Pub Scores

[Mobyduck]

Not the most pressing topic at the moment, but the mind tends to wander in the current tedium.
when reviewing pubs we have the option of rating the pub between 0 and 10, I know not everyone likes to do so and individually different people have different ideas of the meaning of the scale.
Personally I find the ratings very useful when researching a crawl, also seeing who rates a pub a certain score you can get an idea of the validity of the score. The main point I want to make is, would it not make sense to enable half point scores, there are some pubs for example I think sometimes a pub is worth a 7.5 rating , better than a 7 but not quite an 8. To me a 7 rated pub is a good pub worth a revisit, whereas once we get into 8,9and 10 territory I consider them elite, destination pubs. Maybe I'm just being to picky, any thoughts.

[ETA]

I'm not sure how feasible it would be, and i know we've talked around it before, but maybe there's a way we can show the statistics around this. We already see a pub's mean score, but what about individual reviewers' score - mean and (for those with over, say, 100 reviews) standard deviation. I keep them for myself, and I've got more or less a normal distribution of scores with a mean score of 5.78 and a SD of 1.68. It would be interesting to know how others compare - are they more or less generous/tolerant, more or less optimistic etc.

[ROBCamra]

Try this. :cheers:

https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo/ratings/

Dave supplied this some time ago (2017) for your own ratings.

You could choose to publish your own averages on here.

See this thread for caveats on how the numbers are arrived at.

http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?21746-Pub-facilities-and-data-geekery&highlight=average+scores

[Aqualung]

For what it's worth here's mine :


Unrated 89
1 11
2 30
3 90
4 147
5 206
6 389
7 575
8 386
9 196
10 29

As ETA says this is probably a major change to the site with all the grief and risk that entails.
While I do take notice of the scores the trouble is that pubs are different depending on when you visit. This may be due to various things, timing, live Sport, live music, darts or pool matches or even once for me a Union meeting taking place. Timing also includes the weather as in a heatwave the beer becomes dodgy in lots of pubs.

[RealAleRobUK]

Interesting! I didn't know this facility existed.

I always thought I erred on the side of generosity compared to many, and my ratings table would confirm that:

Rating ...... No. of times
Unrated .... 85
4 .............. 1
5 .............. 19
6 .............. 66
7 .............. 163
8 .............. 140
9 .............. 37
10 ............ 3

For me a 10 is rare, but sometimes you just really enjoy the experience on the day, even if you can't explain why, and can't pick fault with the place. Those places get a 10 from me.

A 9 for me is somewhere that is really decent, consistent beer quality and a decent selection, somewhere I would want to visit time and time again.

An 8 for me is somewhere that is perfectly fine and has a decent real ale selection or some other redeeming feature.

A 7 tends to be somewhere that may be a bit limited in terms of beer selection but may have another redeeming feature, for example I've eaten there and the food was good even if the beer choice was uninspiring. Sometimes a 7 can have a good beer selection but something else lets it down.

A 6 is somewhere that I found OK, but wouldn't rush back to. Somewhere that is OK to try once but nothing to lure me into repeating the experience.

A 5 is somewhere I wasn't keen on for whatever reason.

I have only given one 4 and that for me is somewhere I found unpleasant, the beer was crap, and there was a strange smell to the place and I couldn't wait to drink up and get out.

Sometimes I'll slide up or down one, sometimes I think "this would be a 9/10 if it wasn't so expensive so I'm giving it an 8/10" - you get the idea.

And of course I am only human, so I'm not always perfectly consistent in my approach. But you can't take these things too seriously, as has been pointed out, a lot can depend on the time of day, the day of the week, or external events (eg sports events or St Patrick's Day) that can change the dynamic of a pub experience.

[Bucking Fastard]

The average rating I've given to pubs is: 6.73
Rating No. of times
Unrated 94
2 -10
3 -29
4 -102
5 -188
6 -434
7 -647
8 -390
9 -116
10 -44

This is my score history,reasonable bell curve.

[NickDavies]

Unrated 29
1 12
2 34
3 28
4 37
5 82
6 103
7 95
8 43
9 12
10 13

More twos than threes, more tens than nines. Classic sign of heart ruling head. If that was a set of exam marks the moderators would be on my case.

[Mobyduck]

The average rating I've given to pubs is: 6.19
Rating No. of times
Unrated 61
1 1
2 9
3 36
4 83
5 235
6 330
7 368
8 168
9 27
10 2

Slightly lopsided bell curve,

[london calling]

My average rating is 6.42 and I have yet to find a pub worth 10 plenty of time yet.

[NickDavies]

Everyone's median score is usually in the sixes or sevens, which at first I put down to a natural desire to give places the benefit of the doubt. But then it struck me it reflects the places we like to visit. I could go in and write up a few Hungry Horses and it would be unlikely they'd receive more than two points. But life is too short to endure unnecessary suffering.

[rpadam]

As a comparison, there was a similar thread five years ago here: Average pub ratings (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?19827-Average-pub-ratings).

Now being stuck on exactly 6000 for the time being, my ratings graph (with an average score of 6.40) looks like this:
1949

Looking back at the previous thread, I created this similar graph at the 3000 mark (with a remarkably similar average of 6.38):
1950

Not sure what this proves, though!

[sheffield hatter]

The attached document shows my scores in 2015 when we last had this sort of bout of collective madness and a comparison with today:




I've done just over twice as many reviews, and some of the figures for the ratings are spookily close to double too. My 6s, 7s and 8s show a slight increase, which perhaps reflects a tendency to do a little preliminary research before visiting a previously unexplored town. (Average marginally up from 5.98 to 6.06.)

Apart from that, boringly predictable.

[sheffield hatter]

As a comparison, there was a similar thread five years ago here: Average pub ratings (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?19827-Average-pub-ratings).

Thanks for digging that one out. ROBCamra also provided a link, but the original thread got split up, I think.

One point that hadn't occured to me before is that some people revise their reviews for revisits, instead of doing a new review, so that a pub may change from, say, a 5 to an 8. In effect, the original 5 score no longer exists. (If this reviewer is the only one who's done a review, the pub's "average" score shifts from 5 to 8.) This affects both the pub's score, and the individual reviewer's average score too. (Compare someone doing two different reviews, one with 5, one with 8 - both scores still exist, and the pub's average is 6.5.)

Going back to Mobyduck's original post, I'm not sure we should be paying this much attention to scores. As Dave points out in #6 on the other thread, rating systems using a scale of 1 to 10 like this aren't much use. (Especially because quite a few prolific reviewers never give a rating, and at least one does the opposite and always scores a 10.) Introducing half points is just the same as awarding marks out of 20 instead of 10. When the system is not that accurate (overall and on average) is there any point in aiming for an accuracy which is unattainable?

[Mobyduck]

Going back to Mobyduck's original post, I'm not sure we should be paying this much attention to scores. As Dave points out in #6 on the other thread, rating systems using a scale of 1 to 10 like this aren't much use. (Especially because quite a few prolific reviewers never give a rating, and at least one does the opposite and always scores a 10.) Introducing half points is just the same as awarding marks out of 20 instead of 10. When the system is not that accurate (overall and on average) is there any point in aiming for an accuracy which is unattainable?
I thought as much. Smart Arse. :D

[Aqualung]

Going back to Mobyduck's original post, I'm not sure we should be paying this much attention to scores. As Dave points out in #6 on the other thread, rating systems using a scale of 1 to 10 like this aren't much use. (Especially because quite a few prolific reviewers never give a rating, and at least one does the opposite and always scores a 10.) Introducing half points is just the same as awarding marks out of 20 instead of 10. When the system is not that accurate (overall and on average) is there any point in aiming for an accuracy which is unattainable?
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. I seem to recall it being said that when the site was set up consideration was given to not having ratings at all. I'm glad that didn't happen as despite any shortcomings I do like them. There are a few places where I really ought to update the review.

[Mobyduck]

One point that hadn't occured to me before is that some people revise their reviews for revisits, instead of doing a new review, so that a pub may change from, say, a 5 to an 8. In effect, the original 5 score no longer exists. (If this reviewer is the only one who's done a review, the pub's "average" score shifts from 5 to 8.)

Going back to Mobyduck's original post, I'm not sure we should be paying this much attention to scores.
In all seriousness I agree with Wills take on things, that said I do find scores very useful. Most people I guess would do a bit of research before embarking on a day in a new town or area, unless of course you were taking an Alan Winfield approach, I take previous (recent) reviews, words as well as scores to get a balanced idea , for example if Sheffield Hatter rates a pub 7/10 and Bucking Fastard gave it an 8 a couple of months later along with a 7 from Rex Rattus a year before I would surmise the pub was well worth including on the list, If Sandy Beech ,first time reviewer said great Fosters and Karaoke !0/10 I am clever enough to guess It would be more like a 3/10 for me.
That all said a lot can change in pub land over the course of a year, even more so now in the current situation. I think we can forget about the half points.

[Komakino]

In all seriousness I agree with Wills take on things, that said I do find scores very useful. Most people I guess would do a bit of research before embarking on a day in a new town or area, unless of course you were taking an Alan Winfield approach, I take previous (recent) reviews, words as well as scores to get a balanced idea , for example if Sheffield Hatter rates a pub 7/10 and Bucking Fastard gave it an 8 a couple of months later along with a 7 from Rex Rattus a year before I would surmise the pub was well worth including on the list, If Sandy Beech ,first time reviewer said great Fosters and Karaoke !0/10 I am clever enough to guess It would be more like a 3/10 for me.
That all said a lot can change in pub land over the course of a year, even more so now in the current situation. I think we can forget about the half points.

Probably one for a different thread, but there's probably some currency in culling all the one-off 10/10 reviews from the site as they add nothing.

[Mobyduck]

Probably one for a different thread, but there's probably some currency in culling all the one-off 10/10 reviews from the site as they add nothing.

There are probably a few 1/10's as well, one off grudges.

[Aqualung]

In all seriousness I agree with Wills take on things, that said I do find scores very useful. Most people I guess would do a bit of research before embarking on a day in a new town or area, unless of course you were taking an Alan Winfield approach, I take previous (recent) reviews, words as well as scores to get a balanced idea , for example if Sheffield Hatter rates a pub 7/10 and Bucking Fastard gave it an 8 a couple of months later along with a 7 from Rex Rattus a year before I would surmise the pub was well worth including on the list, If Sandy Beech ,first time reviewer said great Fosters and Karaoke !0/10 I am clever enough to guess It would be more like a 3/10 for me.
That all said a lot can change in pub land over the course of a year, even more so now in the current situation. I think we can forget about the half points.

I also use What Pub to get an idea of the sort of beers to expect and the GBG. I also use ownership of the pub and nowadays will try and avoid a Maeston's pubs after so many disappointments. The historic interior link is useful as I get the impression that some places are popular for that rather than the beer. That's on this site and with CAMRA branches. That doesn't mean I avoid historic interior pubs but I'll look more closely at the beers available. To me the Seven Stars in Stourbridge is the best new pub I've been to for a while and it's big on historic interior. This is the way I do things and in most ways always have. I know other people have completely different ideas!

[Mobyduck]

I also use What Pub to get an idea of the sort of beers to expect and the GBG. I also use ownership of the pub and nowadays will try and avoid a Maeston's pubs after so many disappointments. The historic interior link is useful as I get the impression that some places are popular for that rather than the beer. That's on this site and with CAMRA branches. That doesn't mean I avoid historic interior pubs but I'll look more closely at the beers available. To me the Seven Stars in Stourbridge is the best new pub I've been to for a while and it's big on historic interior. This is the way I do things and in most ways always have. I know other people have completely different ideas!

I think we're generally on the same wavelength, I will however occasionally suffer a bland (or not to my taste) beer to experience a good pub like recently a pint of Bass in the Star Inn in Bath.

