TheButler
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 231
- Reaction score
- 0
I was listening to the Freakonomics podcast on my drive before the holidays and the latest episode had this subject. Now, if the topic had come up in conversation before then I would have responded that generally yes, it does, as long as we all acknowledge that marketing and hype play a part as well. In other words, price is one indicator but that doesn't mean there isn't a shortage of overpriced wines that really don't belong in their price category.
For those who can't be bothered to listen to the podcast, I would summarize the findings in a few bullets:
1) When blind tasting selections that include the same wine multiple times, we really can't tell. In one example he gives, tasters were given "four" different wines although two of them were the same; those two had the highest variability in ratings. As well, our perception of quality is highly influenced by what we believe the price to be for that wine.
That part of the study is not fully scientific but this finding has been verified even among "wine experts". There was a formal study done of variability in wine ratings where 70 judges at the California State Wine Fair were given the same wine, drawn from the same bottle, three times. On average, the wine was given a wide range of ratings by the same judge.
2) The average consumer actually enjoys expensive wines slightly less than cheaper wines. This is from a study by Robin Goldstein. I suppose this shouldn't be too surprising; look at the average American's love for McDonalds and cheap, fast, greasy food. Apparently what the experts posit as "fine wine" with its tobacco overtones, mineral notes and full-bodied character is not what the uneducated palate enjoys. I've sort of known this given my anecdotal experience of bringing some fine wines to family gatherings and finding them underappreciated.
Which brings us to the last point, since that would lead us to believe that wine appreciation is a learned thing for the truly refined, much like enjoying art, stylish clothing, and the symphony.
Not so fast.
3) The "wine experts" don't seem to do much better at it. In the Goldstein study, while they found that experts did not have the same negative correlation with price, the positive correlation was very small. The same guy who did the California Wine State Fair study conducted a similar analysis where he found that when you looked at how gold medals were awarded to wines (by the experts), the distribution of awards "mirrors what might be expected should a gold medal be awarded by chance alone."
Taken as whole, I'm suprised. Not surprised that price is not a reliable indicator of quality; I knew that already. I think a little bit surprised by the fact that among the experts there is little correlation, making ratings completely unreliable. And that even with the same expert there is so much variability (I do recall a blog entry about a dinner with Robert Parker where they were sampling wines he had recently rated and though he declined to re-rate them he did name his favourite; which did not correspond at all to how his previous ratings stacked up).
I do still have firmly fixed in my mind that some of my most enjoyable wine experiences were with quite pricey bottles at fine restaurants; the empirical data would suggest that experience was more heavily influence by my understanding of the price of the wine, the overall environment and company of friends, than it was by the quality of the wine itself. It is certainly encouraging to me that I can focus more of my wine budget on "reasonable" wines in the $20-30 range than have to worry too much about wines in the 5x price range.
For those who can't be bothered to listen to the podcast, I would summarize the findings in a few bullets:
1) When blind tasting selections that include the same wine multiple times, we really can't tell. In one example he gives, tasters were given "four" different wines although two of them were the same; those two had the highest variability in ratings. As well, our perception of quality is highly influenced by what we believe the price to be for that wine.
That part of the study is not fully scientific but this finding has been verified even among "wine experts". There was a formal study done of variability in wine ratings where 70 judges at the California State Wine Fair were given the same wine, drawn from the same bottle, three times. On average, the wine was given a wide range of ratings by the same judge.
2) The average consumer actually enjoys expensive wines slightly less than cheaper wines. This is from a study by Robin Goldstein. I suppose this shouldn't be too surprising; look at the average American's love for McDonalds and cheap, fast, greasy food. Apparently what the experts posit as "fine wine" with its tobacco overtones, mineral notes and full-bodied character is not what the uneducated palate enjoys. I've sort of known this given my anecdotal experience of bringing some fine wines to family gatherings and finding them underappreciated.
Which brings us to the last point, since that would lead us to believe that wine appreciation is a learned thing for the truly refined, much like enjoying art, stylish clothing, and the symphony.
Not so fast.
3) The "wine experts" don't seem to do much better at it. In the Goldstein study, while they found that experts did not have the same negative correlation with price, the positive correlation was very small. The same guy who did the California Wine State Fair study conducted a similar analysis where he found that when you looked at how gold medals were awarded to wines (by the experts), the distribution of awards "mirrors what might be expected should a gold medal be awarded by chance alone."
Taken as whole, I'm suprised. Not surprised that price is not a reliable indicator of quality; I knew that already. I think a little bit surprised by the fact that among the experts there is little correlation, making ratings completely unreliable. And that even with the same expert there is so much variability (I do recall a blog entry about a dinner with Robert Parker where they were sampling wines he had recently rated and though he declined to re-rate them he did name his favourite; which did not correspond at all to how his previous ratings stacked up).
I do still have firmly fixed in my mind that some of my most enjoyable wine experiences were with quite pricey bottles at fine restaurants; the empirical data would suggest that experience was more heavily influence by my understanding of the price of the wine, the overall environment and company of friends, than it was by the quality of the wine itself. It is certainly encouraging to me that I can focus more of my wine budget on "reasonable" wines in the $20-30 range than have to worry too much about wines in the 5x price range.