Has anyone seen any empirical, objective studies that attempt to
analyze whether wine preferences of individuals (in blind tastings)
are correlated to the price of wine and/or "professional" wine
ratings?

Furthermore, do these correlations change after individuals have had
1-2 glasses of wine, individuals can tell the difference between a
"great" wine and an "average" wine?

Here is my hypothesis:
The vast majority of wine drinkers can't really tell the difference
between a "great" wine and an "average" wine.

Here is one example of a study I'd love to see:
I'd love to take 1,000 wine drinkers and give them each 10 Chardonnays
to taste.

The Chardonnays would range in price from $2 - $40. I'd have each
person rank the wines from best to worst.

I'd also have them re-rank the wine after having drunk 1-2 glasses of
wine.

I'd love to see the correlation of wine rating to price, and to see
how this changes after 1-2 drinks. I'd also like to see the
correlation of individual's ratings to professional ratings.

I know this is not a perfect study, as the length of time a bottle is
opened, the food pairing, etc are all important. Although imperfect,
I feel it I still an interesting study. It is as much a test of wine,
as of wine drinkers.

>I'd love to see the correlation of wine rating to price, and to see
>how this changes after 1-2 drinks. I'd also like to see the
>correlation of individual's ratings to professional ratings.

There is not necessarily much corelation between price and preference. I do
most of my tastings blind, and so identity and cost of a wine is not a factor.

What you are suggesting is simply blind tasting, but with the added query as to
whether preferences change after a couple of glasses.

I would suggest that there is no significant change in preferences after a
couple of glasses, but by all means do your own study and report back to us.

I would also suggest that trying to relate a sample group's preferences to the
ratings of one of the magazines that rates by tasting panel would be pretty
meaningless. Many of us find ratings from the Wine Speculator, for instance, to
be unreliable and inconsistent.

You might be able to find a correlation if you compared to a single reviewer
(Parker, Tanzer, etc.) but I'm not sure what conclusion you could draw from
that. You might in fact find that a sample group of very new tasters would
prefer easy to like wines with lots of up front fruit and lower tannins than a
group with more experience, that would likely mirror the ratings of an
'expert' more closely.

seeking evidence wrote:
>
> Here is my hypothesis:
> The vast majority of wine drinkers can't really tell the difference
> between a "great" wine and an "average" wine.

Maybe this is semantics, but I'd say "great" and "good". But that's one
of the difficulties with this kind of thing.

> Here is one example of a study I'd love to see:
> I'd love to take 1,000 wine drinkers and give them each 10 Chardonnays
> to taste.

Here's the other problem -- which 1,000 wine drinkers? I bet 1,000
sommeliers would give pretty consistent results. 1,000 clones of me
*might* give consistent results. 1,000 people with my level of
experience would be all over the map. Having said that, I'm kind of
amazed that there's correlation to the current extent. For example, I
buy under $12 USD wines. I'm pretty careful about what I choose, and I
get the best quality I can for what I pay. A friend of mine buys in the
under $20 USD range, he's less assiguous than I about what he picks, but
he pays attention to what he's doing. The thing is, I've rarely enjoyed
my wines more than his. Now I know that there are some real beastlies
out there but they really are few and far between, and as long as people
are reasonably informed we stay away from them. And I'm not even close
to being "an experienced wine drinker".

In short, I *wish* the people who price this stuff were doing a worse
job. Unfortunately, I very seldomly catch them out.

-- kov

...
> >I'd love to see the correlation of wine rating to price, and to see
> >how this changes after 1-2 drinks. I'd also like to see the
> >correlation of individual's ratings to professional ratings.
>
> There is not necessarily much corelation between price and preference. I
do
> most of my tastings blind, and so identity and cost of a wine is not a
factor.
>
> What you are suggesting is simply blind tasting, but with the added query
as to
> whether preferences change after a couple of glasses.

I agree with Bill. My stats are rather rusty, but I think the variables of "
after 2 drinks" nad on price would make the study a statistical nightmare,
( I beg to be corrected by more learned folk.
Most serious wine lovers taste blind part of the time, you are then not
"drinking the label"
Like chess and bridge,( see recent thread), appreciating fine wine is
straightforward, but one can peel away layer upon layer of complexity and
you keep learning to your last glass.
I always remember an experiment in the 70's, ( the details escape me,
someone may know), where very fine examples of classic wines, and some dogs,
were served blind to two groups, one of "wine experts", the other of very
inexperienced tasters. They were asked to rank the wines in niceness to
drink.
, just nice drinking, there was no difference between the two groups.

Now that could be an interesting thread!!

JT

The essence of my thoughts is that "most" people that insist on paying
>>$20++ for a wine (i.e. "yuppies") can't tell their >>$wine from a
$10 wine in a blind test.

