Mon 24th Sept 2012 - Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Organise events to meet up and drink Port.
PhilW
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
Location: Near Cambridge, UK

Mon 24th Sept 2012 - Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by PhilW » 14:58 Thu 26 Apr 2012

Port Houses: Fonseca and Warre
Port Years: 55, 60, 63, 66, 70, 77, 85
Location: The Bunghole Cellars (Davy's Bar and Grill, Holborn)
Date: Sep 24th
Time: 18:30

Attending:
  1. PW
  2. RAYC
  3. JDAW1
  4. DRT
  5. WS1
  6. CRS (griff)
  7. CMAG
  8. THRA
  9. AHB
  10. MW (PopulusTremulo)
  11. BMHR
  12. --spare
  13. --spare
  14. --spare
Ports are being supplied as follows:
AHB: F55
Carl: W66, F85
DRT: W63
JDAW: W70
THRA: W55, F60, F63
PW: W77, W85
RAYC: F66, F77
WS: W60, F70


Original Post:

I'd like to propose a tasting which I would be happy to organise for mid-late september.
TPF has held verticals for both of my favourite houses within the last few years prior to my participation, so rather than my first thought of suggesting a "full-on" Warres vertical, I wondered if people might be up for a Fonseca vs Warres head to head (or "double mini-vertical" if you prefer), featuring the best years of both. Dependent on interest, we could vary the number of years involved.

I would estimate that the above ports, split amongst 12 people would be likely £100-120/head as a first estimate, total cost to include any location/glasses/food costs etc as usual. Additional years could be added (66,83,91, or earlier - 45?), though at extra expense of course.

Would people be interested in such an event?
Last edited by PhilW on 10:39 Thu 06 Sep 2012, edited 21 times in total.

User avatar
AHB
Fonseca 1970
Posts: 10662
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by AHB » 15:30 Thu 26 Apr 2012

I rather like the idea of a good vertical range of two ports against each other. The matrix and the GC/SW/QH tastings were all good fun.

I'd certainly be interested in a Fonseca / Warre double vertical.
Top Port in 2017 (so far): Taylor 2010 LBV
2016 Port of the year: Cockburn 1908

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

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by RAYC » 15:49 Thu 26 Apr 2012

I like the idea of this, but think 66 should definitely be included - as should 1960!

Conveniently, i won an F66 at Strakers on the weekend at (relatively) modest expense...
Last edited by RAYC on 16:51 Thu 26 Apr 2012, edited 1 time in total.
Rob C.

User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3326
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by g-man » 16:05 Thu 26 Apr 2012

In line with our quinta styles discussions and tying in sweetness levels, why Fonseca vs Warres?

Why not Fonseca vs Grahams
Warres vs Croft
Dow vs Taylor
?

We might get a better comparison instead of one camp who likes sweeter fuller port vs another camp who don't
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz

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

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by RAYC » 16:47 Thu 26 Apr 2012

g-man wrote:In line with our quinta styles discussions and tying in sweetness levels, why Fonseca vs Warres?
PhilW wrote:TPF has held verticals for both of my favourite houses within the last few years prior to my participation
Phil's favourite houses are Warre and Fonseca. I would be more than happy to follow this tasting the following year with a similar Graham-Taylor head to head!
Rob C.

User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3326
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by g-man » 19:10 Thu 26 Apr 2012

For the sake of port science, I would suggest a more intellectual tasting consisting of the best years of

Fonseca, grahams, warres and taylors

that way you can do a sweet for sweet, TFP vs SFE tasting
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz

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

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by RAYC » 19:21 Thu 26 Apr 2012

g-man wrote:For the sake of port science, I would suggest a more intellectual tasting consisting of the best years of

Fonseca, grahams, warres and taylors

that way you can do a sweet for sweet, TFP vs SFE tasting
We did a similar tasting in October last year (with Dow instead of Warre - review here)

I like Phil's idea of the double vertical over a broader range of vintages - the Graham-Taylor tasting at Bonhams a couple of years ago was great. I don't think there would be a VP in a Fonseca-Warre line-up along the lines proposed that i would not be very excited about drinking again! (94s, perhaps, excepted)
Rob C.

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19297
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by jdaw1 » 19:48 Thu 26 Apr 2012

Splendid idea. And Monday 24th September 2012 works for me.

Perhaps others could comment on the proposed date.

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14886
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by DRT » 21:15 Thu 26 Apr 2012

I'm in!!

However, I rather suspect that the elegant Warre vintages will be somewhat overshadowed by their Fonseca counterparts.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

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

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by RAYC » 00:05 Fri 27 Apr 2012

DRT wrote:I'm in!!

However, I rather suspect that the elegant Warre vintages will be somewhat overshadowed by their Fonseca counterparts.
Often predicted whenever someone reveals they are bringing a Fonseca to a tasting, but rarely in my experience does it turn out that way.
Rob C.