[Aqualung]

I think we're generally on the same wavelength, I will however occasionally suffer a bland (or not to my taste) beer to experience a good pub like recently a pint of Bass in the Star Inn in Bath.
I may try Bass again just to confirm it's the same as when I was cornered into having it in a Uttoxeter pub. I should also add that I avoid reading the reviews BEFORE going to a new pub as I don't want to cloud my judgement. I do look at the scores and once went to a pub in Wellington, Salop thinking with scores that low it must be worth a look. It turned out to be much better, probably refurbished and the beer was OK if unexciting.

[ETA]

I may try Bass again just to confirm it's the same as when I was cornered into having it in a Uttoxeter pub. I should also add that I avoid reading the reviews BEFORE going to a new pub as I don't want to cloud my judgement. I do look at the scores and once went to a pub in Wellington, Salop thinking with scores that low it must be worth a look. It turned out to be much better, probably refurbished and the beer was OK if unexciting.

I like to read the reviews once I'm in and have formed an initial impression, partly because it saves my having to write a detailed description when a previous reviewer has already done so. and partly in case there's a particular feature to look at (a second bar that's not obvious, casks hidden away from the bar etc). It's interesting how aligned many of us are, though.

[RealAleRobUK]

Everyone's median score is usually in the sixes or sevens, which at first I put down to a natural desire to give places the benefit of the doubt. But then it struck me it reflects the places we like to visit. I could go in and write up a few Hungry Horses and it would be unlikely they'd receive more than two points. But life is too short to endure unnecessary suffering.

I think this is a fair point. I tend to research pubs on WhatPub before I visit an area so I hopefully have a fair idea of what to expect and manage to avoid the dross. Where I have been to a Harvester or the like I may leave a review but no rating, as I find it hard to rate something that really isn't a pub. Similarly I won't leave a rating for an aborted visit, for example where I walked in and found no real ale or it was too busy to get served, but I will leave a comment just to share that experience in case it helps someone else.


One point that hadn't occured to me before is that some people revise their reviews for revisits, instead of doing a new review, so that a pub may change from, say, a 5 to an 8. In effect, the original 5 score no longer exists. (If this reviewer is the only one who's done a review, the pub's "average" score shifts from 5 to 8.) This affects both the pub's score, and the individual reviewer's average score too. (Compare someone doing two different reviews, one with 5, one with 8 - both scores still exist, and the pub's average is 6.5.)

I tend to take this approach and will do a new review for a re-visit. My earlier review still stands as that was my experience at that moment in time, and sometimes it is interesting to look through and see how the reviews and ratings change for a pub over time. There are quite a lot of regular contributors who do it the other way though and update their original review. Perhaps part of this is that it keeps their user stats clean in terms of number of reviews added.

[sheffield hatter]

I will do a new review for a re-visit. My earlier review still stands as that was my experience at that moment in time, and sometimes it is interesting to look through and see how the reviews and ratings change for a pub over time. There are quite a lot of regular contributors who do it the other way though and update their original review.

I must admit it's something that gets my goat! :eek: I would only ever do it if mine was the only review and if the reason for updating the review (and the rating) was more to do with a change in my perception - a feeling that I'd been overharsh :mad: or overgenerous :) (or just in a bad mood :moremad:, or drunk :nishelypished:) on the previous visit. I think that if the pub has changed between visits (eg beer quality or selection :cheers:, refurbishment, new owner/manager, new name), there should be a new review.


Perhaps part of this is that it keeps their user stats clean in terms of number of reviews added.

I hope you're wrong about this - a case of the tail wagging the dog! :rolleyes:


[Sorry about all the emoticons - I don't normally bother, but I didn't want anyone thinking I was having a go at them. It's not something to get worked up about! :cool: ]

[Pangolin]

I tend to take this approach and will do a new review for a re-visit. My earlier review still stands as that was my experience at that moment in time, and sometimes it is interesting to look through and see how the reviews and ratings change for a pub over time. There are quite a lot of regular contributors who do it the other way though and update their original review.

I have to admit that I often do the latter if I spot an earlier review of mine. I think it is interesting to note changes (or lack of) and I am far too idle to write all the detail out again. I reckon adjusting the score is only fair, especially if the pub has dramatically changed. Or I was clearly blottoed when I scored it the first time!

My average is an average 6.65 incidentally, with a 2.4 point bias to pubs serving real ale, and 1.3 points for having beer festivals, both of which I suspect are an indication of pubs which look after/have an interest in good beer rather than being a conscious score. I am intrigued as to why I seem to score an extra point to pubs allowing dogs however, never having taken one.

Is it worth adding this facility to the Stats & Features section, and/or are there any others which ought to be there?

[Aqualung]

I have to admit that I often do the latter if I spot an earlier review of mine. I think it is interesting to note changes (or lack of) and I am far too idle to write all the detail out again. I reckon adjusting the score is only fair, especially if the pub has dramatically changed. Or I was clearly blottoed when I scored it the first time!


I agree as I want my pub total to be the sane as the pubs reviewed but can I find the few outstanding ones, no I can't!!

[Pubsignman]

I agree as I want my pub total to be the sane as the pubs reviewed but can I find the few outstanding ones, no I can't!!

Found a couple of them for you:

Ivy House (JD Wetherspoon) (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/82810/)
A Room With A Brew (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/83889/)

[sheffield hatter]

I agree as I want my pub total to be the sane (sic) as the pubs reviewed...

Insane, more like.

[Aqualung]

Found a couple of them for you:

Ivy House (JD Wetherspoon) (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/82810/)
A Room With A Brew (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/83889/)

Thanks for that, I hadn't thought of looking at now redundant notices of openings which I intended to insanely overwrite.

[Pubsignman]

Thanks for that, I hadn't thought of looking at now redundant notices of openings which I intended to insanely overwrite.

And another:

The Crooked Billet (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/25008/)

[london calling]

In all seriousness I agree with Wills take on things, that said I do find scores very useful. Most people I guess would do a bit of research before embarking on a day in a new town or area, unless of course you were taking an Alan Winfield approach, I take previous (recent) reviews, words as well as scores to get a balanced idea , for example if Sheffield Hatter rates a pub 7/10 and Bucking Fastard gave it an 8 a couple of months later along with a 7 from Rex Rattus a year before I would surmise the pub was well worth including on the list, If Sandy Beech ,first time reviewer said great Fosters and Karaoke !0/10 I am clever enough to guess It would be more like a 3/10 for me.
That all said a lot can change in pub land over the course of a year, even more so now in the current situation. I think we can forget about the half points.

Funnily enough I also check other peoples views and you and Bucking Fastard giving high scores as you both like your beer mean more to me than Rex (no offence Rex)as Rex likes pubs with an original interior and the beer is secondary. Don't look at my scores for any help on Sam Smiths pubs as I dislike their cask,think their bottles are great but too pricy and have no interest in their time warp interiors.

[london calling]

I would like to see Tric,s average score.

[Aqualung]

Funnily enough I also check other peoples views and you and Bucking Fastard giving high scores as you both like your beer mean more to me than Rex (no offence Rex)as Rex likes pubs with an original interior and the beer is secondary. Don't look at my scores for any help on Sam Smiths pubs as I dislike their cask,think their bottles are great but too pricy and have no interest in their time warp interiors.
... and I thought it was just me!
The Fleet Street Cheshire Cheese was much better when Marston's ran it. It was their only London outlet and Pedigree was a proper beer not the dubious mass produced thing it is now. The stairs down to the lower bit would probably be regarded as a Health & Safety issue today.

[Bucking Fastard]

Biases are everywhere in life ,and I readily admit that I am biased towards good ale and my scores will reflect that.However one man's meat is another man's poison ,so my scores also reflect my personal beer tastes.:drinkup:However I try to remind myself before writing a review that this is a pub review site ( not a beer scoring site) and I will try to give credit for a great pub even if the beer is disappointing.

