WINETASTER ON 09/12/16 WITH 8 JUDGES AND 8 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2016 Richard E. Quandt, V. 1.65
A Tasting of 2004 Brunello di Montalcino
FLIGHT 1: Number of Judges = 8 Number of Wines = 8
Identification of the Wine: The judges' overall ranking:
Wine A is Valdicava tied for 6th place Wine B is Casanova di Neri Riserva tied for 6th place Wine C is Uccelliera ........ 3rd place Wine D is Casanova di Neri ........ 4th place Wine E is Pieve Santa Restiuta Rennina ........ 5th place Wine F is Uccelliera Riserva ........ 2nd place Wine G is Mocali Vigna Raunate Riserva ........ 1st place Wine H is Castelgiocondo ........ 8th place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G H Orley 6. 7. 5. 2. 1. 8. 3. 4. Burt 5. 7. 3. 4. 6. 1. 2. 8. Ed 7. 4. 5. 8. 2. 3. 1. 6. Bob 4. 1. 5. 7. 8. 2. 3. 6. Jerry 7. 8. 2. 5. 3. 1. 6. 4. Mike 5. 7. 2. 4. 8. 6. 1. 3. Zaki 6. 5. 7. 3. 4. 2. 1. 8. Dick 4. 5. 1. 2. 6. 3. 7. 8.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F G H
Group Ranking -> 6 6 3 4 5 2 1 8 Votes Against -> 44 44 30 35 38 26 24 47
( 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 = 0.1987
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.1333. 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 Correlation Price Burt 0.8743 -0.5030 Zaki 0.5181 -0.6467 Ed 0.4551 0.0599 Jerry 0.3810 0.0838 Mike 0.1190 -0.2994 Dick 0.1078 -0.0120 Bob 0.0476 0.1916 Orley -0.1677 -0.3713
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 Mocali Vigna Raunate Riserva --------------------------------------------------- 2. ........ 2nd place Wine F is Uccelliera Riserva 3. ........ 3rd place Wine C is Uccelliera 4. ........ 4th place Wine D is casanova di Neri 5. ........ 5th place Wine E is Pieve Santa Restiuta Rennina 6. tied for 6th place Wine B is Casanova di Neri Riserva 7. tied for 6th place Wine A is Valdicava --------------------------------------------------- 8. ........ 8th place Wine H is Castelgiocondo We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 11.1250. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.1333
We now test whether the group ranking of wines is correlated with the prices of the wines. The rank correlation between them is -0.4578. At the 10% level of significance this would have to exceed the critical value of 0.5240 to be significant.
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 Orley Burt Ed Orley 1.000 -0.190 0.048 Burt -0.190 1.000 0.310 Ed 0.048 0.310 1.000 Bob -0.833 0.286 0.286 Jerry 0.024 0.429 0.190 Mike 0.143 0.333 -0.095 Zaki 0.119 0.667 0.524 Dick -0.262 0.500 -0.405 Bob Jerry Mike Orley -0.833 0.024 0.143 Burt 0.286 0.429 0.333 Ed 0.286 0.190 -0.095 Bob 1.000 -0.310 0.000 Jerry -0.310 1.000 0.024 Mike 0.000 0.024 1.000 Zaki 0.238 0.024 -0.048 Dick 0.024 0.310 0.000 Zaki Dick Orley 0.119 -0.262 Burt 0.667 0.500 Ed 0.524 -0.405 Bob 0.238 0.024 Jerry 0.024 0.310 Mike -0.048 0.000 Zaki 1.000 0.024 Dick 0.024 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.667 Burt and Zaki Significantly positive 0.524 Ed and Zaki Not significant 0.500 Burt and Dick Not significant 0.429 Burt and Jerry Not significant 0.333 Burt and Mike Not significant 0.310 Jerry and Dick Not significant 0.310 Burt and Ed Not significant 0.286 Burt and Bob Not significant 0.286 Ed and Bob Not significant 0.238 Bob and Zaki Not significant 0.190 Ed and Jerry Not significant 0.143 Orley and Mike Not significant 0.119 Orley and Zaki Not significant 0.048 Orley and Ed Not significant 0.024 Bob and Dick Not significant 0.024 Jerry and Mike Not significant 0.024 Jerry and Zaki Not significant 0.024 Orley and Jerry Not significant 0.024 Zaki and Dick Not significant 0.000 Bob and Mike Not significant 0.000 Mike and Dick Not significant -0.048 Mike and Zaki Not significant -0.095 Ed and Mike Not significant -0.190 Orley and Burt Not significant -0.262 Orley and Dick Not significant -0.310 Bob and Jerry Not significant -0.405 Ed and Dick Not significant -0.833 Orley and Bob Significantly negative
COMMENT: This was a horizontal tasting of 2004 Brunello di Montalcino; a top vintage for Brunello. The wines were a selection of riservas and ordinary Brunellos of top scoring wines. Generally the riservas are double the price of the regular wines and they have an additional year in oak barrels before being released. The wines were double decanted and poured 2 hours before the tasting commenced. Interestingly, the two top wines were riservas and for one wine (Uccelleria, we tasted both the regular and the riserva wines for the same vintage.) The three smallest production wines finished 1, 2 and 3. Overall, the wines were of uniform high quality, drinking beautifully but with a clear potential for another 10 years. One could conclude that the good regular Brunellos are worth buying. The riservas are double the price and it is hard to generalize as to which we prefer. The two top wines were riservas, but with only the Mocali being significantly superior, the argument could still be made that it is better in a top vintage to buy more of the top scoring regular wines. Some people might think that these wines are too old; however, hat is not true. It is interesting to note that none of the tasters had a strong positive correlation with the price (although some had a weak correlation).
Return to previous page