ThePortForum.com

The first of two bottles that I bought from Tesco at £5.49. A filtered style of LBV. Tasting note taken after 2 hours of decanter time.

Deep red in colour, opaque centre. Nose closed, but hints of blackberries, milk chocolate and vanilla. Fairly neutral entry, but the fruit comes through beautifully as dark cherry juice and blackcurrants. There is a surprising amount of tannin in the wine and the mid-palate shows good complexity. The alcohol in the wine shows through too much on the aftertaste, causing a huge burn at the start although this fades to leave a cheek-drying, tannin loaded fruit juice aftertaste that slowly disappears.

This is a decent port - and excellent value for money at this price. Given the tannin in the wine, it will be softer (and to my preference better) in 2-3 years time. I also think that this port probably has the stuffing in place to hold for 5-10 years. 84/100.

Having drunk this port over an extended period of 4 days, I have decided that I don't like it. It never actually integrated, but remained spiky with unbalanced acidity, tannins and alcohol.

To sum up, I won't be buying any more of these bottles even at £5.49 a bottle. I'm not even sure that I will be opening the second bottle but might instead be giving this to a relative who enjoys port but has no appreciation to go with his enjoyment.

Alex

Alex,

I was surprised at the conclusion of your first split personality, but concur with your second.

Alan

Always strikes me as a bit sad that the titans of VP blending go for filtered LBV - leaving the second division to look after the good stuff.

I can see the commercial arguments - but I really think the Syms would be well advised to pitch Dow against Taylor in the filtered arena, and set up Graham as the gold standard for unfiltered LBV...

Tom

Alex, I was wondering too about the initial like of this. I to have never been a big fan of the Dow's LBV's for the reasons you stated.

The funny thing is, I think that this is a decent port, just far, far too young.

I'm tempted to stick my other bottle away at Octavian for 5 years and try it again.

I'm impressed with the levels of fruit, acidity and tannins - just not with the way these remain totally unintegrated.

My initial score of 84 reflected the weaknesses of this particular port - drinkable but not great, perhaps a tad too high for current drinking but reflecting the belief that it has more to offer.

I'm not prepared to write this wine off just yet. I'll wait another 5 years before finally making up my mind. However, I am clear that this is not a port I would recommend for a pop 'n' pour occasion.

Alex

Alex,

After reading your initial note I rushed out and picked up 6 bottles

I enjoyed the first half of the first bottle I opened but it was at the end of a rather long session with possibly too much red wine. The second half of the bottle was despatched yesterday, 48 hours after opening. I entirely agree with your comments on it lacking integration. It was a strange beast that wasn't very enjoyable at all.

Tonight I am giving it another go. A fresh bottle was popped 30 minutes ago and I have just finished my first glass. It is a big sticky, fruity, tannic mouthfull but nothing more. To be honest, I can drink this stuff but would probably enjoy it more straight from the fridge.

At £5.49 per bottle I am not going to complain but I am also not inclined to keep the remaining bottles in storage as I can't really see them improving.

My guess is that my remaining 4 bottles will not see New Year

Derek

Before you get too depressed, I will now add my final comments to this tasting note. I finished off the last two glasses of this port last night, a full five days after emptying the bottle into the decanter.

By Sunday night, this had started to show all of the balance that it had been lacking before. The acidity had mellowed, the alcohol had integrated and no longer gave a burn, the tannins were still there and still cheek-drying but were in balance with the dominating fruit. Best of all, the aftertaste was a little improved.

This is a very odd port. It was quite tolerable on a pop 'n' pour basis but fell apart after a day in the decanter and then moped and sulked for ages until starting to come out of its grumpy mood after nearly a week of being shut in the dark. I wish I had some left to see what it was like 6 days after opening, but I don't.

All I can say with this one is that I am convinced that it has the ingredients to improve significantly with a few more years of bottle age and this showing last night simply reinforces my opinion. I would also suggest to anyone who wants to enjoy of these bottles to either open it and drink it straight away or pour it into a decanter on Monday morning and then go to work for a week. When you get home at the weekend, this should be starting to pull itself together.

Alex

Off-topic ranting moved by request.

Some things you have to experience for yourself.

decant +1:
A light, strange smell... like a wet dog. This is not nice, what is this? No other smell whatsoever. Taste has something bitter. Next to cherries it has too much alcohol to detect any other specific flavours (yet). Although this strange 'wet dog' smell is really faint, it's enough to repel.
Is this my first off-bottle?
decant +2:
Wet dog is still there, although it seems to fade slowly. Or is that wishful thinking? Still almost too much alcohol, and we're talking the same glass as decant +1, because I couldn't drink past the first 2 sips!
decant +3:
Wet dog is almost gone, thank god, and turns a bit to charcoal. Still an awkward nose. A pitch black colour with a very dark red rim. Still almost too much heat from the alcohol. Cherries, strawberries, blackberries and burned sugar on the palette. There is still something bitter though. Some toasted bread in the aftertaste! What a weird port!
decant +6:
No 'strange' smells anymore. A thin nose is left of cherries and strawberries. Still too much alcohol and a bitter aftertaste. Lots of tannins though, but that isn't going to save this 'port'.

