|
Procedure and Methodology
 |
Bronze Medal Winners |
There were two panels of judges picked out at random
by Robert, both in London and Delhi. Random numbers
were assigned to each label submitted. The bottle was
enclosed in the masking bag. Each juror was told that
the bottle might have been decanted and put back in
a different container - for instance a wine originally
in a burgundy bottle might have been re-bottled into
a Bordeaux shaped bottle.
Each tasting flight had some varietal sequence. For
instance, it could be Chardonnays from different producers
and countries or Pinot Noirs, Shiraz and Cabernet from
other regions.
The marks from 0-20 were to be assigned by each judge
individually. Average of 18.5 and above was a Gold while
17+ entitled the wine to a Silver. 14 was the minimum
to get a Seal of Approval and so on.
When there was a unanimous decision on whether the
wine deserved a medal and which one, it was so declared
by the chairman of the jury. When there was a wide disagreement,
the judges were encouraged to discuss the difference
of opinion and come to a consensus. Otherwise, the wine
would be passed to the other panel for their individual
opinion. If there was a general agreement among both
panels the decision was so recorded by the chairman.
In case there was no consensus or where the debate
involved a possible Gold, the other panel was consulted
for their opinion. In case of any lingering doubt or
unreachable decision, Robert's opinion was also sought.
Though it was not binding or final, it helped the judges
resolve the issue.
Once the medal was decided, the jurors were not allowed
to change their vote and the papers were handed over
to Robert.
There was no limit set for the percentage of Gold,
Silver or Bronze medals or the seal of approval earned
by wines and each was decided on its own merit.
Selection of Top Wines
All the gold winning wines in London were flown to
India for re-tasting-but only to determine the top wine.
Their Gold status would not change. If a Gold winner
was rated only silver or bronze from the Indian panel,
it maintained its Gold but if it won a Gold in the hands
of panelists again, it was entitled to be short-listed
for the top wine award. All the fresh gold winning wines
in India were allowed to enter the final round of the
Top wine selection.
After the wines were short-listed, the panel was asked
to select top 4 wines each and give points at 4 to his
first choice, 3 for the second, down to 2 and 1. The
wine having the maximum points was declared the Top
wine in its category. 'Although we announce the winner
later in other competitions, I chose to show the bottle
to the panel and announced the result under promise
of secrecy to the panelists, so that there would be
no suspicions raised later,' said Robert.
In the Indian category, there were no Gold winners,
which was not surprising. The only silver winner (Sula
Sauvignon Blanc) was declared the Top Indian White Wine.
All the red Bronze winners were pitted against each
other through the individual point system and the one
getting the maximum was declared the Top Red wine.
Since there were no large numbers of wines, sub-categories
were not considered. Besides, price was no consideration
in the judging process.
Too many Medals
Since there was no upper limit on the medals, about
140 wines out of 350 ended up with medals. Though the
Golds were pretty close to the international standard
of around 5%, the total number at 40% does seem to be
on the higher side.
Most international competitions set the limit of 30-35%.
(Personally-I believe the number should even be scaled
down to 25% to make the medals carry more weight and
value).
Judges are but human
Consistency of the marking system by the judges could
be a cause of concern for some. Personal choices and
preferences do tend to interfere unless the judges have
maturity due to sufficient international experience.
Though the difference of opinion is sorted out because
of the democratic process involved, one panel could
be harsher than the other. In other words, one panel
could award a bronze while the other would give the
same wine Silver.
If the top wine in a competition were to be the first
to be tasted, it might get a lower score while an ordinary
wine may get higher score in other competition. Similarly
the palates of judges can be victims of palate exhaustion
and the panel could become lenient or tighter in their
marking, later during the day. Of course, the Chairman
had warned the judges about the fallacy but the human
instincts could still affect their judging capability.
This inherent weakness is applicable to all international
competitions and as they say in golf, it is the luck
of draw.
A Case for Indian wines
The Indian wines were tasted together as a group.
But the standard was kept more or less same as the other
foreign wines. The results- with no Gold and bare Silver
bear it out.
However, in a rather unique gesture, Robert had promised
the Indian producers a summary report based on the comments
from judges and his own tasting notes to help them analyse
why a particular label was not found medal-worthy, at
no cost.
India Wine Challenge- Second Edition
Despite doubts expressed by a few, most of the importers
and producers who stayed on the sidelines this year
are very satisfied with the event and have already declared
their intent to enter next year. As Robert Joseph openly
admits it, 'such wine competitions are never perfect.
If you win medals in other competitions, and not this
one, something could be wrong with our judging procedure.
If you start winning in most other competitions, you
don't need to enter anymore. Till you discover either
way, you should enter to get the proper professional
feedback to improve quality.
The First edition of India Wine Challenge has been
a creditable and credible competition with a lot of
transparency and professionalism, thanks to Robert Joseph.
If you have any better ideas for venue, judges and
style of competition, do share with us and our readers.
Subhash Arora
Page
1 2
3
|