I enjoyed The Cheshire Cheese both when I first went in in the 70's,and again when I reviewed it ,but that doesn't mean I am going to spend the whole night in there.;)

[Aqualung]

I enjoyed The Cheshire Cheese both when I first went in in the 70's,and again when I reviewed it ,but that doesn't mean I am going to spend the whole night in there.;)

I had many a lengthy stop there! I wouldn't even bother going there now but there is talk of a new JDW in the Strand, so you never know,,

[london calling]

Biases are everywhere in life ,and I readily admit that I am biased towards good ale and my scores will reflect that.However one man's meat is another man's poison ,so my scores also reflect my personal beer tastes.:drinkup:However I try to remind myself before writing a review that this is a pub review site ( not a beer scoring site) and I will try to give credit for a great pub even if the beer is disappointing.

I enjoyed The Cheshire Cheese both when I first went in in the 70's,and again when I reviewed it ,but that doesn't mean I am going to spend the whole night in there.;)
Yeah I can see what you are saying but we all leave a sublimable mark in our reviews.You don't see It on your reviews but I do.auqualung does it, real ale ray does it Tris does it and others do.We review pubs with a baise towards what we like and if you do enough reviews it stands out .In its basic form Custodian likes strong beers.No dispute.Rex likes
heritage pubs. No dispute.I like pubs with interesting new beers -no dispute.

[Quinno]

Ohh this is a good thread for stats!

Here's mine

The average rating I've given to pubs is: 6.17

Unrated 617

1 18
2 51
3 127
4 256
5 598
6 803
7 853
8 452
9 162
10 32

Still a nice spread like it was in 2015!

1983

Obviously my own biases in there and I certainly recognise most reviewers ways of scoring, I can guess with a high degree of certainy Moby, PSM or BF's scores without looking at them, just by reading the review!

[Aqualung]

Obviously my own biases in there and I certainly recognise most reviewers ways of scoring, I can guess with a high degree of certainy Moby, PSM or BF's scores without looking at them, just by reading the review!

Like most if not all of us 7 is the most common score. I occasionally find myself screaming, smashing my head against the wall and throwing things around the room after seeing a score but I would defend the rights of the reviewer with my life. We're all different and all have different priorities which I'm happy to see have been illustrated lately in these dark days.

[Quinno]

Like most if not all of us 7 is the most common score. I occasionally find myself screaming, smashing my head against the wall and throwing things around the room after seeing a score but I would defend the rights of the reviewer with my life. We're all different and all have different priorities which I'm happy to see have been illustrated lately in these dark days.

Most of us tend to pick the best rated pubs when we travel to a new destination, so you'd assume we'd cluster there.

I occasionally 'do a Winfield' in small towns and try and bag every one regardless, which, along with my various challenges over the years where I just do a pub which fits the challenge criteria regardless, accounts for probably 80% of my sub-6 scores.

[ETA]

I occasionally 'do a Winfield' in small towns and try and bag every one regardless, which, along with my various challenges over the years where I just a pub which fits the challenge criteria regardless, accounts for probably 80% of my sub-6 scores.

Ditto

[oldboots]

I occasionally 'do a Winfield' in small towns and try and bag every one regardless ...

me too,

[Komakino]

I occasionally 'do a Winfield' in small towns and try and bag every one regardless...

Me three.

[Pubsignman]

I agree as I want my pub total to be the sane as the pubs reviewed but can I find the few outstanding ones, no I can't!!

Stumbled across another this evening:

The Red Lion (JD Wetherspoon) (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/13857/)

[Aqualung]

Stumbled across another this evening:

The Red Lion (JD Wetherspoon) (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/13857/)
Thank, it looks like there's only one left.

[Dave M]

Thank, it looks like there's only one left.

The Wenlock Arms (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/23683/)

[Aqualung]

The Wenlock Arms (https://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/23683/)

Many thanks, no more duplicates!