4 ms·
> they decided to go with the cheapest and worst-tasting one they could find. It’s interesting that one group found it worst tasting, while another found it ex
by yumraj 3y ago
> they decided to go with the cheapest and worst-tasting one they could find.
It’s interesting that one group found it worst tasting, while another found it exceptional. Looks like both suck, and maybe the wine was not the best but not the worst either.
Just like the judges were duped into awarding this wine, the first group also thought this was worst tasting because it was the cheapest.
- Daishiman 3y agoThe entire of the article is that the contest is a sham, not a comparative thing about the subjectivity of taste. Bad wine clearly stands out as bad. Bad wine doesn’t mean “wine you don’t like”. It means “technically flawed wine such that even if you liked this wine you would be very unlikely to prefer it to others in its category”.
- dagw 3y agoIt's equally likely that they never really tasted the wine. They just read the faked lab report, tasting notes and recommendations and gave out the award. These competitions are pay-to-play so if they make it too hard to win, people will stop playing and they won't get paid.