PhilW
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
Location: Near Cambridge, UK

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by PhilW » 08:23 Fri 27 Apr 2012

I'll take that as sufficient positivity and will therefore modify the first post to change this to an organisation thread.

PhilW
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
Location: Near Cambridge, UK

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by PhilW » 08:36 Fri 27 Apr 2012

RAYC wrote:I like the idea of this, but think 66 should definitely be included - as should 1960!

Conveniently, i won an F66 at Strakers on the weekend at (relatively) modest expense...
I admit I almost included 66 in from the start, but didn't want to make things too expensive, especially depending whether we have a full 14 (including any guests) interested. Of course if you add 60 as well, then you may have to add 91 and 83, at which point rude to just be missing 80 and 75... slippery slope, so I stuck to the nominal best years, but would be happy to add more if we get a full team and people are ok with it.
p.s. I have a good-provenance W66 as well if needed :)

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19297
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by jdaw1 » 11:08 Fri 27 Apr 2012

PhilW wrote:slippery slope
Your approval of such a polished slide is much shared. Alas we will have some difficulty finding the 1927 and 1912, but we thrive on a challenge.

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14886
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: Fonseca vs Warres head to head proposal

Post by DRT » 12:14 Fri 27 Apr 2012

jdaw1 wrote:
PhilW wrote:slippery slope
Your approval of such a polished slide is much shared. Alas we will have some difficulty finding the 1927 and 1912, but we thrive on a challenge.
1945 and 1955 would build a nice bridge between the 1927 and the 1960. 1863, 1878, 1887 and 1896 might prove to be a bridge too far.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

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

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by RAYC » 12:27 Fri 27 Apr 2012

PhilW wrote:
RAYC wrote:I like the idea of this, but think 66 should definitely be included - as should 1960!

Conveniently, i won an F66 at Strakers on the weekend at (relatively) modest expense...
I admit I almost included 66 in from the start, but didn't want to make things too expensive, especially depending whether we have a full 14 (including any guests) interested. Of course if you add 60 as well, then you may have to add 91 and 83, at which point rude to just be missing 80 and 75... slippery slope, so I stuck to the nominal best years, but would be happy to add more if we get a full team and people are ok with it.
p.s. I have a good-provenance W66 as well if needed :)
You are organising, and i am in whatever you decide, and of course cost is a concern and should be kept under reasonable control!

I will, however, put forward my arguments for inclusion of 60 and 66.

My case for the inclusion of 66s is that this vintage is (in my opinion, which may not be shared by all) drinking perfectly at the moment - arguably at their very peak (though i know WS1 disagrees!) and in many instances comparing favourably with 70 and 63s.

My case for the inclusion of 60s is that: a) i simply have not drunk many 1960s (so from a personal perspective would be interested to try these two); and b) the few 1960s that have been drunk recently at TPF tastings have been fantastic (eg: Delaforce 1960 this week, Dow 1960 in March, Cockburn 1960 last December, Fonseca 1960 last April).

By comparison, i do not get a lot of joy out of 94s these days (though am always happy to try for academic purposes!) and recent experiences of F85 and W85 have not been overly-impressive in terms of current drinking pleasure. A best of "drink now" vintages (excluding those that get ridiculously expensive, and limited to 12 bottles) would therefore in my opinion be 55, 60, 63, 66, 70 and 77 (though i don't know how much the 55s go for these days...)
Rob C.

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14886
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by DRT » 12:32 Fri 27 Apr 2012

RAYC wrote:A best of "drink now" vintages (excluding those that get ridiculously expensive, and limited to 12 bottles) would therefore in my opinion be 55, 60, 63, 66, 70 and 77
I really like this idea.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

PhilW
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
Location: Near Cambridge, UK

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by PhilW » 13:04 Fri 27 Apr 2012

DRT wrote:
RAYC wrote:A best of "drink now" vintages (excluding those that get ridiculously expensive, and limited to 12 bottles) would therefore in my opinion be 55, 60, 63, 66, 70 and 77
I really like this idea.
I like this idea too, and am more than happy to update to this range if people are happy with the increased cost. If we have a full house of participants I would like to add the 85 as well.

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19297
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by jdaw1 » 16:04 Fri 27 Apr 2012

There could be a tentative list of vintages, from which a final selection will be made depending on availability, cost, and the number of attendees.

User avatar
WS1
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 883
Joined: 23:08 Wed 04 Feb 2009
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by WS1 » 07:49 Sat 28 Apr 2012

Hi,

if still possible I would like to join as well. With regards to the tasting I am clearly against including anything younger than 1983.
DRT wrote:
RAYC wrote:A best of "drink now" vintages (excluding those that get ridiculously expensive, and limited to 12 bottles) would therefore in my opinion be 55, 60, 63, 66, 70 and 77
I really like this idea.
agreed this is the best common ground of wines which showed very well and are not in a bad phase based on my experiences. Since I am a fan of 58 Warre which is also currently drinking well and a Fonseca 58 Guimarens can be found this could be also included.
RAYC wrote:
DRT wrote:I'm in!!