Was it an off-bottle or is it a very poor port? Tasting notes by other people seem to point to the latter (sadly enough I only read these after I purchased this bottle).
Don't try this at home.

Are you sure it was wet dog and not wet cardboard? Either way, I'd say it was either corked or a flawed bottled.

I've had a couple of these, and while not my favorite LBV, there was no wet dog or other strange smell. And it was very fruit forward from the beginning, alibet simple and not to my likening, but not as you describe. I'm betting it was corked.

A TCA taint was my first thought when I read Rubby's note, but then I thought that I have never heard of a T-cork bottle suffering from being corked in this way.

While I accept that it is entirely possible that a T-cork gives rise to taint in exactly the same way as a driven cork, I would theorise that with less time in the bottle and more time standing upright once bottled then wines sealed in this way will be less vulnerable.

Has anyone else had a TCA tainted wine from a T-stoppered bottle?

Alex

AHB wrote:A TCA taint was my first thought when I read Rubby's note, but then I thought that I have never heard of a T-cork bottle suffering from being corked in this way.

While I accept that it is entirely possible that a T-cork gives rise to taint in exactly the same way as a driven cork, I would theorise that with less time in the bottle and more time standing upright once bottled then wines sealed in this way will be less vulnerable.

Has anyone else had a TCA tainted wine from a T-stoppered bottle?

Alex

tca can come from a tainted winery.

I don't think I've ever come across tca taint on a t-stopper though.

g-man wrote:tca can come from a tainted winery.

Very true. If this had been the problem in this case, I would have expected more of the production of this port to have been affected.

AHB wrote:
Has anyone else had a TCA tainted wine from a T-stoppered bottle?

Alex

Yes, only once though.

and g-man is right, it can come from the winery, or something along the bottling line, or some mold or other bacteria that got into the bottle prior to being filled and caused a bacteria issue (hence the wet dog). Any number of possibilities.

ADV wrote:Are you sure it was wet dog and not wet cardboard? Either way, I'd say it was either corked or a flawed bottled.

I've had a couple of these, and while not my favorite LBV, there was no wet dog or other strange smell. And it was very fruit forward from the beginning, alibet simple and not to my likening, but not as you describe. I'm betting it was corked.

I've read the 'wet cardboard' description, but this definitely was a wet dog.
The T-cork looked alright (no strange colour or damage), and before I poured the port into the decanter I sniffed the cork but didn't detect anything strange. Perhaps the concentration on the cork was less than in a full glass, but more likely I didn't know what to look for yet (given this is my first off bottle).

Rubby wrote:

ADV wrote:Are you sure it was wet dog and not wet cardboard? Either way, I'd say it was either corked or a flawed bottled.

I've had a couple of these, and while not my favorite LBV, there was no wet dog or other strange smell. And it was very fruit forward from the beginning, alibet simple and not to my likening, but not as you describe. I'm betting it was corked.

I've read the 'wet cardboard' description, but this definitely was a wet dog.
The T-cork looked alright (no strange colour or damage), and before I poured the port into the decanter I sniffed the cork but didn't detect anything strange. Perhaps the concentration on the cork was less than in a full glass, but more likely I didn't know what to look for yet (given this is my first off bottle).

any furry animal can be characteristics of TCA taint. I've seen sweaty horse, dank and musty, wet rat, wet dog, wet cardboard. If the taint was from any causes that ADV wrote about the cork wouldn't give you any signs. I'm thinking you had a mixture of both VA and TCA. The tca giving you a musty smell and the VA throwing off some sharpness that gives it another dimension of furry.

g-man wrote:

Rubby wrote:

ADV wrote:Are you sure it was wet dog and not wet cardboard? Either way, I'd say it was either corked or a flawed bottled.

I've had a couple of these, and while not my favorite LBV, there was no wet dog or other strange smell. And it was very fruit forward from the beginning, alibet simple and not to my likening, but not as you describe. I'm betting it was corked.

I've read the 'wet cardboard' description, but this definitely was a wet dog.
The T-cork looked alright (no strange colour or damage), and before I poured the port into the decanter I sniffed the cork but didn't detect anything strange. Perhaps the concentration on the cork was less than in a full glass, but more likely I didn't know what to look for yet (given this is my first off bottle).

any furry animal can be characteristics of TCA taint. I've seen sweaty horse, dank and musty, wet rat, wet dog, wet cardboard. If the taint was from any causes that ADV wrote about the cork wouldn't give you any signs. I'm thinking you had a mixture of both VA and TCA. The tca giving you a musty smell and the VA throwing off some sharpness that gives it another dimension of furry.

Try "wet chinchilla" next time.