Skip to content
Have an account?
Login
or
Register
  • About
    • People
    • Fellows
    • Tastings
    • In the News
    • Awards
      • Christophe Baron Prize
      • AAWE Scholarships
      • AAWE Awards of Merits
    • Downloads
    • Contacts & Copyright
  • Journal
    • Online Journal Member Access
    • Online Journal Library Access
    • Editors
    • JWE – All Issues
    • Submission Guidelines
  • Working Papers
  • Meetings
    • 2023 Stellenbosch
    • 2022 Tbilisi
    • 2019 Vienna
    • 2018 Ithaca
    • 2017 Padua
    • 2016 Bordeaux
    • 2015 Mendoza
    • 2014 Walla Walla
    • 2013 Stellenbosch
    • 2012 Princeton
    • 2011 Bolzano
    • 2010 Davis
    • 2009 Reims
    • 2008 Portland
    • 2007 Trier
  • Membership
Menu
  • About
    • People
    • Fellows
    • Tastings
    • In the News
    • Awards
      • Christophe Baron Prize
      • AAWE Scholarships
      • AAWE Awards of Merits
    • Downloads
    • Contacts & Copyright
  • Journal
    • Online Journal Member Access
    • Online Journal Library Access
    • Editors
    • JWE – All Issues
    • Submission Guidelines
  • Working Papers
  • Meetings
    • 2023 Stellenbosch
    • 2022 Tbilisi
    • 2019 Vienna
    • 2018 Ithaca
    • 2017 Padua
    • 2016 Bordeaux
    • 2015 Mendoza
    • 2014 Walla Walla
    • 2013 Stellenbosch
    • 2012 Princeton
    • 2011 Bolzano
    • 2010 Davis
    • 2009 Reims
    • 2008 Portland
    • 2007 Trier
  • Membership
DONATE
  • Data
  • Jobs & Programs
  • Data
  • Jobs & Programs
Home
»
Working Papers
»
A Mathematician Meddles with Medals

Working Paper No. 97

Published: 2012
Category:
Economics

A Mathematician Meddles with Medals

Neal D. Hulkower
Full Text PDF
Abstract

Scores of wine competitions are held annually to bestow gold, silver or bronze medals upon a select number of bottles. Only within the past few years has the reliability of the awards come under rigorous scrutiny and been found wanting. The focus of these studies has been on the decision makers. For major competitions, these are typically expert judges who may or may not have been trained and who may or may not have been screened for consistency. Since ultimately the credibility of the decisions stems from the credibility of the judges, how they are selected is critical. But once reliable judges have been empanelled, how their opinions are recorded and aggregated becomes of paramount importance. It is well-known that an outcome of any vote depends as much on the choice of method used to combine the votes as on any other factor (Saari 2001b). After examining a number of procedures for comparing wines, Amerine and Roessler (1983) concluded that “[r]anking procedures are then usually preferred” (p. 168). Ashenfelter and Quandt (1999) used rank values, which they called “Points Against,” introduced in Amerine and Roessler (1983) to reassess the famous Judgment of Paris red wine competition. This method is equivalent to the Borda Count which Hulkower (2009, 2011) emphasized is the most mathematically defensible for combining individual rankings of wines to arrive at an aggregate ranking. In addition to the unique properties summarized in the third section of this paper, the Borda Count avoids distortions introduced by summing or averaging points assigned by individual judges which can diminish the influence of tougher graders thereby violating “one judge, one vote.” The purpose of this paper is to offer a ranking procedure based on the Borda Count that can be used to award medals in a manner that most reliably and completely reflects each judge’s opinion while preserving “one judge, one vote.”
A summary of recent studies exposing problems with wine competitions is presented in the next section. The case for the Borda Count is made in the third section and a method for awarding medals based on it comprises the fourth section. The fifth section is a discussion that compares the method proposed in this paper to an alternative in the literature. Conclusions are contained in the sixth section.

Submission

Please send your papers as PDF files to the editor, Victor Ginsburgh, at vginsbur@ulb.ac.be
Papers will be quickly reviewed, prior to potential posting on the website. Decision will be to post or not, possibly with short comments, but without referee reports. The decision will be based primarily on the suitability of the paper’s topic to the aims of the Association.
Such decisions are independent of publication decisions for the Journal of Wine Economics.

Working Paper publication requires that at least one author
is a regular member of AAWE.

Subscribe to our Email List

You can cancel your subscription at any time.
SUBSCRIBE HERE

Contact

AAWE
Economics Department
New York University
19 W. 4th Street, 6FL
New York, NY 10012, U.S.A.
Tel: (212) 992-8083
Fax: (212) 995-4186
E-Mail: karl.storchmann@nyu.edu

AAWE

Journal

Working Papers as a List

Membership

Videos

LINKS

Fifthsense

JWE at Cambridge University Press

Liquid Assets

Stuart Pigott

Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Policy

Cookies Policy

Twitter Facebook-f Youtube

© AAWE 2021 - All rights reserved