What is VP's current sweet spot

[Alex Bridgeman]

The conversation on '70 vs '77 led me to wonder what my sweet spot is for VP right now. I really enjoy drinking ports from the eighties or the forties, but when I open a bottle of 1966 or 1970 I anticipate something special - that seems to be where the sweet spot for port is for me right now. It will be really interesting to see whether in 10 years time I feel that the sweet spot is then 1970 and 1977, with meaningful comparison between the two vintages with '77 rivaling '70 with the benefit of the extra few years to mature.

[PhilW]

I absolutely agree with '66 and '70 being in their prime, and I would add '77 as well; I have higher expectations of '66 and '70 over '77, but am less convinced that seven more years will turn '77 into '70; as you say it will be interesting to see.

My larger concern is whether another ten years will turn (any of) '80,'83,'85 into ports of a similar standard to '70,'77 (non-respectively); At least one respected industry winemaker believes a major '85 will become as good as their '70, but I have to say I have some doubts here, as it does not seem to me that the '85s are currently in the same place that the '70s were fifteen years ago. I hope to be proven wrong on this.

[flash_uk]

I've not had a huge amount of experience of tasting port, and out of 60, 63, 66, 70 and 77, I have probably tasted 77s the least. This Is partly due to a perhaps mistaken belief that the 77s are more prone to flaws, and so I have not bought so many 77s. In the past year or so I've tasted horizontals of 60, 63 and 66, together with plenty of 70s from time to time, and some 77s.

Of 60,63,66,70,77, my favourite year is 66 - almost every 66 I have tasted has been superb. A real shame they are not so easy to find given the lower volumes produced in that vintage. I think it would be interesting to try some of the majors side by side and blind from 66, 70 and 77 - perhaps Graham, Fonseca and Taylor. A nine bottle line-up. If there was strong interest, it could become a 12 bottle line-up adding say Niepoort? I suggest these years as I find them quite hard to compare. The "best" vintage can mean different things - it could be the vintage that turns up the most outstanding bottles, even if not many of these, or it could be the vintage that is both superb, and most reliable (e.g. 70?). My hunch is that G,F,T,Ni across 66,70,77 would all be quite close together (assuming no faulty bottles), and that actually preferences for a particular vintage are shaped a little bit by beliefs about reliability or availability or other factors.

EDIT: if such a tasting did happen, perhaps a change in voting model would be merited, handing out 9 points to be awarded (a point per bottle tasted), with a limit of max 3 points permitted to be awarded to a bottle. My rationale being that the normal 6 points voting method is aimed at finding a 1-2-3 relative ranking, rather than attempting to judge proximity to each other. Using the 9 points, in a nine bottle tasting, if you felt there was one wine a little above the rest and one wine a little below the rest, you could score 1½,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,½. This would signal that you felt almost all wines were of equal quality.

[jdaw1]

I think it would be interesting to try some of the majors side by side and blind from 66, 70 and 77 - perhaps Graham, Fonseca and Taylor. A nine bottle line-up. If there was strong interest, it could become a 12 bottle line-up adding say Niepoort?

FYI, Tue 11 Oct 2011, {D, F, G, T}×{’63, ’66, ’70, ’77}.

[flash_uk]

I think it would be interesting to try some of the majors side by side and blind from 66, 70 and 77 - perhaps Graham, Fonseca and Taylor. A nine bottle line-up. If there was strong interest, it could become a 12 bottle line-up adding say Niepoort?

FYI, Tue 11 Oct 2011, {D, F, G, T}×{’63, ’66, ’70, ’77}.

Interesting! Although the scoring at that tasting gave no indication of placings across the vintages. (also, ref my edit to post above).

[LGTrotter]

I would broadly agree with most of Flash's sentiments. Except the bit about not ever really knowing much about port.

But to put some flesh on the bones I would add that this notion of a sweet spot is one that comes and goes, the 60 immediately springs to mind as I have had not a few about 15 years ago which seemed to me to be on the point of collapse, many seem to have rallied (now I have drunk the ones I had left ) and are rightly included in this talk of sweet spots.

