WINETASTER ON 12/06/22 WITH 7 JUDGES AND 8 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2003 Richard E. Quandt, V. 1.65
A Tasting of Latin American Malbecs
FLIGHT 1: Number of Judges = 7 Number of Wines = 8
Identification of the Wine: The judges' overall ranking:
Wine A is Dom. Bousquet Valle de Uco 2019 ........ 8th place Wine B is Catena Zapata Malbec 2018 ........ 5th place Wine C is Salentein Res. Valle de Uco 2006 ........ 7th place Wine D is Catena Zapata Fortuna Terrae 2018 ........ 6th place Wine E is Catena Zapata Mundus Bacillus 2013 ........ 1st place Wine F is Achaval Ferrer Medrano 2005 ........ 3rd place Wine G is Catena Zapata River Stones 2017 ........ 2nd place Wine H is Colome, Salta 2016 ........ 4th place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G H Burt 4. 6. 2. 8. 3. 7. 5. 1. Bob 7. 8. 5. 6. 4. 2. 3. 1. Zaki 3. 5. 6. 1. 8. 7. 4. 2. Mike 8. 1. 6. 4. 5. 3. 2. 7. Orley 7. 1. 5. 6. 4. 3. 2. 8. Frank 8. 5. 6. 2. 1. 4. 3. 7. Dick 6. 4. 5. 7. 1. 2. 8. 3.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F G H
Group Ranking -> 8 5 7 6 1 3 2 4 Votes Against -> 43 30 35 34 26 28 27 29
( 7 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 = 0.1079
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.6251. 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 Dick 0.2196 Mike 0.1205 Frank 0.0843 Bob 0.0602 Orley -0.0359 Burt -0.4762 Zaki -0.7381
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 E is Catena Zapata Mundus Bacillus 2013 2. ........ 2nd place Wine G is Catena Zapata River Stones 2017 3. ........ 3rd place Wine F is Achaval Ferrer Medrano 2005 4. ........ 4th place Wine H is Colome, Salta 2016 5. ........ 5th place Wine B is Catena Zapata Malbec 2018 6. ........ 6th place Wine D is Catena Zapata Fortuna Terrae 2018 7. ........ 7th place Wine C is Salentein Res. Valle de Uco 2006 --------------------------------------------------- 8. ........ 8th place Wine A is Dom. Bousquet Valle de Uco 2019 We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 5.2857. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.6251 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 Burt Bob Zaki Burt 1.000 0.333 -0.119 Bob 0.333 1.000 -0.119 Zaki -0.119 -0.119 1.000 Mike -0.643 -0.119 -0.238 Orley -0.452 -0.190 -0.548 Frank -0.452 0.095 -0.310 Dick 0.286 0.333 -0.643 Mike Orley Frank Burt -0.643 -0.452 -0.452 Bob -0.119 -0.190 0.095 Zaki -0.238 -0.548 -0.310 Mike 1.000 0.905 0.548 Orley 0.905 1.000 0.452 Frank 0.548 0.452 1.000 Dick -0.095 0.024 0.095 Dick Burt 0.286 Bob 0.333 Zaki -0.643 Mike -0.095 Orley 0.024 Frank 0.095 Dick 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.905 Mike and Orley Significantly positive 0.548 Mike and Frank Not significant 0.452 Orley and Frank Not significant 0.333 Bob and Dick Not significant 0.333 Burt and Bob Not significant 0.286 Burt and Dick Not significant 0.095 Bob and Frank Not significant 0.095 Frank and Dick Not significant 0.024 Orley and Dick Not significant -0.095 Mike and Dick Not significant -0.119 Burt and Zaki Not significant -0.119 Bob and Mike Not significant -0.119 Bob and Zaki Not significant -0.190 Bob and Orley Not significant -0.238 Zaki and Mike Not significant -0.310 Zaki and Frank Not significant -0.452 Burt and Frank Not significant -0.452 Burt and Orley Not significant -0.548 Zaki and Orley Not significant -0.643 Burt and Mike Not significant -0.643 Zaki and Dick Not significant
COMMENT: This was a very special tasting of Argentinian Malbecs, with 4 of the wines being sourced directly from the Catena Zapata cellars, including the wine that came first, the Mundus Bacillus Terrae, from the high altitude Adrianna Vineyard. The Catena Zapata winery, with it’s great focus on terroir, is generally viewed as producing the finest wines in Argentina. The other four wines were from other outstanding vineyards of Mendoza, with one from Salta (Colomé). Such fine bodegas as Salentein and Achaval Ferrer were included, with the latter represented by their well-regarded Finca Mirador Malbec. Overall the wines were of uniformly high standards, and there was a low range of difference between the high and low scores of individual tasters, when viewed together as a group. All the wines were 100% Malbec and they demonstrated the aging potential of these wines with vintages represented between 2003 to 2019, at the same time the young wines were very approachable and delicious.
Return to previous page