WINE TASTER ON 12/14/98 WITH 10 JUDGES AND  5 WINES BASED ON RANKS

                        Copyright (c) 1994-99 Richard E. Quandt



                     


                                     FLIGHT 1:

                              Number of Judges = 10
                              Number of Wines  =  5

		              Type = Barbaresco


  Identification of the Wine:         The judges's overall ranking:



  Wine A is 1980                          ........  5th place
  Wine B is 1979                          ........  3rd place
  Wine C is 1975                          ........  2nd place
  Wine D is 1976                          ........  1st place
  Wine E is 1974                          ........  4th place


                        The Judges's Rankings



  Judge       Wine ->   A   B   C   D   E



  albert                1.  2.  3.  5.  4.
  davide                3.  4.  1.  2.  5.
  gary                  4.  5.  3.  1.  2.
  scully                3.  5.  1.  2.  4.
  louis                 4.  2.  3.  5.  1.
  andy                  3.  1.  4.  2.  5.
  enrico                4.  3.  5.  2.  1.
  lal                   5.  4.  3.  1.  2.
  alex                  5.  1.  2.  3.  4.
  orley                 5.  1.  2.  3.  4.




                        Table of Votes Against




              Wine ->   A   B   C   D   E




     Group Ranking ->   5   3   2   1   4
     Votes Against ->  37  28  27  26  32


     (10 is the best possible,  50 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 = 0.0820

The probability that random chance could be responsible for this
correlation is rather large, 0.5121. 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.


       Correlation Between the Ranks of
 Each Person With the Average Ranking of Others

  Name of Person      Correlation

  orley                 0.6000
  alex                  0.6000
  davide                0.2052
  lal                   0.1539
  andy                 -0.1026
  scully               -0.2000
  gary                 -0.3000
  enrico               -0.3000
  louis                -0.4000
  albert               -0.7000



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 D is 1976
  2.   ........  2nd place    Wine C is 1975
  3.   ........  3rd place    Wine B is 1979
  4.   ........  4th place    Wine E is 1974
  5.   ........  5th place    Wine A is 1980


 Comments:

This was an interesting (and lots of fun) tasting of Barbarescos
from the the Produttori di Barbaresco.  These were the regular
bottlings (not reservas) in a vertical tasting, held in Torino
in the Villa Gualino after an ICER conference. The wines were 
purchased in Alba but it was not known what the storage was like. 
Many of us felt that the 1980 was oxidized, but since the wines
came from the same source, this was no doubt just bad luck.  Still,
better bottles may well exist.  Although fully mature, the wines
were still tannic (and typical of Barbaresco), but quite
delicious.  Most important, we did not feel that there were
really strong differences across the vintages (with the exception
of the possibly oxidized wine).  In fact, the wines were all
priced at around $36 per bottle.  All agreed these were very
good value wines, and far better than most French wines for value.


Return to previous page