Identification of the Wine The Judges' Overall Ranking:
Wine A is 1999 Matarromera Rese ........ 1st place
Wine D is 2012 Ramirez de Gangu ........ 2nd place
Wine C is 2017 Clos Martinet ........ 3rd place
Wine B is 2007 Continuous Graci tied for 4th place
Wine F is 1998 Claims de Porrer tied for 4th place
Wine E is 1990 Vega Sicilia Uni ........ 6th place
Wine G is 2007 Vega Sicilia Val tied for 7th place
Wine H is 2016 Vera Blecua tied for 7th place
The Judges' Rankings
Judge Wine -> A B C D E F G H
Ed 5 8 4 3 1 2 7 6
Orley 3 4 1 2 5 8 7 6
Frank 2 3 6 4 1 7 5 8
Burt 2 4 8 5 6 3 1 7
Zaki 8 7 3 2 6 5 4 1
Bob 2 3 1 6 8 4 7 5
Mike 2 1 5 3 8 4 6 7
Dick 2 6 7 8 5 3 4 1
Wine -> A B C D E F G H
Group Ranking -> 1 4 3 2 6 4 7 7
Votes Against -> 26 36 35 33 40 36 41 41
(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 = 0.0655
The probability that random chance could be responsible for this correlation is rather large, 0.8173. 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
Judge Spearman's Rho
Mike 0.2061
Orley 0.1325
Bob 0.0241
Burt -0.1317
Frank -0.1350
Ed -0.3952
Dick -0.4286
Zaki -0.6826
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 A is 1999 Matarromera Reserva
2. ........ 2nd place Wine D is 2012 Ramirez de Ganguza Gran Reserva
3. ........ 3rd place Wine C is 2017 Clos Martinet
4. tied for 4th place Wine B is 2007 Continuous Graciano Especial
5. tied for 4th place Wine F is 1998 Claims de Porrera Classic
6. ........ 6th place Wine E is 1990 Vega Sicilia Unico
7. tied for 7th place Wine G is 2007 Vega Sicilia Valbuena
8. tied for 7th place Wine H is 2016 Vera Blecua
We now test whether the ranksums AS A WHOLE provide a significant ordering. The Friedman Chi-Square value is 3.667. The probability that this could happen by chance is 0.817.
We now undertake a more detailed examination of the pair-wise rank correlations 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 0.705 for significance at the 0.05 level, and must exceed 0.626 for significance at the 0.10 level.
Correlation Array for the tasting is:
Ed Orley Frank Burt Zaki Bob Mike Dick
Ed 1.000 0.024 0.143 -0.286 0.048 -0.262 -0.357 -0.167
Orley 0.024 1.000 0.333 -0.452 0.024 0.476 0.357 -0.619
Frank 0.143 0.333 1.000 0.238 -0.714 -0.190 0.214 -0.286
Burt -0.286 -0.452 0.238 1.000 -0.524 -0.143 0.381 0.286
Zaki 0.048 0.024 -0.714 -0.524 1.000 -0.214 -0.452 -0.119
Bob -0.262 0.476 -0.190 -0.143 -0.214 1.000 0.595 0.000
Mike -0.357 0.357 0.214 0.381 -0.452 0.595 1.000 -0.238
Dick -0.167 -0.619 -0.286 0.286 -0.119 0.000 -0.238 1.000
Pairwise correlations in descending order
0.595 Bob and Mike Not significant
0.476 Orley and Bob Not significant
0.381 Burt and Mike Not significant
0.357 Orley and Mike Not significant
0.333 Orley and Frank Not significant
0.286 Burt and Dick Not significant
0.238 Frank and Burt Not significant
0.214 Frank and Mike Not significant
0.143 Ed and Frank Not significant
0.048 Ed and Zaki Not significant
0.024 Ed and Orley Not significant
0.024 Orley and Zaki Not significant
0.000 Bob and Dick Not significant
-0.119 Zaki and Dick Not significant
-0.143 Burt and Bob Not significant
-0.167 Ed and Dick Not significant
-0.190 Frank and Bob Not significant
-0.214 Zaki and Bob Not significant
-0.238 Mike and Dick Not significant
-0.262 Ed and Bob Not significant
-0.286 Ed and Burt Not significant
-0.286 Frank and Dick Not significant
-0.357 Ed and Mike Not significant
-0.452 Orley and Burt Not significant
-0.452 Zaki and Mike Not significant
-0.524 Burt and Zaki Not significant
-0.619 Orley and Dick Not significant
-0.714 Frank and Zaki Significantly negative
COMMENT:
This was a spectacular tasting. It shows the range of different regions in Spain and the different taste preferences and profiles.the wines comprised a combination of Rioja, Ribera del Douro and Priorat plus a Somontano, Showingthe great diversity yet quality being produced.
the wines, many acquired in Spain directly went beautifully with the Spanish chorizo and Iberian meats.
While these were some of the greatest wines of Spain the age range was 27yearsapart, showing the great longevity of these wines.
Overall this was marvelous and the Riojas showed what what great vale and quality they represent. Somewhat surprising was how the 2 Vega Sicilia wines fared in comparison. Even though there was a low correlation between the judges there was an indication that it was more about preferences than absolute quality with 2 people voting the Unico 1st and 2 others voting it last.
Return to the previous page