2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Organise events to meet up and drink Port.
winesecretary
Fonseca 1980
Posts: 1900
Joined: 15:35 Mon 13 May 2019

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by winesecretary »

@rich_n - I would say definitely decant a 2005 a day ahead. I'll be decanting the 1991 TV this evening.

Looking forward to it.
User avatar
Alex Bridgeman
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14879
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Alex Bridgeman »

Looking at my drinking list for the year I don't have much to choose from. On the list and meeting the preferred qualifications for this tasting I have:
  • Fonseca Panascal 2001
  • Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
  • Taylor Vargells 1967
Anyone got a particular preference to hear my thoughts on one of these? If not, I'll open the Panascal after dinner tonight and let it sit in the decanter for a day before we meet up tomorrow night.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.

2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
User avatar
nac
Fonseca 1980
Posts: 1808
Joined: 14:21 Fri 16 Dec 2016
Location: Kent & London
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by nac »

winesecretary wrote: 15:47 Wed 10 Feb 2021 I'll be decanting the 1991 TV this evening.
Good call - will do likewise.
User avatar
nac
Fonseca 1980
Posts: 1808
Joined: 14:21 Fri 16 Dec 2016
Location: Kent & London
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by nac »

Alex Bridgeman wrote: 16:15 Wed 10 Feb 2021 Looking at my drinking list for the year I don't have much to choose from. On the list and meeting the preferred qualifications for this tasting I have:
  • Fonseca Panascal 2001
  • Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
  • Taylor Vargells 1967
Anyone got a particular preference to hear my thoughts on one of these? If not, I'll open the Panascal after dinner tonight and let it sit in the decanter for a day before we meet up tomorrow night.
Or maybe all of them?
User avatar
rich_n
Warre’s Otima 10 year old Tawny
Posts: 550
Joined: 10:59 Thu 23 May 2019

Re: RE: Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by rich_n »

winesecretary wrote:@rich_n - I would say definitely decant a 2005 a day ahead. I'll be decanting the 1991 TV this evening.

Looking forward to it.
Thanks for confirming that, I'll decant shortly.
User avatar
Doggett
Morgan 1991
Posts: 1188
Joined: 17:40 Sun 20 Sep 2015
Location: Weymouth
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Doggett »

Alex Bridgeman wrote: 16:15 Wed 10 Feb 2021 Looking at my drinking list for the year I don't have much to choose from. On the list and meeting the preferred qualifications for this tasting I have:
  • Fonseca Panascal 2001
  • Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
  • Taylor Vargells 1967
Anyone got a particular preference to hear my thoughts on one of these? If not, I'll open the Panascal after dinner tonight and let it sit in the decanter for a day before we meet up tomorrow night.
As I am lucky enough to have just one of the FG76 bottles, I would love to hear your thoughts on its current drinking window.
User avatar
jdaw1
Cockburn 1851
Posts: 23613
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by jdaw1 »

Oops. I decanted today. Oh well.
User avatar
Doggett
Morgan 1991
Posts: 1188
Joined: 17:40 Sun 20 Sep 2015
Location: Weymouth
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Doggett »

jdaw1 wrote: 19:52 Wed 10 Feb 2021 Oops. I decanted today. Oh well.
Luckily for you there is two bottles to hand...
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Glenn E. »

I opened a 1994 Vesuvio last night and will hopefully still have some available for tomorrow's event.
Glenn Elliott
User avatar
Alex Bridgeman
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14879
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Alex Bridgeman »

Doggett wrote: 17:23 Wed 10 Feb 2021
Alex Bridgeman wrote: 16:15 Wed 10 Feb 2021 Looking at my drinking list for the year I don't have much to choose from. On the list and meeting the preferred qualifications for this tasting I have:
  • Fonseca Panascal 2001
  • Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
  • Taylor Vargells 1967
Anyone got a particular preference to hear my thoughts on one of these? If not, I'll open the Panascal after dinner tonight and let it sit in the decanter for a day before we meet up tomorrow night.
As I am lucky enough to have just one of the FG76 bottles, I would love to hear your thoughts on its current drinking window.
sorry Simon. I was in the process of getting the bottle out and realised I didn’t have it at home! Panascal 2001 opened and decanted.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.

2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
akzy
Warre’s Otima 10 year old Tawny
Posts: 537
Joined: 21:42 Tue 13 Nov 2018
Location: Three Bridges

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by akzy »

Just decanted Terra Feita 2001 which was given to me in error (it should have been a noval black).
User avatar
jdaw1
Cockburn 1851
Posts: 23613
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by jdaw1 »

jdaw1 wrote: 19:52 Wed 10 Feb 2021Oops. I decanted today. Oh well.
One was opened. Of this name, the youngest in my immediate possession.

