I do like the idea of having their greats together: Taylor/Fonseca/Croft vs. Graham/Dow/Warre of 63, 66, 70 and 77. We could then easily subdivide them into 4 flights.
Axel P wrote:I do like the idea of having their greats together: Taylor/Fonseca/Croft vs. Graham/Dow/Warre of 63, 66, 70 and 77. We could then easily subdivide them into 4 flights.
That’s good. But as AHB has suggested, so is the idea of letting them choose their champions.
I thought it would be Derek in charge, who specifically asked for ideas. So will it be Alex ? Then I will forward the Menue suggestions, which have been send to me further to him. I already posted them to Derek to decide.
I think Julian was referring to an idea that Alex put forward in the previous thread.
I'll do the main part of the organising as I have already started this with our guests but will obviously call on you guys to help out on specific things. You are hereby appointed to the role of Vice President of Venue Booking
I'll get back to you on the menu choices.
Thanks
Derek
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
The original idea in the other thread was to try to figure out which is the best shipper. It seems two approaches have been proposed - to ask TF and S to bring along their champions, or to bring the generally-accepted best years (63, 66, 70, 77) of Taylor/Fonseca/Croft versus Graham/Dow/Warre.
Both these tastings would probably deliver the goods -we would have some truly fab ports and be able to try to sort who might be the best. The latter is a purer comparison - looking specifically at these great years for making port, which of you did the best? However, I have a small preference for the former, because there is the opportunity for the experts to bring along (or otherwise arrange for us to have available) port from a year we might not have chosen, which could introduce us to a year we have previously not rated so well. Furthermore, I am a bit concerned about a 24-bottle tasting, even if it is done in flights, both in terms of the cost and in the ability to maintain a strong sense of differentiation between the ports. Mind you, this latter concern may arise just from the fact I've never done a flighty tasting.
How many ports would we typically have in a tasting of this size? If we stick to the idea of the six shippers, and if I'm right that 24 bottles is too many (and please feel free to shout me down if I'm wrong), I guess we have the choice of 12 or 18 bottles. With a max of 14 guests proclaimed, 12 bottles ain't gonna do, so I think it would have to be 18. Maybe as a halfway solution, we could pick two years (presumably 63 and 66?) and give them carte blanche on their third one?
Well, there you go - some thoughts from me.
Ghandih
A man who likes vintage ports, and we're not talking Carthage
Ghandih wrote: How many ports would we typically have in a tasting of this size?
A 24 bottle tasting normally has 24 bottles.
Ghandih wrote: I am a bit concerned about a 24-bottle tasting, even if it is done in flights, both in terms of the cost and in the ability to maintain a strong sense of differentiation between the ports
Although the theme/line-up are not yet finalised I think it is worth pointing out that this event isn't going to be cheap. My intention is to do this in the same way as the Cockburn and 1966 tastings where we share the cost out equally regardless of where or from whom the bottles are sourced.
Derek
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
At the risk of becoming all French, I concur with the suggestion that after eighteen bottles a palate loses some subtlety of distinction. An session of eight, a slight pause for food, and then a session of ten, might work well.
jdaw1 wrote:At the risk of becoming all French, I concur with the suggestion that after eighteen bottles a palate loses some subtlety of distinction. An session of eight, a slight pause for food, and then a session of ten, might work well.
At the risk of sounding too British, that sounds a bit too French to me
The tasting is likely to be in two flights, split by dinner. 12 bottles per session doesn't sound like too much of a challenge to me, especially if we have some fine palate-cleansing ale on hand to refresh the palate after each sub-flight of 6.
18 wines would be almost sufficient. 12 would only be possible in America.
Derek
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
Glenn E. wrote:I must protest. A new standard has been set, and it was set here in Washington.
We had 18 bottles - 9 2007 cask samples, 4 old Colheitas, 3 40-yr old Tawnies, and 2 Madeiras - for 5 tasters on 1 night.
Cask samples and Madeira don't count - so you only had 7 bottles of port between 5 - not good enough!
Derek’s being very generous; it could be argued wooden-matured Ports don’t count either...
Derek knows full well that cask samples not only count, but that they require even more stamina than other Ports. He's just jealous that he wasn't here!
I won't contest the Madeiras, but all you get for your comment on wood-matured Ports is .
jdaw1 wrote:At the risk of becoming all French, I concur with the suggestion that after eighteen bottles a palate loses some subtlety of distinction. An session of eight, a slight pause for food, and then a session of ten, might work well.
a session of 8, followed by a session of champagne with lunch, then a session of 10 would work even better.
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
The original idea in the other thread was to try to figure out which is the best shipper. It seems two approaches have been proposed - to ask TF and S to bring along their champions, or to bring the generally-accepted best years (63, 66, 70, 77) of Taylor/Fonseca/Croft versus Graham/Dow/Warre.
