1966 Graham

Tasting notes for individual Ports, with an index sorted by vintage and alphabetically.
Forum rules
Tasting notes for individual Ports, with an index sorted by vintage and alphabetically.
Post Reply
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

1966 Graham

Post by DRT »

"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
User avatar
jdaw1
Cockburn 1851
Posts: 23613
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1966 Graham

Post by jdaw1 »

Alas I was unable to take a tasting note of this port.
User avatar
Alex Bridgeman
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14879
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 1966 Graham

Post by Alex Bridgeman »

Deeply coloured, dark but transparent centre. Nose was a little reluctant with heat being the main feature for the first hour or two in the glass but with time it opened to reveal a very attractive rich and spicy mélange of Dundee fruitcake. Huge flavour profile in the mouth, massive and complex. Thick texture and flavours. Enormously chewy aftertaste that fills the cheeks and dominates the palate with chocolate tannins showing late on. Very impressive and still years from it's peak. 94/199.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.

2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
User avatar
JacobH
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3300
Joined: 16:37 Sat 03 May 2008
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: 1966 Graham

Post by JacobH »

Notably darker than the older wines in this tasting. On the palate, simply incredible complexity with a good amount of fruit to balance out its sweetness and maturity. Absolutely excellent.
Image
Andy Velebil
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3028
Joined: 22:16 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Los Angeles, Ca USA
Contact:

1966 Graham’s Vintage Port

Post by Andy Velebil »

1966 Graham’s Vintage Port:
A very dark ruby with just a touch of pink at the edge. Still very youthful and fruit driven on the nose with some unmistakable amounts of chocolate also showing through. I couldn’t help but immediately notice how full bodied this was. Plenty of fruit, tannins, acidity, and structure to keep this going for at least several more decades. Even the finish was still very tannic with that signature dollop of cigar box (tobacco) showing up late. This also was quite sweet and considering it has a Bauméof 4.0 no wonder. It’s interesting to note Paul said 1966 wasn’t held in super high regard early on and this was originally considered a ‟Peasant vintage” in Portugal. All I got to say is the ‟peasants” sure must have drunk well when this was released. 96 Points
Post Reply