Comments on: A Walk in The Woods http://www.thescotchcast.com/2007/12/a-walk-in-the-woods/ All single malt, all the time! Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:24:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Chris Gray http://www.thescotchcast.com/2007/12/a-walk-in-the-woods/#comment-126 Chris Gray Sun, 06 Jan 2008 16:39:14 +0000 http://thescotchcast.com/?p=62#comment-126 I feel like the scoring system is getting stale. The scotch is supposed to be judged on a scale of 1-10, but the actual range of the averaged scores of you 16 graded scotches is only 3.5. The lowest score given by one of the main judges is a 6. The elaborated scoring system itself is faulty: the system lumps scores of 1-5 (half the points possible for any scotch) under a group description (i.e. "significant problems"). If separate criteria are not set forth for a 3 vs. a 4, how are different judges expected to grade a lower-scoring scotch similarly and consistently? Also, if supermarket scotches are scoring 6 or more, why even have scores of 1 through 5? What could a 1 possibly be? Why is a score of 5 not an "average" scotch? I think using the full 10 point scale would open up conversation for more disagreement between judges as well as allowing listeners listeners a more appreciable sense of what was really liked or disliked. Another option would be to admit you are using a three point scale (bad, ok, and very good), which would at least be honest. Siskel & Ebert got famous on less! Thanks for the show. I feel like the scoring system is getting stale. The scotch is supposed to be judged on a scale of 1-10, but the actual range of the averaged scores of you 16 graded scotches is only 3.5. The lowest score given by one of the main judges is a 6. The elaborated scoring system itself is faulty: the system lumps scores of 1-5 (half the points possible for any scotch) under a group description (i.e. “significant problems”). If separate criteria are not set forth for a 3 vs. a 4, how are different judges expected to grade a lower-scoring scotch similarly and consistently? Also, if supermarket scotches are scoring 6 or more, why even have scores of 1 through 5? What could a 1 possibly be? Why is a score of 5 not an “average” scotch? I think using the full 10 point scale would open up conversation for more disagreement between judges as well as allowing listeners listeners a more appreciable sense of what was really liked or disliked. Another option would be to admit you are using a three point scale (bad, ok, and very good), which would at least be honest. Siskel & Ebert got famous on less! Thanks for the show.

]]> By: Chip http://www.thescotchcast.com/2007/12/a-walk-in-the-woods/#comment-105 Chip Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:14:26 +0000 http://thescotchcast.com/?p=62#comment-105 Hey, thanks for the awesome comment, dc!! We are thrilled to be your new favorite podcast. All of us have a blast doing the show, so knowing that listeners are enjoying it just makes it more fun. It is also nice to know that someone is tasting along with us! I think we knew that the second finish was sherry, but our brains failed us. I had the container next to me, so I really should have looked at it and verified the second finish. Thanks for keeping us honest! Hey, thanks for the awesome comment, dc!!

We are thrilled to be your new favorite podcast. All of us have a blast doing the show, so knowing that listeners are enjoying it just makes it more fun. It is also nice to know that someone is tasting along with us!

I think we knew that the second finish was sherry, but our brains failed us. I had the container next to me, so I really should have looked at it and verified the second finish. Thanks for keeping us honest!

]]> By: dc http://www.thescotchcast.com/2007/12/a-walk-in-the-woods/#comment-103 dc Thu, 06 Dec 2007 02:42:23 +0000 http://thescotchcast.com/?p=62#comment-103 Just finished listening to show #7 and tasted along with you guys for the first time (port wood finish). It really made the show more enjoyable (for once I wasn't jealous you guys were drinking scotch and I wasn't) and hearing your comments while having the first glass of a scotch I'd never tried really enhanced the experience. Thanks a lot, this is fast becoming my favorite podcast! -------- btw, the Balvenie Doublewood's second finish is sherry, not port (I'm sure you guys realized this after the show, but thought I'd mention it in case someone reads this comment). Just finished listening to show #7 and tasted along with you guys for the first time (port wood finish). It really made the show more enjoyable (for once I wasn’t jealous you guys were drinking scotch and I wasn’t) and hearing your comments while having the first glass of a scotch I’d never tried really enhanced the experience. Thanks a lot, this is fast becoming my favorite podcast!
——–
btw, the Balvenie Doublewood’s second finish is sherry, not port (I’m sure you guys realized this after the show, but thought I’d mention it in case someone reads this comment).

]]>