different rates for same whisky

  • Mateusz_Kopacz
    Topic creator
    Member
    Joined: 12.01.2016Posts: 1CollectionMateusz_Kopaczs CollectionRatings: 3

    I have noted that tasting notes are different for same whisky where the only difference is a volume of bottle. I would suggest to same whisky, but released with a different bottle volume, or "with glass edition" merge into one position in whisky database, but leave a possibility of choice of version (for example 1L, 0.7L, with glasses) with for example drop down list. This will unify notes for same whisky and make an order with a bottles in whisky data base.
    As an example is 12 yo Glenfiddich 0.7L and 1L. In my opinion testing notes for both should be an average from all tasting notes for the same whisky.
    I will appreciate if someone will consider my comments and I'm opened for any discussion.

    Regards
    Mateusz Kopacz

  • ben Member, Administrator ben Joined: 01.07.2014Posts: 271Collectionbens CollectionRatings: 92
    Options

    We have this discussion internally as well. The problem with this situation is that nobody has done it, yet.

    I work for whisky.com
  • SlàinteMhath Member SlàinteMhath Joined: 09.10.2016Posts: 134CollectionOslo Whisky ClubRatings: 131
    Options
    "ben" wrote:
    We have this discussion internally as well. The problem with this situation is that nobody has done it, yet.


    I know that issue is not new but what Mateusz_Kopacz has pointed out is a big issue, IMO.

    User ratings are a very useful tool to assess the 'common peoples opinion' on a spirit. However, most whisky bottlings have several, if not numerous entries in the database.

    It would *REALLY* help to pool these ratings. I understand you use this data also on whisky.de shop, so it would be even more important to have more reliable data. The ratings are there, they just need to be pooled.

    Your database is a great ressource, but the sheer amount of (identical) entries sometimes makes it difficult to find the most relevant one.

    That's what I do. I drink, and I know things.” (Tyrion Lannister)

    >>> Whisky reviews by Slàinte Mhath <<<

    [Deleted User] liked that
  • horst_s Administrator horst_s Joined: 01.07.2014Posts: 507Ratings: 704
    Options

    We will put it on our ToDo-List. But it will take quite a time, because we have two other projects to finish first (Responsove Design, new Forum Software).

    Kind regards, Horst Luening, Master Taster, Whisky.com
  • kroman Member Joined: 16.04.2016Posts: 260Collectionkromans CollectionRatings: 21
    Options
    Perhaps it's time to re-engage this issue. I know that it would take a lot of work, but there needs to be some kind of consolidation with the database.  Ten different expressions of the Edradour Un-Chillfiltered Edition is excessive, intimidating, and confusing!  Not to mention, I have no idea where Horst's vlog would be unless I click through each rating.

    An argument can be made for certain whiskies that are more popular and come in different batches; Aberlour Abunadh, for example.  In this case, it might be a good idea to have them separated.  Still, I would say that the batches are similar enough to have them combined into one specific entry.   Let the user who is giving a rating state which batch they are reviewing in the comment section.
    [Deleted User] liked that
  • [Deleted User] Joined: 04.12.2016Posts: 0CollectionJohn's CollectionRatings: 0
    , edited February 19 2017 at 8:06AM
    Options
    @SlàinteMhath
    I wholeheartedly agree with your idea that removing many of the superfluous whiskies (or whiskeys, depending) from the database will decrease the amount of frustration on the user's part.
    SCOTT: I found this on Ganymood, er, Ganymede.
    TOMAR: What is it?
    SCOTT: Well, it's, er. (peers at it, sniffs it) It's green.
  • SlàinteMhath Member SlàinteMhath Joined: 09.10.2016Posts: 134CollectionOslo Whisky ClubRatings: 131
    Options

    I wholeheartedly agree with your idea that removing many of the superfluous whiskies (or whiskeys, depending) from the database will decrease the amount of frustration on the user's part.

    True. Sometimes it takes minutes to find a particular entry among all these irrelevant and often unrated entries. Pooling relevant data and deleting unnecessary information will not only make searching the database a lot easier, it will also give a better average rating as more votes are being used to calculate that average.

    A lot of work, I know.

    That's what I do. I drink, and I know things.” (Tyrion Lannister)

    >>> Whisky reviews by Slàinte Mhath <<<

    [Deleted User] liked that
  • [Deleted User] Joined: 04.12.2016Posts: 0CollectionJohn's CollectionRatings: 0
    , edited February 19 2017 at 8:07AM
    Options
    @kroman
    I fully concur with your recommendations as with SlàinteMhath's.
    SCOTT: I found this on Ganymood, er, Ganymede.
    TOMAR: What is it?
    SCOTT: Well, it's, er. (peers at it, sniffs it) It's green.
    kroman liked that
  • kroman Member Joined: 16.04.2016Posts: 260Collectionkromans CollectionRatings: 21
    Options
    @to_e_or_not_to_e

    The initial workload would be quite intensive, but fixing this would be result in less work in the long run

    Going back to the Edradour database again, for example...if the "straight from the cask" series was consolodated (ONE entry for Marsala, ONE entry for Chateauneuf Du Pape), @ben wouldn't have to worry about uploading each new expression that they release.  The only time the database would need to be uploaded is when a completely new expression is released, like Straight From the Cask Rye Finish...Yummy :razz:

    [Deleted User] liked that
  • [Deleted User] Joined: 26.08.2016Posts: 0CollectionEmpty Bottle ClubRatings: 160
    Options


    @SlàinteMhath

    @kroman

    @Mateusz_Kopacz

    @to_e_or_not_to_e

    I think this all depends on how many resources Horst, Ben, and crew are willing to devote to this project.

    If they do go to the trouble to clean up the database, I think the biggest help in keeping it that way would be to eliminate the ability of users to add bottles to the database. A user could submit the info for a new bottle, but it could get reviewed before it is allowed into the database.

    I would still like to see an individual database entry for each unique bottling, which means that each different batch, version, bottle size, etc. would still have its own entry. However, I think pooling the data based on the following parameters would make it much more useful:

    1) Composite rating for each official distillery expression (all A'bunadh, etc.) or brand expression for blends (all Johnnie Walker Green Label, etc.).

    2) Composite ratings for each distillery's independent bottlings by age (all 16-year-old independent Aberlour bottlings, etc.).

    3) Composite ratings for each distillery's independent bottlings by bottler (all Gordon & MacPhail Aberlour bottlings, etc.).

    4) Composite ratings for each distillery (all bottlings of Aberlour, etc.) and each brand for blends (all bottlings of Johnnie Walker, etc.).


    Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets. (Ron Swanson)
Sign In or Register to comment.