1970 Ramos Pinto

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
RAYC
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2060
Joined: 23:50 Tue 04 May 2010
Location: London

Re: 1970 Ramos Pinto

Post by RAYC » 16:38 Tue 05 Apr 2011

A well-travelled bottle with plenty of air miles, this showed really well and i'd be more than happy to drink again.

Selected by ADV after scouring TPF tasting notes for gaps in the knowledge. Rare - winesearcher reveals two examples worldwide - at £159 per btl and (gulp) £384 per bottle.
Rob C.

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19486
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1970 Ramos Pinto

Post by jdaw1 » 17:20 Fri 08 Apr 2011

ADV’s RP70. Brown and cloudy. Hot, oxidised. Some candy. More heat mid-palate. Not much fruit: ‟basic reasonable old port”.

Guesses included Mz75 (from JDAW), WC78, Ch82, DB78, Ni80. My notes also suggest that somebody guessed an illegible ’74, but that might be my error.

User avatar
JacobH
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2283
Joined: 16:37 Sat 03 May 2008
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: 1970 Ramos Pinto

Post by JacobH » 20:35 Fri 08 Apr 2011

Many thanks to ADV for bringing such a rarity. You rarely see Ramos Pinto VP in the UK and this was the first old one (and possibly first one) I’ve tried.

Slightly cloudy pink. A bit musty and muddy on the nose. A hit of sherbet-like sugar, with a small amount of fruit which fades quickly. Not great, unfortunately.
Image

User avatar
AHB
Fonseca 1970
Posts: 10829
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 1970 Ramos Pinto

Post by AHB » 21:39 Sun 01 May 2011

Opened 3 April 2011 and decanted for about 36 hours before being tasted. Slightly cloudy appearance, deep orange in colour, opacity difficult to determine because of the cloudiness. Very closed and flat on the nose, a little musty if anything. Perhaps a spoiled bottle? Flat and hollow entry showing little on the palate other than some light sugar. A bit of treacle on the finish, some warmth and grassiness that lasts well. Overall, this shows as a weak and tired wine ”“ but I suspect that this is not a typical bottle. Perhaps this could be a light damaged ’63 from a second tier producer, such as Royal Oporto? 76/100.
Top Port in 2017 (so far): Taylor 2010 LBV
2016 Port of the year: Cockburn 1908

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests