ThePortForum.com

Prior to this post, I had made 9993 posts. Coming soon are two changes of rank in quick succession. Perhaps the Delaforce 1958 tasting should be pressed into the additional duty of commemorating this milestone.

Let the drum-roll commence...

I protest!

Cruz Ruby is distinctly palatable compared to some port I have been forced to drink this year. Could we make the descritpion for 10,000 posts Santelmo White NV (from Lidl) or Santelmo Tawny NV (from Lidl) - both of which were worse than the Cruz Ruby I once drank!

AHB wrote:I protest!

Cruz Ruby is distinctly palatable compared to some port I have been forced to drink this year. Could we make the descritpion for 10,000 posts Santelmo White NV (from Lidl) or Santelmo Tawny NV (from Lidl) - both of which were worse than the Cruz Ruby I once drank!

I protest!

It should be Real Vinicola 1983.


PS: Rule 47(b) says that the first member to reach 10,000 posts has to drink seven bottles of Real Vinicola 1983.

DRT wrote:

AHB wrote:I protest!

Cruz Ruby is distinctly palatable compared to some port I have been forced to drink this year. Could we make the descritpion for 10,000 posts Santelmo White NV (from Lidl) or Santelmo Tawny NV (from Lidl) - both of which were worse than the Cruz Ruby I once drank!

I protest!

It should be Real Vinicola 1983.


PS: Rule 47(b) says that the first member to reach 10,000 posts has to drink seven bottles of Real Vinicola 1983.

Where would anyone find so many bottles of Real Vinicola 1983?

These suggestions, though splendid in their own way, deny the revisited-ness of Cruz Ruby.

Is it time to revisit the ranking system entirely?

You have reached 10k posts in TPF's first six years of life.

Extrapolating, this means there should be categories for at least up to 50k posts (Dow 1896 and N / NN 31 can then take care of all further posts).

The ranks from 0 (Cruz Ruby) to 40,000 (NN31).

I disagree with the position of Cockburn 1851. That is much, much more prestigious than any of the three Noval wines that have the highest ranks.

Anyone who disagrees can have my bottle of NN63 for a Cockburn 1851 in the same condition

There’s also a request that Dow 1896 be inserted, which can be done by moving 22500 to 22000, moving 25000 to 26000, and inserting a level at 24000.

Let’s see what others believe and then adjust.

Perhaps we could include some additional attributes to give a finer grain of precision, such as...

Taylor 1970
...
Fonseca 1970
...
Taylor 1970 (Tregnum)
...
Graham 1948
...
Fonseca 1970 (Melchior)
...
etc.

?

AHB wrote:

DRT wrote: I protest!

It should be Real Vinicola 1983.


PS: Rule 47(b) says that the first member to reach 10,000 posts has to drink seven bottles of Real Vinicola 1983.

Where would anyone find so many bottles of Real Vinicola 1983?

I was going to say http://www.winebid.com but it appears someone bought the 2 or so cases that was listed for sale for the past months....or maybe they just took it down?

Maybe the person who posted this TN (‟I bought 9 bottles of Real CocaCola 1983 from Seckfords today at £13 per bottle”) might know more about it. Apparently that person’s rank is currently ‟Graham’s 1970”: maybe the RCV83 tastes like G70?

Edit: this TN (‟Not very nice, but drinkable in an emergency. 68/100”) of AHB’s is amusing.

Quinta do Noval Nacional 1962!

Goodness, and here I have just achieved a lowly "Cockburn's Special Reserve".

Just noticed that my rank is now pre-WW2: Constantino 1927. Never had that.

I see someone is approaching a major milestone for the board...

But where does he go after Graham 48? To my mind there is nothing finer...

djewesbury wrote:But where does he go after Graham 48?

Fonseca 1966.

Oh well. You saw the peaks, at least.

jdaw1 wrote:There’s also a request that Dow 1896 be inserted, which can be done by moving 22500 to 22000, moving 25000 to 26000, and inserting a level at 24000.

Let’s see what others believe and then adjust.

Beliefs, if any, were not reported here.