Annapolis Valley Vintners Wolfville, Nova Scotia

This is a report on what we did with some comments and recommendations. The only thing yet to come is the financial report which will be issued after the medals have been mailed out.

Our offer to host the competition was accepted 18 months before the event and we immediately started to make preparations.

Key people on our committee were;

John Starr – Chair and AWC Vice President for the Competition.
Alan Baker – Chief Steward; assisted by Brian McKibbin.
Ivan Herbert – Treasurer, Registrar and Data Processor; assisted by Faye Pilkington and Wayne Woodman.
Marta Mihoff; - Chief Judge.
Conny Bishop – Catering.

LOCATION

A critical factor on how well things went was that we were able to use space at Acadia University.

We had 2 large food preparation labs in the School of Nutrition and Dietetics. One room, with white topped tables and very good lighting was the judging room. The other, with steel topped lab benches was our preparation room. Here we set out all the wines, separated into classes and organized into flights and judging order. Glasses and trays were available as was a commercial style dishwasher. A nearby dining room was used for lunches.

Dr. Lisa Duizer, our faculty contact, was with us for the whole weekend along with 2 of her students.

RECEIVING

Entries were received shipped in cartons and in plastic pails. Some breakage was found in the cartons, but all bottles shipped in the plastic pails were received without damage. Upon receipt all shipments were opened, bottles unwrapped and the bottle label was checked against the relevant entry form. In some cases entry forms were taped to the bottle and in some cases they were attached by elastic bands. Some difficulty was experienced removing overly secure tape, but in no case had any labels become detached from bottles. Problems were encountered where leakage from broken bottles had permeated intact bottle labels but in all instances we were able to positively identify each bottle. Some bottles were received with only entry forms attached [no bottle labels]. In such cases temporary bottle labels were attached to allow removal of the entry form. After checking, the bottles were placed in cases with bottle labels, [but not entry forms] still attached for later transport to the judging facility.

ENTRY PLANNING

We made several early decisions about organizing the entries.

Flights would be a maximum of 7.

Classes would be sorted wherever possible by main ingredients and flights would be determined based on this.

i.e. in class E3, the zinfandels were all in 3 flights of 7 and the 10 non-viniferas were in 2 flights of 5.

A judging order was also established for each class based on information supplied. This was based on light-bodied before full-bodied and dry before off-dry. Wines with more assertive flavours such as Muscat and Gewurtztraminer were put at the end of the C2 class.

Prior to judging, each entry was given a label containing entry number, class, flight and judging order.

JUDGING

We had 15 judges.

7 were members of Wine Judges of Canada.

3 were certified under the Beer Judges Certification Program (BJCP).

1 was a commercial winemaker and qualified sommelier,

2 others were qualified sommeliers.

All local judges were known to us, having participated in our Provincial Competitions.

Judges worked in teams of 3 except for 1 team of 2. Beer and cider was judged by BJCP judges working in teams of 2.

All judges were asked to reach consensus and report only 1 score for each entry.

For each flight, judges were given a print-out showing all ingredients for those entries.

Judging teams were shuffled after lunch on Saturday and on Sunday morning.

A major effort was made to distribute classes and flights among to judges so as to minimize palate fatigue. A schedule showing classes and flights assigned to each table of judges was prepared prior to judging.

STEWARDING

The procedure we followed was that, in the preparation room, stewards would pour the wines for each flight. Glasses were placed on ringed mats on trays and an ID number for each entry marked on the mat. Trays were then carried in to the judges room.

There were 15 stewards, some working in the preparation room and some with the judges. Assignments were rotated during to day. Some of the stewards were inexperienced but, by teaming them with those with more experience, the system worked very smoothly.

DATA ENTRY

Upon receipt, spreadsheets from the various provinces were saved to a separate file and additional working copies were made. All entry forms were checked against the spreadsheet working copies and corrections were made [see Recommendations concerning the completion of spreadsheets]. Once the individual spreadsheets had been checked and corrected they were merged into the master spreadsheet and again a copy was made and placed in a separate file. The working copy was used thereafter and as changes were made the backup copy was updated as appropriate. Flights and judging order were determined by the Competition Vice President, following which bottle labels were prepared using mail merge to print entry number, class number and name, flight number and judging order.

PREPARATION FOR JUDGING

On the day prior to judging, cases were transported to the judging facility and bottles were sorted by class, in alphabetical order of entrant name. The original labels were then removed and replaced by the pre-printed self-adhesive labels mentioned above. Similar labels had previously been attached to the judging sheets. The bottles were then placed in flights and judging order.

DURING THE COMPETITION

Judging sheets were collated immediately after the judging of each flight had been completed and the information was entered on the spreadsheet. In this way we were able to immediately determine the results for each entrant, and other parameters required by the competition sponsor. All of this information was available immediately after the last flight had been judged.

AFTER THE COMPETITION

Mailing labels were printed by mail merge from the spreadsheet and similarly certificates were produced by mail merge from a selected section of the spreadsheet.

SOCIAL AND CATERING

On Friday afternoon before the competition, we organized a tour of 3 local wineries. Most of the people who came from away were able to attend.

