In article >, dwmidnt@aol.
comdamnspam says...
>
>This comes up periodically. I'm no fan of WS. I don't like panel tastings (no
>one to "calibrate" to), I don't think that Suckling or Mansson (sp?) match my
>tastes very well, etc. I don't subscribe, though I did in my more innocent
>years, and have long list of
>problems I could name with the "Speculator". But while I've often heard the
>complaint that they trade points for ads, I've never seen anyone try and
really
>analyze it, except Jon Reuter.
>
>Jon, a poster on WCWN who is apparently a statistician(he was a
>frequent and respected poster who has no apparent connection to WS) posted
this
>a couple years ago:
>
>"I've actually done a fairly technical (and therefore boring) review of WS
>advertising and ratings (using WA ratings as a sort of control group) and
found
>only a slight bias at WS. For the majority of wines, the WS and WA ratings
are
>statistically indistiguishable. However, it does appear that WS is more
likely
>to retaste wines from advertisers and that these wines as a group benefit
from
>being retasted (to the tune of 2-3 points). To put that effect in context
>though, less than 5 percent of wines are retasted so the overall average bias
>is quite small.
>
>Furthermore, conditional on price, production, and actual WS rating, there
does
>not appear to be any bias in who receives the various awards. So the earlier
>post by a former WSer claiming that advertising and awards are unrelated
>appears to be dead on."
>
>There was a disclaimer that he only did the analysis for US wines for a 3
year
>period I believe.
>
>Of course, an extended analysis AFTER a winery scores high would probably
show
>a bigger correlation, because if WS scored one's wine a 94 wouldn't you think
>of advertising there to remind readers once that issue has passed?
>
>Now, the entry level restaurant awards are another thing. Pretty much any
>restaurant that pays the $100 fee gets an award (602 out of 763 first time
>entrants according to their own website).
>
>
>Dale
>
>Dale Williams

Dale,

Thanks for taking the time to delve into the vaults for that piece. My general
assumption, based on memory, and glances at the ads (since I'm in advertising,
I cannot resist, though I'm usually being critical of the photo, the layout,
the typeface used... ) I do not recall a direct correlation between the wines
tasted and those most advertised - MOF, it almost seems the opposite. Now,
there are occasions where wine A will get "wine of the year," etc. and there
will be an ad in that edition also trumpeting that achievement, but that is
magazine advertising. If an architectural mag bestows an award to an
architect, chances are that firm/person will be contacted as soon as the award
is announced, and will then run an ad in the same edition. It should not be
assumed that BECAUSE of the ad, the award was given. It rarely is.

Now, with the restaurant awards... I have ALWAYS had bones to pick over those.
While some of the WS tasters (a few you mentioned) don't match MY tastes, I
have almost never agreed with the restaurant awards, until you get to the very
top, and then I still find some glaring faults.

Hunt