Both these tastings would probably deliver the goods -we would have some truly fab ports and be able to try to sort who might be the best. The latter is a purer comparison - looking specifically at these great years for making port, which of you did the best? However, I have a small preference for the former, because there is the opportunity for the experts to bring along (or otherwise arrange for us to have available) port from a year we might not have chosen, which could introduce us to a year we have previously not rated so well. Furthermore, I am a bit concerned about a 24-bottle tasting, even if it is done in flights, both in terms of the cost and in the ability to maintain a strong sense of differentiation between the ports. Mind you, this latter concern may arise just from the fact I've never done a flighty tasting.
How many ports would we typically have in a tasting of this size? If we stick to the idea of the six shippers, and if I'm right that 24 bottles is too many (and please feel free to shout me down if I'm wrong), I guess we have the choice of 12 or 18 bottles. With a max of 14 guests proclaimed, 12 bottles ain't gonna do, so I think it would have to be 18. Maybe as a halfway solution, we could pick two years (presumably 63 and 66?) and give them carte blanche on their third one?
Well, there you go - some thoughts from me.
Ghandih
My thought when I made my earlier suggestion was that we should ask each firm to suggest 12 wines which they feel would best represent the current peak of their port making (from labels currently part of the firm). No restrictions as to shipper or vintage, so if Taylor wants to suggest Croft 1922 and the Symingtons would like to suggest Gould Campbell 1977, then they are free to do so. We then use our combined powers to source as many of the 24 bottles as possible and realistically will end up with 16-18 for the themed part of the tasting.
If we end up with fewer bottles than deemed required for 14 people, we can bring some additional bottles which are not "peak of wine-making" but which are jolly good drinking.
Or so my thoughts went...
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
The original idea in the other thread was to try to figure out which is the best shipper. It seems two approaches have been proposed - to ask TF and S to bring along their champions, or to bring the generally-accepted best years (63, 66, 70, 77) of Taylor/Fonseca/Croft versus Graham/Dow/Warre.
Both these tastings would probably deliver the goods -we would have some truly fab ports and be able to try to sort who might be the best. The latter is a purer comparison - looking specifically at these great years for making port, which of you did the best? However, I have a small preference for the former, because there is the opportunity for the experts to bring along (or otherwise arrange for us to have available) port from a year we might not have chosen, which could introduce us to a year we have previously not rated so well. Furthermore, I am a bit concerned about a 24-bottle tasting, even if it is done in flights, both in terms of the cost and in the ability to maintain a strong sense of differentiation between the ports. Mind you, this latter concern may arise just from the fact I've never done a flighty tasting.
How many ports would we typically have in a tasting of this size? If we stick to the idea of the six shippers, and if I'm right that 24 bottles is too many (and please feel free to shout me down if I'm wrong), I guess we have the choice of 12 or 18 bottles. With a max of 14 guests proclaimed, 12 bottles ain't gonna do, so I think it would have to be 18. Maybe as a halfway solution, we could pick two years (presumably 63 and 66?) and give them carte blanche on their third one?
Well, there you go - some thoughts from me.
Ghandih
My thought when I made my earlier suggestion was that we should ask each firm to suggest 12 wines which they feel would best represent the current peak of their port making (from labels currently part of the firm). No restrictions as to shipper or vintage, so if Taylor wants to suggest Croft 1922 and the Symingtons would like to suggest Gould Campbell 1977, then they are free to do so. We then use our combined powers to source as many of the 24 bottles as possible and realistically will end up with 16-18 for the themed part of the tasting.
If we end up with fewer bottles than deemed required for 14 people, we can bring some additional bottles which are not "peak of wine-making" but which are jolly good drinking.
Or so my thoughts went...
I do like this idea for a tasting, too, but I think we should decide in advance which would be the idea of the tasting. A fair comparison in my opinion would have to be from the same years, but the tasting idea of Alex I do like a lot, too. So, let's leave it to the organisator what it would be.
It seems to me that we need to start moving this forward, even though I am unable to position myself in the vanguard that this posting suggests would befit me [blame the kids]. Therefore, I am hoping to nudge debate towards some conclusion on what we are going to do.
The first posting suggests that we have a list of attendees, including a guest each from the two dynasties. We also have a venue, and a time, and a date. That's pretty good, isn't it? I'm reminded of the first proper sketch in The Meaning of Life ("Birth"), where the surgeons sense they're missing something - utensils [check], monitors [check], machine that goes ping [check]. [Pause] Patient!
Or, in our case, Port!
My original intention, as you must be bored of reading by now, was to determine who makes the best port. I quite like Alex's suggestion of inviting the two guests to pick their top 12, and to see which we can source, with an aim of obtaining about 18 to quaff on the night (a flight of 6 before supper, and 12 more post prandial). I guess that list of 24 would need to be ranked by the guests, in case our (for which read 'your') vast access to port might be able to deliver the lot. However, I would like to add one constraint, that they should offer at least one each of their main three ports (as listed previously), so that we don't miss out on them.
There you go, then. I've actually come up with quite a clear (I think) definition of what we might try to do. But far be it for me to get all dictatorial. Wadyafink?
Ghandih
A man who likes vintage ports, and we're not talking Carthage
As all who were due to attend this event already know this theme has now been parked for another occassion. However, as the venue and date were already secured this event has been substituted by this one.
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
.
