1960 versus 1963: which should be drunk first?

[jdaw1]

In recent times we have enjoyed horizontals of 1960 (The Bowler, 19^th May 2010) and of 1963 (Wokingham, 11^th and 12^th October 2013). Also, from time to time, we have tasted sporadic bottles from each of these vintages and, of course, from others.

Which of ’60 and ’63 is holding up better? Which has more life in it? Or, reverse questions, which should be drunk first? Which is fading quicker?

[jdaw1]

In a new post to separate my question from my more-tentative answer.

My unscientific impression is that the ’60 is holding up better, and the ’63s are more obviously fading. But more learned comment would be welcome.

[LGTrotter]

My very small acquaintance with this extends only to the Croft 60 versus 63. I feel strongly that the 63 is on its way out and the 60 is a beast for the ages.

[RAYC]

When i first started drinking port in 07/08, 1960 had a reputation of being rather faded and over the hill. Similar, in fact, to some of the recent discussions regarding the 1963 vintage.

I don't know whether this actually was the case (i only started tasting them with any real frequency from 2010ish), but - if so - the concept of "holding up" (implying an ageing profile that heads in one direction) might need to be re-assessed.

[DRT]

Our collective experience of 1960 is not as wide as it is for 1963, therefore the balance might be uneven when it comes to answering this question.

With only one or two exceptions the Ports in the 1960 line-up referred to by JDAW in the opening post were from top flight houses. The recent 1963 tasting was a "warts and all" affair with many lesser houses being represented, many of which lived up to expectation. I strongly suspect that five differently branded bottles of VP made by Royal Oporto from the 1960 vintage would be very similar to those we tasted from 1963.

If we were to limit our comparison to the houses included in the 1960 tasting would our overall assessment of the comparative merits of these two vintages change?

There is of course only one thing to do.

[uncle tom]

There is of course only one thing to do

Indeed - and Dirk's very generous offer to supply the Niepoorts for such an event is too good to pass up.

Suggest:

- Blind pairs of the ten principal houses - Cockburn, Croft, Dow, Fonseca, Graham, Niepoort, Noval, Sandeman, Taylor & Warre.

- Back up bottles to be on hand to replace any that are obviously faulty - only Ni63 would give me a problem on that front.

- Each participant knows only that each pair is the same shipper.

- Each participant has to award a total of six points to each pair, and guess the shipper. If the guess is correct, their points are doubled.

Time to split this thread into events??

[jdaw1]

Please do start a thread in O.T.&G-Ts, quoting as needed from here.

But we have, between us, drunk many bottles of each vintage over the last few years, so keep this thread. And the ’60s, from big shippers and small, do seem to be in a better phase (doff of the the cap to RAYC) than the ’63s.

[Alex Bridgeman]

This is a question that I think I will decline to answer on the grounds of too much label bias. 1960 was a vintage which had a reputation a decade ago for being on the decline. Our tasting in 2010 did much to challenge this perceived wisdom and the occasional bottle of 1960 port appearing at our tastings since then have done nothing to undermine that view.

On the other hand, 1963 seems to be developing a view on this forum as being a vintage on the decline. Perhaps it is - many of the wines tasted a couple of weeks ago were certainly on the tertiary side (although plenty were still rather vigorous). What I am intrigued to see is whether in 3-5 years time we find the 1963 vintage suddenly bouncing back in the way which the 1960 vintage seems to have done.

My hand is waving frantically to attract Tom's attention - I think a 1960 vs 1963 taste off in a style similar to the one we did when comparing 1966 and 1967 would be an excellent idea. Put my name down please!

[uncle tom]

Offline thread launched:

http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 191#p64191

[g-man]

For the Fonseca

I feel the 63' is holding up much better than the 60'

[jdaw1]

What I am intrigued to see is whether in 3-5 years time we find the 1963 vintage suddenly bouncing back in the way which the 1960 vintage seems to have done.

Don’t be shy about starting a thread to organise a ’60-versus’63 tasting in, say, ‟3-5 years time”. And every few years thereafter.

[Glenn E.]

I can recall having had both vintages of only 3 Ports - Croft, Cockburn, and Ferreira. In all 3 cases I would say that the 1963s showed better than the 1960s, but not by much except in the case of the Ferreira.