Report

WINETASTER ON 11/04/02 WITH 8 JUDGES AND 6 WINES BASED ON RANKS, IDENT=N Copyright (c) 1995-2002 Richard E. Quandt

FLIGHT 1: Number of Judges = 8 Number of Wines = 6
Identification of the Wine: The judges' overall ranking:
Wine A is Forman 1983 ........ 6th place Wine B is Forman 1988 ........ 1st place Wine C is Forman 1985 ........ 4th place Wine D is Forman 1987 ........ 3rd place Wine E is Forman 1986 ........ 2nd place Wine F is Forman 1984 ........ 5th place
The Judges's Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F Dick 2. 6. 4. 1. 3. 5. Grant 6. 5. 3. 2. 4. 1. Ed 3. 2. 4. 5. 6. 1. Bob 6. 1. 2. 4. 3. 5. Orley 5. 1. 2. 4. 3. 6. Burt 6. 1. 4. 5. 2. 3. John 6. 1. 4. 3. 2. 5. Frank 6. 3. 4. 2. 1. 5.
Table of Votes Against Wine -> A B C D E F
Group Ranking -> 6 1 4 3 2 5 Votes Against -> 40 20 27 26 24 31
( 8 is the best possible, 48 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 = 0.2125

The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.1307. 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 John 0.9856 Bob 0.8286 Orley 0.6667 Frank 0.6377 Burt 0.6000 Grant -0.1160 Ed -0.4348 Dick -0.4857

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 B is Forman 1988 2. ........ 2nd place Wine E is Forman 1986 3. ........ 3rd place Wine D is Forman 1987 4. ........ 4th place Wine C is Forman 1985 5. ........ 5th place Wine F is Forman 1984 --------------------------------------------------- 6. ........ 6th place Wine A is Forman 1983 We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-square value is 8.5000. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.1307 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 0.89 for significance at the 0.05 level and must exceed 0.83 for significance at the 0.1 level Dick Grant Ed Dick 1.000 -0.029 -0.657 Grant -0.029 1.000 0.086 Ed -0.657 0.086 1.000 Bob -0.543 -0.086 -0.143 Orley -0.371 -0.371 -0.257 Burt -0.771 0.029 0.143 John -0.314 -0.086 -0.314 Frank 0.143 0.143 -0.714 Bob Orley Burt Dick -0.543 -0.371 -0.771 Grant -0.086 -0.371 0.029 Ed -0.143 -0.257 0.143 Bob 1.000 0.943 0.714 Orley 0.943 1.000 0.543 Burt 0.714 0.543 1.000 John 0.829 0.771 0.771 Frank 0.543 0.486 0.486 John Frank Dick -0.314 0.143 Grant -0.086 0.143 Ed -0.314 -0.714 Bob 0.829 0.543 Orley 0.771 0.486 Burt 0.771 0.486 John 1.000 0.829 Frank 0.829 1.000 Pairwise correlations in descending order 0.943 Bob and Orley Significantly positive 0.829 Bob and John Not significant 0.829 John and Frank Not significant 0.771 Orley and John Not significant 0.771 Burt and John Not significant 0.714 Bob and Burt Not significant 0.543 Bob and Frank Not significant 0.543 Orley and Burt Not significant 0.486 Orley and Frank Not significant 0.486 Burt and Frank Not significant 0.143 Grant and Frank Not significant 0.143 Ed and Burt Not significant 0.143 Dick and Frank Not significant 0.086 Grant and Ed Not significant 0.029 Grant and Burt Not significant -0.029 Dick and Grant Not significant -0.086 Grant and Bob Not significant -0.086 Grant and John Not significant -0.143 Ed and Bob Not significant -0.257 Ed and Orley Not significant -0.314 Dick and John Not significant -0.314 Ed and John Not significant -0.371 Grant and Orley Not significant -0.371 Dick and Orley Not significant -0.543 Dick and Bob Not significant -0.657 Dick and Ed Not significant -0.714 Ed and Frank Not significant -0.771 Dick and Burt Not significant

COMMENT:

This was a vertical tasting wines made by one of the winemakers with the longest track record in Napa: Ric Forman. The wines we tasted were from the Forman winery and included all the Forman cabernets between 1983 and 1988. Forman began his career at Sterling, and his cabernets made there during the period 1970 to 1980 are extraordinarily fine wines that have withstood the test of time better than virtually all the other wines made in this period. Forman left Sterling around 1980, worked at Newton for a short time, and then began making wines under his epynomous label. In the main tasting we sample most of the Forman cabernets from the 1980s. As usual, the wines were tasted blind and in random order, although everyone was aware that these were Forman cabernets.

At the end of the tasting, we also opened a 1975 Sterling Reserve Cabernet and we will comment on that in due course, because it was also made by Ric Forman. This Sterling Reserve is a highly extracted well- balanced wine with more complex nose and flavors than any of the 1980's Formans we tasted. The two things that stand out in the main tasting are the incredible consistency of the wines and the fact that we ranked the 1988 (considered a weak vintage) so highly. One member of the group thought that the Sterling needed to be drunk very soon after opening, because it faded fast. Another taster thought that the wines were initially unapproachable but that with time they became increasingly pleasant to drink.

Return to previous page