1991 Smith Woodhouse

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
Dow 1896
Posts: 24574
Joined: 14:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

1991 Smith Woodhouse

Post by jdaw1 »

User avatar
jdaw1
Dow 1896
Posts: 24574
Joined: 14:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1991 Smith Woodhouse

Post by jdaw1 »

SW91. Red-pink, 20% opaque. Nose revolting. Taste less revolting — but this is not praise.
winesecretary
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2437
Joined: 14:35 Mon 13 May 2019

Re: 1991 Smith Woodhouse

Post by winesecretary »

A bit stinky on the nose. Not wonderful in the mouth either. I am not sure this is a good bottle.
User avatar
nac
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas 1987
Posts: 2317
Joined: 13:21 Fri 16 Dec 2016
Location: Kent & London
Contact:

Re: 1991 Smith Woodhouse

Post by nac »

Quite pale. Something not at all nice on the nose. Much better in the mouth.
User avatar
Alex Bridgeman
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15922
Joined: 12:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 1991 Smith Woodhouse

Post by Alex Bridgeman »

A mature copper-red colour with a very light tone, only 30% opaque. Some bottle stink dominates the nose. The texture on entry is smooth and balanced with very light fruit and syrup flavours. Work on the palate improves it a little, but there is a distinct caramelised note to the fruit. A burnt aftertaste and sticky strawberry finish. Perhaps a damaged bottle?
Top Ports in 2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.

2025: Quevedo 1972 Colheita, b.2024. Just as good as Niepoort 1900!
Post Reply