1955 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
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19401
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

1955 Graham

Post by jdaw1 » 20:43 Sat 02 Apr 2016

On Friday 1st April 2016 Daniel Jewesbury and his friend Mark O., Miguel Simoes and his friend Daniel Ron, Jay Hack, and Arlene and Stephan Bassett gathered in Lupulo (835 Sixth Avenue at 29th Street, NY 10001-4101) to sample some Graham’s vintages.

Links:

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19401
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1955 Graham

Post by jdaw1 » 22:54 Sat 02 Apr 2016

[url=http://theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=99087#p99087]Here[/url] J a y H a c k wrote:1955 Graham Porto Vintage - Portugal, Douro, Porto
Outstanding, not only is it not on the downside, but still a tiny bit of bite indicating that it may have a bit more time before it actually reached its plateau. Velvety smooth and sexy/slutty. Fruit driven with the alcohol in check. dark red fruit. No caramel, no nuts indicating oxidation has not yet set in. Just pure and smooth. Consensus WOTN. (96 pts.)



Posted from CellarTracker

The bottles:

Image

How did we confirm that the unlabeled bottle from a private cellar that they never bothered to put a label on was actually a 1955? This might do it.

Image

User avatar
djewesbury
Graham’s 1970
Posts: 8152
Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
Location: Belfast
Contact:

Re: 1955 Graham

Post by djewesbury » 14:38 Tue 05 Apr 2016

This was a very good bottle. I noted cedar and tobacco in the nose which were very agreeable. It was still a little taut in the mouth as Jay says, but I don't think that it really has that far to go. Bottles from the same batch were tasted here (at which Johnny Symington thought, "disappointing") and here (at which AHB (and I) thought, "wonderful"). This was certainly not disappointing. It was the clear WOTN, rich and still powerful, silky, but I don't think it'll get any better than it already is.
Daniel J.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 6 guests