From a statistical analysis of wine competitions, found at http://www.letastevin.org/Hodgson%202009%20Analysis%20of%20concordance%20among%2013%20us%20wine%20com

From a statistical analysis of wine competitions, found at http://www.letastevin.org/Hodgson%202009%20Analysis%20of%20concordance%20among%2013%20us%20wine%20competitions.pdf http://www.letastevin.org/Hodgson%202009%20Analysis%20of%20c... : "An examination of the results of 13 U.S. wine competitions shows that (1) there is almost no consensus among the 13 wine competitions regarding wine quality, (2) for wines receiving a Gold medal in one or more competitions, it is very likely that the same wine received no award at another, (3) the likelihood of receiving a Gold medal can be statistically explained by chance alone." I'm not a 'wine person', so don't find this issue interesting. Different people, even 'expert judges', have different subjective experiences for a variety of reasons. Even if 'greater enjoyment' is simply a product of cognitive bias, the reasons are largely irrelevant. The relevant part is that they do enjoy it more, even if others might consider the reason 'irrational'. I think this issue only becomes interesting (and objective facts important) if there's some ethical line being crossed (like wilful misleading conduct by the producer e.g. monster cables).