And I think whoever said that the popularity of the 1970 has much to do with its availability may be onto something, the 66s being equally terrific wines, but we just don't hear so much about them.

As to the 80, 83 and 85 I am sanguine that there will be individual wines from these vintages which will be every bit as good as their equivalents 63, 66 and 70. And maybe one of the eighties vintages will emerge as a clear leader, although much discussed I would still have my money on the 85.

Tom has rumbled before about how the vintages from the nineties will turn out and I would have more doubts about how the 91 and 97, even at times the 94, will turn out than I would vintages of the eighties.

And then there is that most nebulous and subjective thing; 'best wine'. I love the Fonseca 85 and 77, but I wouldn't want to say which is 'best'. And neither would I swap my remaining Fonseca 83 for more of the 85, because it too is beautiful.

So my current sweet spot is what I have; a few 66s, rather more 70s and plenty from 77 to 85, even if these last are a bit young.

[Axel P]

I am fully with you on this, but wait and see in a two decades where the 66s or 70s are heading. I believe you will adjust your position on the sweet spot then.

Look on the 55s now - I think - although drinking them not often enough - that this is perfect Port.

Axel

[PhilW]

I am fully with you on this, but wait and see in a two decades where the 66s or 70s are heading. I believe you will adjust your position on the sweet spot then.

Look on the 55s now - I think - although drinking them not often enough - that this is perfect Port.

True enough, but I think the same can be said of much older port also, providing it has been well stored. To be fair, rather than using Alex's terminology of a "sweet spot" I did alter this slightly in my reply to say that I felt '66, '70 and (probably) '77 were now in their prime, in the sense that they are now almost all of the best they can be, with the implicit corollary that so are any older ports which have been sufficiently well stored.

[idj123]

I can only echo the sentiments expressed above. It would seem that the 66s and 70s are great vintages and currently in perfect drinking windows. I've had more of the latter than former (as Mike suggests, the 66s are harder to source) and besides an underwhelming Hutcheson 70, they've pretty much all drunk beautifully. For the likes of the G70 and F70, I can see this drinking window continuing for some time meaning that I will continue to try and lay my hands on some.

[Glenn E.]

Speaking to vintages and not individual producers or bottles, I would agree that the sweet spot is currently '66 or '70. I sometimes feel like '70 isn't quite there yet, but it's close enough. It might still be there in 5 years for its 50th. And for the most part '63 feels like it is past that sweet spot, though that should not imply that I think it is over the hill.

'77 isn't there yet. For me that's very clear. While many are delicious in their present state, they also could use another 5-10 years.

Oddly, and with a few exceptions, '80 also feels like it is in its sweet spot. These feel like mid-term VPs to me, which for me are VPs you drink at 30-40 years of age. (Less than 30 years is a short term VP... VP really should age for at least 30 years in my opinion. If it can't age that long, I submit that it should have been used to make top-end LBV.)

[LGTrotter]

Glenn, I wonder why you are sure that the 77 needs more time? I know these things are difficult to put your finger on but is it something missing or too much of something? For me the 77s seem fine right now, but they will certainly keep, maybe it is just a matter of taste.

And I think the best of the 1980 still need time and like the 1960 may have more than one sweet spot.

[uncle tom]

For uniform quality and abundance, the 70 vintage has to be the best of the last half century. Going forward, I can't find a better candidate than 2011 for uniformity of quality, but I worry about the low production volumes of the big names - they will become the treats for the few, and not for the many..

Going back before '70 we are also influenced greatly by production volumes, 66 is far scarcer than 63 and there is a big step down from 60 to 55 and a much bigger one going back to the vintages of the 40s, however that doesn't render these old wines past their best.

I'm currently indulging a perfect bottle of Noval '58, a largely overlooked vintage, and sadly the last from it's case. I judge it to be at the pinnacle of it's maturity - it certainly hits the sweet spot for me..