1992 Taylor

[AHB]

A half bottle purchased and consumed in El Vino, Fleet Street. Deep red, firm rim with a magenta tone, 99% opaque. Subdued nose, showing some complexity - pine freshness rather than primary fruit; very attractive. The immediate impact on the palate is restrained, but then a huge wave of dense, sweet but perfumed fruit crashes over the tongue - perfectly balanced by gentle acidity and soft tannins. The aftertaste is big and generous, followed by a long length of dark chocolate and sweet black cherry. Served blind, I guessed this to be Vesuvio 1994 because of the density and sweetness of the fruit. 94/100. Drunk 14 Feb 2012.

The first time I have been able to try this port and I am very grateful for the opportunity - it really was a very impressive and youthful port.

[DRT]

Dark red with a big blackcurrant nose. A big tannic mouthful of very dense fruit — quite closed, with some astringency in the finish, but then long mouth-watering sweetness. Grade A Port!

Worth mentioning is the youthfulness and concentration of this Port in comparison to all 1991 VPs I have had. For me, this experience answered the question of which was the correct vintage to declare

[DRT]

Organisation thread
Placemats
1977 Fonseca
1991 Graham
1997 Smith Woodhouse
Review thread

[jdaw1]

T92, in ½: red-purple, 80% opaque. Mid weight, dry mid-palate. Dry red cherries throughout.

[JacobH]

Worth mentioning is the youthfulness and concentration of this Port in comparison to all 1991 VPs I have had. For me, this experience answered the question of which was the correct vintage to declare

No doubt reinforced by the way in which the Graham’s 1991 didn’t do that well compared to the Malvedos 1992 a few nights later?

Of course, I bet the 1987 vintage would have beat either of them, had the shippers not decided against declaring every other year when they had the chance.