Dark dark red, 100%, opaque. Palate and nose full of red grapes, late grip and tannin. Still full of that flush of teenage youth, freshness still, but showing glimpse of mature respectability. Fuller than mid-weight, longer than mid-length; some, even if not enough, will be saved for the morrow.
User avatar
nac
Fonseca 1980
Posts: 1808
Joined: 14:21 Fri 16 Dec 2016
Location: Kent & London
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by nac »

Vargellas 91 decanted at 1800, so should get 24 hours prior to “proper” sampling.
Quick QA check and all well.
User avatar
flash_uk
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4081
Joined: 20:02 Thu 13 Feb 2014
Location: London

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by flash_uk »

Invites should be with you all now :CC0033:
User avatar
Alex Bridgeman
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14879
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Alex Bridgeman »

Got my invite. Hurry up 7pm!

I couldn’t wait any longer so I’ve just had a quality test sip - my FP01 is pretty big and punchy! I’m going to enjoy drinking this tonight.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.

2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
User avatar
rich_n
Warre’s Otima 10 year old Tawny
Posts: 550
Joined: 10:59 Thu 23 May 2019

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by rich_n »

I may be on later than usual. Will aim to be in by 8-8.30pm at the latest.
User avatar
jdaw1
Cockburn 1851
Posts: 23613
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by jdaw1 »

jdaw1 wrote: 22:33 Wed 10 Feb 2021
jdaw1 wrote: 19:52 Wed 10 Feb 2021Oops. I decanted today. Oh well.
One was opened. Of this name, the youngest in my immediate possession.

Dark dark red, 100%, opaque. Palate and nose full of red grapes, late grip and tannin. Still full of that flush of teenage youth, freshness still, but showing glimpse of mature respectability. Fuller than mid-weight, longer than mid-length; some, even if not enough, will be saved for the morrow.
Day 2: drier; a hint of leather; mouth-cloying. Yesterday’s decant was good; today it feels under-decanted.
PhilW
Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
Posts: 3503
Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
Location: Near Cambridge, UK

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by PhilW »

jdaw1 wrote: 19:52 Wed 10 Feb 2021Dark dark red, 100% opaque.
I know we know what we mean colloquially, but I wish we could find a more pragmatic method to be more precise.
While almost nothing is 100% opaque if you use a thin enough sample, I accept that if we're only interested in a measure to an accuracy of say 5%, we still at least have to use a repeatable distance through the wine to make a fair comparison; double the depth of wine through which the light is passing and I suspect the light loss squares (though I don't know how non-linear our perception may be, even if we accept a fixed level of general illumination with the effect of any difference in wine opacity not deemed to have affected pupil size dependent on viewing method).
I think we've talked before about methods such as using a square test tube with fixed light source and sensor, though given the potentially acceptable wide margin of accuracy there should be a simpler solution; ideally using a 50ml sample in an ISO tasting glass, for example. I recall the last attempt to print sheets with varying density patterns did not solve the issue, but perhaps it is time for a revisit in a spare moment, or fresh ideas from people present who were not here last time it was discussed.
User avatar
rich_n
Warre’s Otima 10 year old Tawny
Posts: 550
Joined: 10:59 Thu 23 May 2019

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by rich_n »

Really enjoyable evening gents, thanks to those involved in organising. I enjoyed my first proper tasting of a SQVP - it's a style I've tried a long time ago with no real appreciation for it's nuances so this feels like a bit of a first. Fortunately I have a fair amount more of it to look forward to in the future!
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February

Post by Glenn E. »

PhilW wrote: 11:25 Fri 12 Feb 2021
jdaw1 wrote: 19:52 Wed 10 Feb 2021Dark dark red, 100% opaque.
I know we know what we mean colloquially, but I wish we could find a more pragmatic method to be more precise.
I do not use this method, as I feel that attempting to estimate a %opacity is not in my skill set.

Instead, I use a standard pour in a standard INAO/ISO 7 oz Port wine glass (Riedel Vinum, the Schott Zwiesel Alvaro Siza glasses, et al). Tip the glass away from you at approximately 45 degrees above a white paper such as a placemat. Hold a #2 pencil or similarly sized instrument behind the glass and look through the wine at the pencil. Count how many multiple widths of the pencil you could theoretically see through the wine at the rim.

I.e. "2 pens wide rim" means that the wine is opaque enough that you cannot see the pencil behind it once it is more than 2 widths from the rim.

I find this test quick to perform and easily/consistently reproducible. When I'm using this method, I'm usually only interested in units of 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2. A wider rim than that is typically noted simply as "opaque center" if that is true, or as a dark or very dark color if it is not.
Glenn Elliott
Post Reply