ThePortForum.com

Come on guys, where are the notes!! I'm sitting here in a hospital bed not having had anything to eat or drink for two days, and only a bowl of rice in the day before that, and you guys are stalling with the notes so I can't even live vicariously. Every one of my doctors who I complained to about missing the event asked if they could come in my place. I told them to Go F Themselves. My blood chemistry still is not back to normal. HOw was the 2000? I have one more left.

J a y H a c k wrote:Come on guys, where are the notes!! I'm sitting here in a hospital bed not having had anything to eat or drink for two days, and only a bowl of rice in the day before that, and you guys are stalling with the notes so I can't even live vicariously. Every one of my doctors who I complained to about missing the event asked if they could come in my place. I told them to Go F Themselves. My blood chemistry still is not back to normal. HOw was the 2000? I have one more left.

I believe the 2000 was one of glenn's favorite.

i felt it in a dumb phase right now not to be opened but there was definitely some good stuffing in there.

I'll post notes shortly when i can retranslate my chicken scratch.

looking back at the notes, there was only 1 dud in the whole tasting and it wasn't because it was bad,
it was because it was overshadowed by it's other siblings at the same tasting.

There were some unexpected surprises, and some slight disappointments but the food, wine and company were all fantastic.

Jay, we certainly hope you get better soon and we look forward to setting something up when you're ready for it!

Top 3 for me to enjoy now are
1970
1963
1994

in terms of potential
1980
2003
1994

I believe amongst the tasters differed from me.

i enjoyed the 1970, 1960 & a tie for 3rd place with the 1977/1963. everything after 1980 just didn't do it for me so i guess i'm not very good at judging future potential.

TBird wrote:i enjoyed the 1970, 1960 & a tie for 3rd place with the 1977/1963. everything after 1980 just didn't do it for me so i guess i'm not very good at judging future potential.

shall we have an every 2 yr tasting of dow 00, 03 and 07 starting today?

g-man wrote:shall we have an every 2 yr tasting of dow 00, 03 and 07 starting today?

Interesting arithmetic.

what about leap year?

g-man wrote:

TBird wrote:i enjoyed the 1970, 1960 & a tie for 3rd place with the 1977/1963. everything after 1980 just didn't do it for me so i guess i'm not very good at judging future potential.

shall we have an every 2 yr tasting of dow 00, 03 and 07 starting today?

60, 70, and 80 were my favorite 3.

Did you think there was much of a Dow’s house style?

JacobH wrote:Did you think there was much of a Dow’s house style?

acutally

I'd have to say I did notice a change from the 94/97/00 to the 03s and 07s that I felt were definitely more approachable.

the 07s even with it's tar and asphalt and youth, definitely wasn't as tannic as the 00 and 97s.

the 03s I almost felt was perfectly balanced and drinking very well now.

I did detect amongst the 60s and 70s a sweeter style looking at my notes with the latter years being more of that "dry" style.

On the nose of the 60s and the 1970 I wrote strawberries and allspice in their bouquets.

Was there a house style? I'd have to say it's beyond my palate to tell but I thought there was a definitely change from the old to recent vintages.

With permission from Lamont

I have reposted his notes over to the respective links at tpf

I'll get to my notes this weekend, I hope.

I had a great time! Jeff and Josh did a fantastic job as usual, and as Jeff said the Ports all showed pretty well. My top 3 were the 1970, 1994, and 1980 in that order with the 2007 essentially tied with the 1980. I finished my glass of 1980 before I finished the glass of 2007 so that's what broke the tie. The 1980 was incredibly dark and really looked out of place in the lineup sorted by age - my notes have it as the 3rd darkest behind only the '03 and '07!

After the 2007 were the 2000 and 2003, followed by (1977, 1997), (1963, 1966), (1960, 1983, 1985, 1991). That last batch still received 90 points so it was a good tasting.

This bottle of 1980 showed 2-3 points better than the last one I had at the FTLOP 1980s restrospective. That bottle looked like a strong, dark 31-year old Port. This bottle looked like a 3-yr old Port. (I'll post a picture when I do my notes.) The 1983 was better because the bottle we had in January was corked. The 1985 and 1966 showed about the same ('85 one point better, '66 one point worse).

I do feel like I notice a "house style" with Dow, but it's not terribly obvious. Many times I will note them as dry or dryish, but a more common theme is tart or tangy. I think those are actually related and that the one I write down depends on my palate on that day. Dow's style isn't particularly suited to my taste, but I still manage to recognize that they're very good. I just prefer Graham, Fonseca, and Vesuvio.