2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
-
- Fonseca 1980
- Posts: 1909
- Joined: 15:35 Mon 13 May 2019
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
@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.
Looking forward to it.
- Alex Bridgeman
- Graham’s 1948
- Posts: 14915
- Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Good call - will do likewise.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Or maybe all of them?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: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.
- Fonseca Panascal 2001
- Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
- Taylor Vargells 1967
Re: RE: Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Thanks for confirming that, I'll decant shortly.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.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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.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: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.
- Fonseca Panascal 2001
- Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
- Taylor Vargells 1967
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Oops. I decanted today. Oh well.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
I opened a 1994 Vesuvio last night and will hopefully still have some available for tomorrow's event.
Glenn Elliott
- Alex Bridgeman
- Graham’s 1948
- Posts: 14915
- Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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.Doggett wrote: ↑17:23 Wed 10 Feb 2021As I am lucky enough to have just one of the FG76 bottles, I would love to hear your thoughts on its current drinking window.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: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.
- Fonseca Panascal 2001
- Fonseca Guimaraens 1976
- Taylor Vargells 1967
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
-
- Warre’s Otima 10 year old Tawny
- Posts: 542
- Joined: 21:42 Tue 13 Nov 2018
- Location: Three Bridges
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Just decanted Terra Feita 2001 which was given to me in error (it should have been a noval black).
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Vargellas 91 decanted at 1800, so should get 24 hours prior to “proper” sampling.
Quick QA check and all well.
Quick QA check and all well.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Invites should be with you all now
- Alex Bridgeman
- Graham’s 1948
- Posts: 14915
- Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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.
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.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
I may be on later than usual. Will aim to be in by 8-8.30pm at the latest.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
Day 2: drier; a hint of leather; mouth-cloying. Yesterday’s decant was good; today it feels under-decanted.jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:33 Wed 10 Feb 2021One 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.
-
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3520
- Joined: 14:22 Wed 15 Dec 2010
- Location: Near Cambridge, UK
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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.
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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!
Re: 2021 Virtual Tasting #3 - Thursday 11th February
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