Rank Amateur > wrote in message >...
> seeking evidence wrote:
> >
> > Here is my hypothesis:
> > The vast majority of wine drinkers can't really tell the difference
> > between a "great" wine and an "average" wine.
>
> Maybe this is semantics, but I'd say "great" and "good". But that's one
> of the difficulties with this kind of thing.
>
> > Here is one example of a study I'd love to see:
> > I'd love to take 1,000 wine drinkers and give them each 10 Chardonnays
> > to taste.
>
> Here's the other problem -- which 1,000 wine drinkers? I bet 1,000
> sommeliers would give pretty consistent results. 1,000 clones of me
> *might* give consistent results. 1,000 people with my level of
> experience would be all over the map. Having said that, I'm kind of
> amazed that there's correlation to the current extent. For example, I
> buy under $12 USD wines. I'm pretty careful about what I choose, and I
> get the best quality I can for what I pay. A friend of mine buys in the
> under $20 USD range, he's less assiguous than I about what he picks, but
> he pays attention to what he's doing. The thing is, I've rarely enjoyed
> my wines more than his. Now I know that there are some real beastlies
> out there but they really are few and far between, and as long as people
> are reasonably informed we stay away from them. And I'm not even close
> to being "an experienced wine drinker".
>
> In short, I *wish* the people who price this stuff were doing a worse
> job. Unfortunately, I very seldomly catch them out.
>
> -- kov

Hello

When I read your first post, I wondered if you didn't have a hidden
agenda.

On 17 Dec 2003 14:19:15 -0800, (seeking evidence)
wrote:

>The essence of my thoughts is that "most" people that insist on paying
>>>$20++ for a wine (i.e. "yuppies") can't tell their >>$wine from a
>$10 wine in a blind test.


Thanks for confirming that you have. You have your opinion, and you're
perfectly entitled to it. However, you reveal - or you do to me -
where you're coming from when you say "most people that _insist_.
etc. Your use of the word "insist" was NOST revealing.

If you can't tell the difference between a €10 wine and a €20 wine
after a couple of glasses, then you've saved a lot of money. That's
great.

But your post seems to me to cast doubt on the judgement and tasting
ability who do think they can tell the difference. It's your right of
course, though I'd be happier if you did it more openly.

All the best
Ian
(To reply by email PLEASE don't use "Reply to" but
use my name at wanadoo.fr) Thanks.

On 17 Dec 2003 09:10:24 -0800, (seeking evidence)
wrote:

>Has anyone seen any empirical, objective studies that attempt to
>analyze whether wine preferences of individuals (in blind tastings)
>are correlated to the price of wine and/or "professional" wine
>ratings?

There was a study back in the 80s; unfortunately I can't recall the
source.

In it, a smallish, 40 or so, randomly selected group were offered
wines to drink in a leisurely way, on their own. The offering was
repeated for daily for about a month. The wines were very varied by
price, style, and general recognition of quality. The design of the
experiment. People could taste all of them, then pick the wine they
wanted to drink.

The initial result confirmed the sceptics -- peoples choices were
random, uncorrelated to price or quality.

The progression however tended to confirm the beliefs of those who
think there is some objectivity to wine ratings. Once people had
settled on a style they liked, they would gradually work their way up
the quality ladder. What was interesting is that they didn't jump for
their initial preference to the top rated wines, but selected their
way up gradually.

You can interpret this in any way you like. My guess is with
increasing familiarity, one begins to enjoy the composition and
complexity of wine more, and places less emphasis on the immediately
pleasant primary qualities, i.e. something sweet, without sour or
bitter tastes or oddball aromas.

--
Jim

)

If I know anything about the wine: producer, vintage, price, WS/WA rating,
storage history, I've tasted it before, etc. I suppose it sets up a certain
expectation. However, an expensive wine has a greater potential to
_disappoint_ if it doesn't deliver the desired attributes . . . whereas a
cheap wine has a lot more room to impress (on a QPR basis).

To your point, I believe that an average consumer (at least the ones I
observe here in middle America) reacts to both price and any posted
professional ratings _at the point of sale_ in their decision to purchase.
If that taints the tasting experience and tips in it a positive way or
changes repeat purchase behavior, I would be curious.

Not many food products are numerically rated by 'experts' . . . however,
consumers are very familiar with food, berverages, and consumer goods being
offered for sale at a variety of price points. There may be a variety of
consumer/sociological/economic studies out there around this general idea to
give you guidance, because in a way it isn't necessarily a wine specific
question. For example: I am interested in buying a stereo; I read consumer
reports for their opinion; I go to the store and listen to them and I may or
may not be able to detect an improvement in sound quality from $200 to
$2000; also maybe the brand is important as to you (for experience,
reputation for quality, or status symbol). Your purchase decision will be
fueled by all of that and also, ultimately, what you can afford.

justin

"seeking evidence" > wrote in message
om...
> Has anyone seen any empirical, objective studies that attempt to
> analyze whether wine preferences of individuals (in blind tastings)
> are correlated to the price of wine and/or "professional" wine
> ratings?
>
> Furthermore, do these correlations change after individuals have had
> 1-2 glasses of wine, individuals can tell the difference between a
> "great" wine and an "average" wine?
>
> Here is my hypothesis:
> The vast majority of wine drinkers can't really tell the difference
> between a "great" wine and an "average" wine.
>
> Here is one example of a study I'd love to see:
> I'd love to take 1,000 wine drinkers and give them each 10 Chardonnays
> to taste.
>
> The Chardonnays would range in price from $2 - $40. I'd have each
> person rank the wines from best to worst.
>
> I'd also have them re-rank the wine after having drunk 1-2 glasses of
> wine.
>
> I'd love to see the correlation of wine rating to price, and to see
> how this changes after 1-2 drinks. I'd also like to see the
> correlation of individual's ratings to professional ratings.
>
> I know this is not a perfect study, as the length of time a bottle is
> opened, the food pairing, etc are all important. Although imperfect,
> I feel it I still an interesting study. It is as much a test of wine,
> as of wine drinkers.