Comments on: Wine Competitions vs. Really Bad Science (or “The Journal of Wine Economics Drops the Cork. Again.”)

By: 1WineDude

1WineDude — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 02:55:15 +0000

Sorry you feel that way.

By: anon

anon — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:22:32 +0000

Exactly. Geetus made the point that your analysis and Hodgson's analysis are nearly identical and you called Hodgson's analysis crap. Then you tell Geetus that he stated that point eloquently. Dude. Rolling on Floor Laughing with Tears in eyes and pain in side!

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:17:57 +0000

Your analysis assumes that "contestants" in a wine judging contest are judged only against each other and not against any reliable standard of quality, which is actually the point of Hodgson's report, there is no reliable or standardized measurement of wine quality. Yeah, the math language is outside of most people's vocabulary so I can understand why you didn't understand it and made such a ridiculous posting. Your point about the trampoline is laughably nearly identical to the Hodgson analysis in that there is no particular standardization in process of judging wines either. Dude, you brought tears to my eyes. Thanks for the best laugh I have had in ages. You can't essentially agree with an article and call it BS, not without making an educated person ROFL.

By: STEVE HEIMOFF| WINE BLOG » Blog Archive » Joe Roberts is right about bullsh*t unreliable wine judge studies

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:55:52 +0000

[...] Roberts, at 1WineDude, hit the nail on the head with his deconstruction of one of Hodgson’s papers by pointing out that [...]

By: 1WineDude

1WineDude — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:24:51 +0000

Thank you – stated rather eloquently!