One of ten bottles bought last year. This bottle selected for having signs of old seepage, although they might have resulted from a messy moment in the bottling plant.
Cork showed no defects, was extracted intact, and was perfectly branded.
Decanted 12.30. Very dark, moderate amount of fine sediment.
First sip - dark purple colour, slightly alcoholic nose and immediately approachable.
The similarity to the Morgan '91 was immediately apparent. It then occurred to me that it was possible that they are in fact the same...
See how it evolves..
Tom
1991 Croft
-
uncle tom
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3519
- Joined: 23:43 Wed 20 Jun 2007
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
1991 Croft
I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly - W.S. Churchill
-
uncle tom
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3519
- Joined: 23:43 Wed 20 Jun 2007
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
Re: 1991 Croft vintage port
+ 8 hrs
A young Turk with a good nose. Well short of mature, but not overly tannic either.
Is this the same as the M91? - I'm not sure. There are clear similarities, but I sense this may be a class above.
May be.. - need to do a back to back at some point. See where this one goes from here..
Tom
A young Turk with a good nose. Well short of mature, but not overly tannic either.
Is this the same as the M91? - I'm not sure. There are clear similarities, but I sense this may be a class above.
May be.. - need to do a back to back at some point. See where this one goes from here..
Tom
I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly - W.S. Churchill
-
uncle tom
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3519
- Joined: 23:43 Wed 20 Jun 2007
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
Re: 1991 Croft vintage port
Another day and this continues to look very young; with greater depth and integrity than I recall from the M91.
This is nowhere near mature, with a vibrant young nose and tannic palate.
As the '91's have moved on from their 'Kevin' phase, I have begun to suspect that this vintage is one that will really blossom at the 40yr mark, much as '66 has done. This wine confirms that prognosis.
To score:
For immediate gratification it is too young and tannic still. Being somewhat tannin-averse I will give this a 5 - others might rate it more highly.
Where's it going? A winner without doubt, eventually, but I doubt it will be fully mature in another decade..
Score 5-9
(I last indulged an M91 three months ago and rated it 6-8)
- note to me: re-visit in 2011
Tom
This is nowhere near mature, with a vibrant young nose and tannic palate.
As the '91's have moved on from their 'Kevin' phase, I have begun to suspect that this vintage is one that will really blossom at the 40yr mark, much as '66 has done. This wine confirms that prognosis.
To score:
For immediate gratification it is too young and tannic still. Being somewhat tannin-averse I will give this a 5 - others might rate it more highly.
Where's it going? A winner without doubt, eventually, but I doubt it will be fully mature in another decade..
Score 5-9
(I last indulged an M91 three months ago and rated it 6-8)
- note to me: re-visit in 2011
Tom
I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly - W.S. Churchill
Re: 1991 Croft vintage port
Tom,uncle tom wrote:The similarity to the Morgan '91 was immediately apparent. It then occurred to me that it was possible that they are in fact the same...
I can't see why Croft would punt out their premium wine under a brand name that couldn't hold the requisite price in the market? Was this just pure speculation or do you have any other examples of Croft doubling up on the branding of the same wine in other vintages?
Derek
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Ernest H. Cockburn