moki
el Presidente
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2003
- Messages
- 9,418
Group Blind Taste Test #1 Summary
Here's a summary of the results from The Evil Dr. Moki's Group Blind Taste Test #1
Raw Data
Here's the spreadsheet I used to enter the raw data into:
Cigar Rankings
#1 -- 6.94/10 -- Cigar #3, non-Cuban Cabaiguan WCD 120, 2007 -- (10/10 thought Cuban)
#2 -- 6.65/10 -- Cigar #4, Cuban Bolivar Gold Medal, 2007 -- (5/10 thought Cuban)
#3 -- 6.60/10 -- Cigar #7, non-Cuban Davidoff Millennium Blend Lonsdale, 2006 -- (3/10 thought Cuban)
#4 -- 6.45/10 -- Cigar #9, non-Cuban Avo LE05, 2005 -- (3/10 thought Cuban)
#5 -- 6.45/10 -- Cigar #5, non-Cuban Ashton ESG Robusto, 20067 -- (2/10 thought Cuban)
#6 -- 6.39/10 -- Cigar #1, Cuban H.Upmann Naturales tubos, early 1980s -- (8/9 thought Cuban)
#7 -- 6.28/10 -- Cigar #8, non-Cuban Tatuaje Cojonu 2003, 2005 -- (3/10 thought Cuban)
#8 -- 6.19/10 -- Cigar #10, Cuban Cohiba Panatela, 2003 -- (10/10 thought Cuban)
#9 -- 5.75/10 -- Cigar #6, Cuban San Cristobal de la H. La Punta, 2001 -- (7/10 thought Cuban)
#10 -- 5.45/10 -- Cigar #2, non-Cuban Ashton VSG "Round" Robusto, 1997 -- (1/10 thought Cuban)
The same data, presented two different ways:
Testers and their Scores
Here's a chart of each tester and their respective ratings for each cigar:
Some are more positive than others in general, others are more negative in general, and some are just bipolar.
Conclusions
So what do we make of all of this? Individually, people were not very good at picking out Cuban vs. non-Cuban. However collectively, they did a pretty good job "voting" which cigars were Cuban and which were not... except for the Cabaiguan, which everyone thought was Cuban, and it was not... and the Bolivar Gold Medal, which as split 50/50 in terms of Cuban vs. non-Cuban.
In terms of the cigar ratings, every single cigar was all over the map... there was no consensus on any cigar in terms of people liking it or not. The closest we came to a consensus, and the cigar with the lowest standard deviation, was the Cabaiguan WCD 120... which also ended up with the highest average result.
Short of that, it was completely a crapshoot. For any given cigar, some people would love it, and some would hate it. That might reinforce the old maxim "Smoke what you like!"
It's certainly instructive to read everyone's review of the same cigar -- often times, it sounds like they are smoking completely different cigars. Is anyone "right" and anyone "wrong"? Absolutely not... taste is very subjective.
The Future
I plan on doing more blind taste testings. As interesting as it is to see people's guesses for various things, I'm thinking that for successive rounds, I won't ask people to guess the origin, marca, etc. Instead of trying to determine any statistical trends by what people think a cigar is, I will instead just rely on what the cigar actually is for any conclusions. I think then people will focus more on the review of the cigar rather than trying to "get it right".
I also think that I was remiss in not establishing a "ratings scale" guide for everyone, so that we'd all be on the same page in terms of what a "7" meant for a particular cigar, for instance.
Thanks!
Thanks to everyone who participated -- it was a blast!
Here's a summary of the results from The Evil Dr. Moki's Group Blind Taste Test #1
Raw Data
Here's the spreadsheet I used to enter the raw data into:
Cigar Rankings
#1 -- 6.94/10 -- Cigar #3, non-Cuban Cabaiguan WCD 120, 2007 -- (10/10 thought Cuban)
#2 -- 6.65/10 -- Cigar #4, Cuban Bolivar Gold Medal, 2007 -- (5/10 thought Cuban)
#3 -- 6.60/10 -- Cigar #7, non-Cuban Davidoff Millennium Blend Lonsdale, 2006 -- (3/10 thought Cuban)
#4 -- 6.45/10 -- Cigar #9, non-Cuban Avo LE05, 2005 -- (3/10 thought Cuban)
#5 -- 6.45/10 -- Cigar #5, non-Cuban Ashton ESG Robusto, 20067 -- (2/10 thought Cuban)
#6 -- 6.39/10 -- Cigar #1, Cuban H.Upmann Naturales tubos, early 1980s -- (8/9 thought Cuban)
#7 -- 6.28/10 -- Cigar #8, non-Cuban Tatuaje Cojonu 2003, 2005 -- (3/10 thought Cuban)
#8 -- 6.19/10 -- Cigar #10, Cuban Cohiba Panatela, 2003 -- (10/10 thought Cuban)
#9 -- 5.75/10 -- Cigar #6, Cuban San Cristobal de la H. La Punta, 2001 -- (7/10 thought Cuban)
#10 -- 5.45/10 -- Cigar #2, non-Cuban Ashton VSG "Round" Robusto, 1997 -- (1/10 thought Cuban)
The same data, presented two different ways:
Testers and their Scores
Here's a chart of each tester and their respective ratings for each cigar:
Some are more positive than others in general, others are more negative in general, and some are just bipolar.
Conclusions
So what do we make of all of this? Individually, people were not very good at picking out Cuban vs. non-Cuban. However collectively, they did a pretty good job "voting" which cigars were Cuban and which were not... except for the Cabaiguan, which everyone thought was Cuban, and it was not... and the Bolivar Gold Medal, which as split 50/50 in terms of Cuban vs. non-Cuban.
In terms of the cigar ratings, every single cigar was all over the map... there was no consensus on any cigar in terms of people liking it or not. The closest we came to a consensus, and the cigar with the lowest standard deviation, was the Cabaiguan WCD 120... which also ended up with the highest average result.
Short of that, it was completely a crapshoot. For any given cigar, some people would love it, and some would hate it. That might reinforce the old maxim "Smoke what you like!"
It's certainly instructive to read everyone's review of the same cigar -- often times, it sounds like they are smoking completely different cigars. Is anyone "right" and anyone "wrong"? Absolutely not... taste is very subjective.
The Future
I plan on doing more blind taste testings. As interesting as it is to see people's guesses for various things, I'm thinking that for successive rounds, I won't ask people to guess the origin, marca, etc. Instead of trying to determine any statistical trends by what people think a cigar is, I will instead just rely on what the cigar actually is for any conclusions. I think then people will focus more on the review of the cigar rather than trying to "get it right".
I also think that I was remiss in not establishing a "ratings scale" guide for everyone, so that we'd all be on the same page in terms of what a "7" meant for a particular cigar, for instance.
Thanks!
Thanks to everyone who participated -- it was a blast!