On Friday evening, there was a social get-together for visitors and workers.

On Sunday, after the judging, there was a wind-up BBQ.

Conny Bishop did an outstanding job of providing food for the Friday evening event and for lunches on Saturday and Sunday.

MEDALS AND CERTIFICATES

Medals were ordered using photocopies of existing medals and specifications obtained from Larry. Two competitive quotes were obtained. It should be noted that, if a quote is FOB from a remote supplier, significant additional shipping costs will be incurred as the medals are quite heavy.

Certificates were prepared by computer, using a master obtained from Bill Spier. However, we took some liberties in removing extraneous lines and choosing a different font for the names and class. The AWC seal was received from Bill Spier and will be returned to him afterwards.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In General

We think there were three main factors that made the competition go well for us.

The first was the facilities available to us.

The second was that, prior to the judging, we sorted the classes into small flights, based on main ingredients and then into a judging order. This facilitated the pouring of the wine and getting the flights in to the judges with minimum delay.

The third was that we shuffled the judges during the event and distributed the classes and flights among the teams to minimize palate fatigue.

Packaging and Receiving

The most secure way to package seems to be bubble wrap around each bottle, bottles placed into a 23 litre plastic pail with newspaper between bottles and filling void spaces. Lid secured with duct tape or screws. The use of a plastic pail instead of cardboard cartons seems to lend more rigidity to the packaging and prevents damage from everything but very severe impact. We experienced broken bottles in shipments packaged in cardboard cartons and in at least one case the damage had clearly resulted from impact on the top of the carton.

Bottles should be labelled with a small tag showing the entrant’s name, club and class of entry. The tag should be secured with the minimum amount of masking tape consistent with a secure but easily removable attachment. Entry forms should be placed in a zip lock plastic bag and placed into one of the pails. The pail containing the entry forms should be so marked.

On opening the packages the bottles should be unwrapped ensuring that the tag remains attached to the bottle and this should be checked against the entry form. The bottles should then be placed in wine boxes and stored pending sorting by class and flight and attachment of the entry number label [see below].

Data Entry

A blank electronic spreadsheet should be provided to each province well in advance of the competition so that all relevant details can be entered by the provincial representative responsible for collecting and cataloguing each province’s entries. The completed electronic spreadsheet should be sent to the host province registrar PRIOR to receipt of the shipment. Entry deadline should be a minimum of three weeks prior to judging.

Upon receipt of the completed provincial spreadsheets by the registrar each should be placed in a file “as received” and a working copy made and placed in a separate file. Each spreadsheet should be checked against the entry forms following receipt of the entries and any amendments made. Such amendments will include rendering terminology consistent [Other Dry Red not ODR or OTHER DRY RED]. This will enable consistent mail merges to be made for bottle labels, mailing labels and certificates. Numbers should also be checked as Excel will automatically increase numbers when drag and paste is used unless the Ctrl key is pressed.

After receipt and checking of all entries the provincial spreadsheets should be finalised and then merged into the master spreadsheet which should then be saved and a second working copy made. The spreadsheet can then be sorted by class and a judging order assigned in consultation with the Chief Steward / Competition Vice President

The bottle labels can then be printed indicating Entry Number, Class, Class Name, Flight, and Judging Order. Based on three judges per flight, four copies are required, with an extra copy recommended. The judging sheets can then be prepared with bottle labels in the top left hand corner, and sorted by flight and judging order.

On the day prior to judging the bottles should be organised by class and alphabetically by entrant [for ease of identification], and the bottle labels can then be attached, and the original identification labels removed [note reference to the spreadsheet is required for this process]. The bottles can then be organised by flight and judging order, and the appropriate judging sheets should be placed with the individual flights. Allow at least four hours for this process, and it is vital to the smooth start up of the judging process. Other documentation required prior to judging are sheets of labels with each judge’s name – we made a full sheet of 80 return address labels for each judge. It is also of benefit to the judges to print extracts of the spreadsheet to indicate the entry number, flight, and judging order and the ingredients; at least one copy for each judging table. This is time consuming because it will likely need two pages taped together and folded to reduce the space taken on each table.

Judging

On judging day we recommend that the person responsible for data entry have an assistant who can sort and staple the three judging sheets together and read out the scores. The entrant’s name can then be marked on the judging sheet for ease of later sorting. In this way I was able to keep up with the judging and had results available immediately after completion of judging.

Afterwards

Sort the spreadsheet by medals and print off a list so that medals can be ordered immediately after the judging, then resort by entrant name and print off mailing labels by mail merge. Then make an extract of the spreadsheet indicating entrant’s name, club, medal awarded, and class name; save and then prepare a mail merge to print the certificates.

Medals and Certificate

We recommend that a file be prepared of detailed specifications for the medals. We could circulate to Directors the specifications we used for comment and/or approval.

We recommend that a study be made of other options for medal design. Cost savings might be made by reducing the diameter slightly or making them thinner.

We recommend that a detailed specification be drawn up for certificates. This should include type and colour of paper, general layout and font for names and class. Respectfully submitted,

John Starr

Chair and AWC Vice President for the Competition

AWC www.littlefatwino.com