However, I rather suspect that the elegant Warre vintages will be somewhat overshadowed by their Fonseca counterparts.
Often predicted whenever someone reveals they are bringing a Fonseca to a tasting, but rarely in my experience does it turn out that way.
:) I think the biggest factors are if english bottled or not, the preparation and quality of the bts (provenance). It is very important to avoid any major transportantion before the tasting and stand up the bts at least a couple of days before the tasting (the 77s probably longer because of fine sediment). Also again I am adamant that the corks should be pulled well in advance (~3 hours) before decanting. Some ports need a very long time e.g. Warre and Fonseca 1970.
Due to the sweeter Fonseca style there will be a preferance towards it of all port drinkers who like full bodied meaty ports. However I can see even those change their minds if we have a perfect bt of Warre 55 (excellent port :!: ).

regards

WS1
"Sometimes too much to drink is barely enough"
Mark Twain

griff
Warre’s Traditional LBV
Posts: 343
Joined: 09:43 Thu 03 Jun 2010
Location: Sydney

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by griff » 11:52 Sat 28 Apr 2012

Hi,

I am likely to be down in London that weekend to celebrate a wedding anniversary. I have a real soft spot for Warres so this looks interesting. Would there be room for Rebecca and me? As for something from the 80's, 1980 might suit? Fonseca should be ready I would have thought and Warres made an impressive port that year.

Carl

PhilW
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
Location: Near Cambridge, UK

Re: Sep 24th Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by PhilW » 13:09 Sun 29 Apr 2012

WS1 wrote:if still possible I would like to join as well.
griff wrote:I am likely to be down in London that weekend to celebrate a wedding anniversary. I have a real soft spot for Warres so this looks interesting. Would there be room for Rebecca and me?
Have added you all to the list of attendees. More than happy to include you both Carl, sounds like an ideal way to spend a wedding anniversary to me :) Just to confirm, I'm assuming Rebecca would be drinking (port)?
WS1 wrote:With regards to the tasting I am clearly against including anything younger than 1983.
WS1 wrote:agreed this is the best common ground of wines which showed very well and are not in a bad phase based on my experiences. Since I am a fan of 58 Warre which is also currently drinking well and a Fonseca 58 Guimarens can be found this could be also included.
griff wrote:As for something from the 80's, 1980 might suit? Fonseca should be ready I would have thought and Warres made an impressive port that year.
My intention was to span the years while limiting the overall cost by only including the best wine from each decade (ish - I know I included 63-70-77). I'm happy to be flexible on this especially where there is a common group preference, keeping the overall objectives and cost in mind. I'd personally like to keep the 85s in if we have sufficient numbers, to keep the span of years (unless we want to span back to 45 instead, which I'd love but would have significant cost, probably too high for double-mini-vertical). I'll remove the 94 and add in the 66 in its place for now since that seems to be a common consensus and then save any further decisions to nearer the time when we know how many people we expect to be, what wines we have access to and at what costs.

User avatar
DRT
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14886
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: Mon 24th Sept 2012 - Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by DRT » 14:51 Sun 29 Apr 2012

'55 to '85 has the added attraction that the title of the tasting could be "Almost Exactly Three Decades of Fonseca v Warre" :wink:
"The first duty of Port is to be red"

Ernest H. Cockburn

User avatar
AHB
Fonseca 1970
Posts: 10662
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: Mon 24th Sept 2012 - Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by AHB » 15:49 Sun 29 Apr 2012

As much as I like the idea of the Fonseca / Warre double mini-vertical, I am unlikely to be in the UK the week commencing 24th September so better move me off the list of attendees please.

Thanks.
Top Port in 2017 (so far): Taylor 2010 LBV
2016 Port of the year: Cockburn 1908

User avatar
jdaw1
Taylor 1900
Posts: 19297
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Mon 24th Sept 2012 - Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by jdaw1 » 23:24 Sun 29 Apr 2012

I’m fairly confident that both Warre and Fonseca declared all of 1900, 1904, 1908, 1912, 1920, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1934, 1945, 1955, 1960, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1975, 1977, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1994, 1997, 2000, 2003, 2007, and 2009.

(To keep costs down I have restricted the list to ≥1900. I’m not mentioning 1868, 1870, 1872, 1873, 1878, 1881, 1884, 1887, 1890, and 1896.)

griff
Warre’s Traditional LBV
Posts: 343
Joined: 09:43 Thu 03 Jun 2010
Location: Sydney

Re: Mon 24th Sept 2012 - Fonseca vs Warres head to head

Post by griff » 16:16 Mon 30 Apr 2012

Thanks. I confirm the better half will be drinking ;)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests