th place Wine I is 2005 8. ........ 8th place Wine C is 1999 9. ........ 9th place Wine D is 1985 We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 8.6333. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.3742 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 0.70 for significance at the 0.05 level and must exceed 0.60 for significance at the 0.1 level Orley Dwight Ed Orley 1.000 -0.283 -0.433 Dwight -0.283 1.000 -0.383 Ed -0.433 -0.383 1.000 Bob -0.167 0.150 -0.217 Dean 0.000 0.367 -0.183 Mike -0.083 0.050 -0.117 Zachy 0.033 0.600 -0.117 Dick 0.050 -0.283 0.433 Bob Dean Mike Orley -0.167 0.000 -0.083 Dwight 0.150 0.367 0.050 Ed -0.217 -0.183 -0.117 Bob 1.000 -0.183 0.383 Dean -0.183 1.000 -0.100 Mike 0.383 -0.100 1.000 Zachy -0.050 0.600 0.433 Dick -0.483 -0.017 0.233 Zachy Dick Orley 0.033 0.050 Dwight 0.600 -0.283 Ed -0.117 0.433 Bob -0.050 -0.483 Dean 0.600 -0.017 Mike 0.433 0.233 Zachy 1.000 0.083 Dick 0.083 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.600 Dwight and Zachy Significantly positive 0.600 Dean and Zachy Significantly positive 0.433 Ed and Dick Not significant 0.433 Mike and Zachy Not significant 0.383 Bob and Mike Not significant 0.367 Dwight and Dean Not significant 0.233 Mike and Dick Not significant 0.150 Dwight and Bob Not significant 0.083 Zachy and Dick Not significant 0.050 Dwight and Mike Not significant 0.050 Orley and Dick Not significant 0.033 Orley and Zachy Not significant 0.000 Orley and Dean Not significant -0.017 Dean and Dick Not significant -0.050 Bob and Zachy Not significant -0.083 Orley and Mike Not significant -0.100 Dean and Mike Not significant -0.117 Ed and Zachy Not significant -0.117 Ed and Mike Not significant -0.167 Orley and Bob Not significant -0.183 Bob and Dean Not significant -0.183 Ed and Dean Not significant -0.217 Ed and Bob Not significant -0.283 Orley and Dwight Not significant -0.283 Dwight and Dick Not significant -0.383 Dwight and Ed Not significant -0.433 Orley and Ed Not significant -0.483 Bob and Dick Not significant
COMMENT: Heitz Martha's is an iconic Napa wine and is arguanly the first single vineyard wine in the U.S., first produced in 1996. It was one of the Judgment of Paris wines and has produced many outstanding wines since.What is somewhat unusual about this wine is that the wine is 100% Cabernet, vinified in an identical way, +/- one or 2 months in a mixture of American and French oak. That may account for the similarity in style of these wines which had been produced over a period of 20 years. The only other point of note is that both the 1985 and 2005, both famous vintages, had a slightly musty hint which made them less representative of the cvintages. Demonstrating the compelling power of terroir over vintage or winemaking, they were all distinguished wines with real but subtle differences. In contrast to earlier tastings, these wines were remarkably similar despite a 20-year span of vintages. The reputation of the older vintages was not vindicated by the tasters' assessments.
Return to previous page