1991 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
AHB
Fonseca 1970
Posts: 10831
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

1991 Graham

Post by AHB » 19:00 Wed 15 Feb 2012

A bottle bought from and consumed in El Vino, Fleet Street. Deep red with a plummy tone, sfter on the rim; 95% opaque. Stewed strawberries on the nose, a swirl revealing bottle stink. Light entry, with red licorice fruit showing quickly. Sweet and flavoursome on the palate but a lightweight wine for a Graham - more elegance and finesse than power. The bottle stink tones lurk behind the powdery tannins. Sweet aniseed on the aftertaste and a finish of modest length - although this reappears unexpectedly as a nice sage flavour. This is drinking nicely now, and may well be at its peak. Pleasant enough sipping port. 87/100. Drunk 14 Feb 2012 after 5 hours decant.
Top Port in 2017 (so far): Taylor 2010 LBV
2016 Port of the year: Cockburn 1908

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14940
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by DRT » 01:44 Mon 20 Feb 2012

At first this was quite open and fruity on the nose, but it quickly developed lots of stinky stuff, which is not consistent with my experience of this wine.

Quite evolved colour. Very sweet and approachable with damsons and some stewed fruits. Quite hot in the finish. A bad bottle?

I tasted this 24 hours later and it was rubbish. This was definitely a flawed bottle.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14940
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by DRT » 01:54 Mon 20 Feb 2012

"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14940
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by DRT » 02:06 Mon 20 Feb 2012

+24 hours - the same bottle at a different tasting!

Dull nose very drinkable, but quite short and one dimensional.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14940
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by DRT » 02:17 Mon 20 Feb 2012

"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19487
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by jdaw1 » 20:57 Sat 25 Feb 2012

G91: darkish red, 50% opaque. Nose had bottle stink. Good weight, heat late-palate, but the stinky nose was in the taste.

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19487
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by jdaw1 » 21:23 Sat 25 Feb 2012

G91 on the second day, in different company, a ‟bright dark red”, 70% opaque. Nose had vegetables. To taste red cherries, some of the nose vegetation, plus plum. Despite nose, quite nice.

Only JGH did not have prior knowledge of what it was, and he mis-guessed 1985 Warre.

Voting was unanimous (by those present, JGH DRT JDAW): winner GM92; in second place the Rr00; third the G91 on its second day; unplaced SWM88.

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

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by JacobH » 21:41 Mon 27 Feb 2012

Reddy-purple middle. Fades to the edge. Odd nose. Ramen noodles perhaps? Moderate red cherries. Some tannins. Short aftertaste. Something odd afterwards. Flawed?
Image

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

Re: 1991 Graham

Post by JacobH » 21:44 Mon 27 Feb 2012

JacobH wrote:Reddy-purple middle. Fades to the edge. Odd nose. Ramen noodles perhaps? Moderate red cherries. Some tannins. Short aftertaste. Something odd afterwards. Flawed?
It appears that this note was the 500th I’ve recorded in my port records 88) 88)
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests