Attentive students of will also know that 1963 Avery was a blend made by the wine merchant Avery’s, being one part Taylor to two parts Fonseca to three parts Sandeman.
Put these together.
Could we do our own 2014? Could we do a better 2014 blend? Buy a few dozen of the relevant components, mix, re-bottle, and apply our own labels? Of course the rotters at the IVDP (those who won’t let us buy the components in pipes) will have conniptions, which would be a small part of the pleasure. Would it be worthwhile? Are we confident that we can improve on the work of the professionals?
Couldn't we corrupt an expert and bring them over to our side? Then we wouldn't just be standing in the kitchen swilling things about in demijohns. We'd be standing in a lab swilling things about in demijohns, and wearing white coats.
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
It is a little early in the season to be sure about how each individual parcel will finish, but, based on the data so far available, I’m envisaging three parts Dow to two parts Quevedo to one part either Graham or Vesuvio. Does that seem wrong?
If the intention is to have fun creating a unique port that we can put our label on then it is a fun idea. If the intention is to make something that is better than is produced by the professionals it is a terrible idea that is certain to fail.
Perhaps a better idea would be to find a friendly supplier who would allow us to have some input to the blending of a volume of VP that could be labelled under our name?
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
DRT wrote:Perhaps a better idea would be to find a friendly supplier who would allow us to have some input to the blending of a volume of VP that could be labelled under our name?
The original suggestion was meant to be more Avery than Tesco.
And there is nobody in Portugal able to blend Dow Quevedo Graham Fonseca Vesuvio Sandeman Taylor. We have tools they don’t.
as most places require at least a barrel's worth of stuff before bottling (small barrel is about 20 cases) we would have to determine what the blend is
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
This is all delightful; but remember how many here have foresworn the buying of new port. Even the great alumni such as AHB claim not to need any more; and they feign not to want it either. And then there is the question of your life-coaching responsibilities towards young DRT. Who, I ask, is to drink these gallons of TPF 2014?
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
djewesbury wrote:And then there is the question of your life-coaching responsibilities towards young DRT.
I hereby release my life-coach from his responsibilities to me in relation to this misadventure.
In the words of the Duncan Bannatyne: "I'm out!"
Ambiguous: do you mean that you are giving up your position at the feet of your spiritual guru, or that you think that TPF 14 is a mug's game and you wouldn't risk your knees for this mess of portage?
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
djewesbury wrote:do you mean that you are giving up your position at the feet of your spiritual guru, or that you think that TPF 14 is a mug's game and you wouldn't risk your knees for this mess of portage?
The latter. It is a seriously bad idea. Not even Baldrick could have come up with a less cunning plan than this one.
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
DRT wrote: It is a seriously bad idea. Not even Baldrick could have come up with a less cunning plan than this one.
Do you not admire the audacity of John Avery in concocting a rough and ready "house" blend of three of the top producers' efforts from, what was at the time, one of the finest vintages in recent memory?
Attentive students of will also know that 1963 Avery was a blend made by the wine merchant Avery’s, being one part Taylor to two parts Fonseca to three parts Sandeman.
Put these together.
Could we do our own 2014? Could we do a better 2014 blend? Buy a few dozen of the relevant components, mix, re-bottle, and apply our own labels? Of course the rotters at the IVDP (those who won’t let us buy the components in pipes) will have conniptions, which would be a small part of the pleasure. Would it be worthwhile? Are we confident that we can improve on the work of the professionals?
I don’t know — so far, these are questions.
For this to work and be worthwhile, i think you would need to set up a port company and register with IVDP. That would presumably give you the ability to buy pipes of port from other producers (if - big if - they are willing to sell). Said company would be a "virtual" producer - no quinta / plant / lodge - though you could look to acquire a defunct brand if you wanted to push the boat out. You would then need to negotiate use of another producer's plant for mixing and bottling of the pipes. Since none of the "port" would be for sale, presumably you wouldn't need IVDP approval of the end product (albeit you couldn't then call it "Port" - simply "JDAW's Finest Reserve"), nor would you need to hold additional stock under the lei de terceiro for some time (and even then, you could buy a large quantity of low quality stuff to see you through).
It does not strike me that the advice of a friendly producer / experienced lawyer in Porto to scope this out would be too expensive or time-consuming....and perhaps THRA has already looked into it in relation to TPS.....
If we do it in Portugal, it will be destroyed by anti-business Portuguese bureaucracy.
So it has to be elsewhere. So the juice has to be exported in small glass containers, which have to be opened. But if we do that, the Portuguese can’t stop us selling it. If the label is honest — customer blend, ½ Dow ⅓ Quevedo ⅙ Vesuvio, first English bottled VP since the 1970 vintage — their legal arguments will have some difficulties.
DRT wrote: It is a seriously bad idea. Not even Baldrick could have come up with a less cunning plan than this one.
Do you not admire the audacity of John Avery in concocting a rough and ready "house" blend of three of the top producers' efforts from, what was at the time, one of the finest vintages in recent memory?
Indeed I do. I admire the product of his many decades in the wines trade and his many, many years of experience in blending Port from bulk components and then bottling them. John Avery was a professional. We are mere amatuers.
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
actually, i like the idea and may just persue this stateside myself.
now, just eagerly awaiting the 2014 vintages.
however, speculation on the blend now woudl be just. I find that i've been liking the recent taylor's on their own, same goes with the other houses mentioned. I do find lacking with some of the other 2nd-3rd tier quintas tho that I may try blending a lesser (see cheaper) brand with a few bottles of either Dow or Fonseca.
and after a year of dawdling, I'm also going to proceed and try my hand at tawnynizing some niepoort rubys and storing them in a 5 gallon barrel.
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
I have no idea what we might produce... Might an alternative be to take a set of bottles from say 1999 and attempt a blend; this would have the advantage of potential immediate drinkability, but also longer term improvement, rather than 2014 requiring us to wait 15-20 years to see how we did? (I have no idea whether mixing post (partial) maturation is really a viable option).
Theoretically, could I take 3 different bottles of F70 from 3 different bottlers, mix them and then put my own label on as PhilW's F70...?
PhilW wrote:I have no idea what we might produce... Might an alternative be to take a set of bottles from say 1999 and attempt a blend; this would have the advantage of potential immediate drinkability, but also longer term improvement, rather than 2014 requiring us to wait 15-20 years to see how we did? (I have no idea whether mixing post (partial) maturation is really a viable option).
Theoretically, could I take 3 different bottles of F70 from 3 different bottlers, mix them and then put my own label on as PhilW's F70...?
i certainly woudlnt' risk the amount of air that would mix with the wine if you did do that with an older bottle
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
As you're directing that jab at me Derek, looks like i'm not privy to something that has been discussed offline.
And as it seems you have an issue with my other posts on this particular forum, I shall save you the trouble and simply no longer be a part of this particular forum.
To friends I've made on the forums, you can reach me personally if you wish to share some port.
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
g-man wrote:As you're directing that jab at me Derek, looks like i'm not privy to something that has been discussed offline.
Derek doesn’t like the idea, for reasons he has given here. His jabs—in general—are directed at those pursuing this idea. There has been no separate discussion, other thank general shaking of his head at the recent ’94.
By PM someone has suggested that I explain my dislike for this idea. Here goes...
I think the idea of a group of amateurs thinking that they can improve on what producers with hundreds of years of experience behind them can produce is somewhat arrogant and insulting to those who have shown us great friendship and unconditional hospitality.
We have zero chance of improving these wines by doing what is suggested. At best we would average them out, but more likely end up with something worse than the worst of them.
The analogy of Avery 1963 is fundamentally flawed. Avery used bulk-shipped wines and their decades of experience of blending and bottling. We would be uncorking already bottled wine and re-bottling them without knowing what we were doing.
Irritating the IVDP and a group of major shippers doesn't seem to be the best idea I have ever heard. Imagine you are the master blender of a Grade A producer reading this thread or the back label on one of the proposed bottles. After spending significant effort creating a fabulous 2014 VP you read that we tried to improve it by blending it with three other VPs in random quantities determined by something we read that Avery might or might not have done 50 years ago. Are you pleased that a few cases of your fabulous port has been adulterated? Are you pleased that we didn't like your wine enough to drink it as you intended it to be drunk?
Moving from consumer to embrionic-producer/shipper/merchant causes shippers to think of you differently. I want them to think of me for what I am, a consumer - not a potential competitor or business associate.
Is that enough?
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
Derek, you are quite right.
This TFP blend is what we in German call a "Schapsidee", which is a (crackpot) idea conceived while drinking too much distilled beverages or hard liquour. ( No offence intended though)
The Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt know thy Port
DRT wrote:By PM someone has suggested that I explain my dislike for this idea. Here goes...
I think the idea of a group of amateurs thinking that they can improve on what producers with hundreds of years of experience behind them can produce is somewhat arrogant and insulting to those who have shown us great friendship and unconditional hospitality.
We have zero chance of improving these wines by doing what is suggested. At best we would average them out, but more likely end up with something worse than the worst of them.
The analogy of Avery 1963 is fundamentally flawed. Avery used bulk-shipped wines and their decades of experience of blending and bottling. We would be uncorking already bottled wine and re-bottling them without knowing what we were doing.
Irritating the IVDP and a group of major shippers doesn't seem to be the best idea I have ever heard. Imagine you are the master blender of a Grade A producer reading this thread or the back label on one of the proposed bottles. After spending significant effort creating a fabulous 2014 VP you read that we tried to improve it by blending it with three other VPs in random quantities determined by something we read that Avery might or might not have done 50 years ago. Are you pleased that a few cases of your fabulous port has been adulterated? Are you pleased that we didn't like your wine enough to drink it as you intended it to be drunk?
Moving from consumer to embrionic-producer/shipper/merchant causes shippers to think of you differently. I want them to think of me for what I am, a consumer - not a potential competitor or business associate.
Is that enough?
Personally, i find these "reasons" all a bit melodramatic and overblown....i hardly think anyone is going to take great offence at using a few cases to try to come up with an homage to Avery 1963
RAYC wrote:Personally, i find these "reasons" all a bit melodramatic and overblown....i hardly think anyone is going to take great offence at using a few cases to try to come up with an homage to Avery 1963
Go for it. Roll the dice and see what happens - but please don't do it in a way that would be perceived to be associated with those of us who think it is a ridiculous idea, even if that is only me.
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
RAYC wrote:Personally, i find these "reasons" all a bit melodramatic and overblown....i hardly think anyone is going to take great offence at using a few cases to try to come up with an homage to Avery 1963
Go for it. Roll the dice and see what happens - but please don't do it in a way that would be perceived to be associated with those of us who think it is a ridiculous idea, even if that is only me.
Perhaps 2014: the RAYC and g-man blend?
Is it available for pre-order yet? I would like to reserve a bottle. Purely for scientific reasons, of course.
DRT wrote:By PM someone has suggested that I explain my dislike for this idea. Here goes...
I think the idea of a group of amateurs thinking that they can improve on what producers with hundreds of years of experience behind them can produce is somewhat arrogant and insulting to those who have shown us great friendship and unconditional hospitality.
We have zero chance of improving these wines by doing what is suggested. At best we would average them out, but more likely end up with something worse than the worst of them.
The analogy of Avery 1963 is fundamentally flawed. Avery used bulk-shipped wines and their decades of experience of blending and bottling. We would be uncorking already bottled wine and re-bottling them without knowing what we were doing.
Irritating the IVDP and a group of major shippers doesn't seem to be the best idea I have ever heard. Imagine you are the master blender of a Grade A producer reading this thread or the back label on one of the proposed bottles. After spending significant effort creating a fabulous 2014 VP you read that we tried to improve it by blending it with three other VPs in random quantities determined by something we read that Avery might or might not have done 50 years ago. Are you pleased that a few cases of your fabulous port has been adulterated? Are you pleased that we didn't like your wine enough to drink it as you intended it to be drunk?
Moving from consumer to embrionic-producer/shipper/merchant causes shippers to think of you differently. I want them to think of me for what I am, a consumer - not a potential competitor or business associate.
Is that enough?
I agree with Derek 100%. It's not melodramatic in any way, just reality.
Andy Velebil wrote:
I agree with Derek 100%. It's not melodramatic in any way, just reality.
Well i call both of you out for being ridiculous then!
Glenn E. wrote:Perhaps 2014: the RAYC and g-man blend?
I think this is a mischaracterisation of my position upthread. I've given advice to jdaw on the way i think he would need to do it to make it worthwhile (the phrasing "you", not "we", was deliberate), expressed admiration for Avery's 63, and the fact that i think DRT's reaction to this idea is OTT. But i don't think i've ever said that i believe this is a worthwhile endeavour in terms of money / effort.
RAYC wrote: But i don't think i've ever said that i believe this is a worthwhile endeavour in terms of money / effort.
That said, i've also never attempted to become an importer/distributor when frustrated by the lack of local availability of a particular wine i like! Perhaps that type of big idea, together with the wherewithal to see it through, is what sets g-man apart from small-minded folk like me...
Last edited by RAYC on 10:13 Fri 07 Mar 2014, edited 1 time in total.
Avery did this, and did it well. It is not impossible. It was then what happened, and Port companies and Port people knew it, and at least tolerated it, some perhaps liking it.
But that ended almost half a century ago. Derek might be right that the current generation of Port people might not see it as “what happens”, instead seeing it as something new and unwelcome.
For which reason, despite my still liking the mischief, I have been dissuaded.
But g-man is trade rather than pure consumer, so his position might be different.
This thread is too long for me to read entirely, but I think I get the idea and would like to propose instead:
1.) A representative from TPF who is understood to have a more commercial bent but who is also just a generally likeable hobbyist (Christopher, perhaps?), makes some overtures while placing a reasonable order with each (or at least discussing doing so) and says that we would like to buy a few kilos of their grapes at the 2014 harvest for the purposes of a personal port project (we should be fully transparent). We aggregate these grapes from across a range of producers/sites, take them to over to Oscar's, crush them, allow them to be port together, and basically boss the _ out.
We would then offer first (before even paying out ourselves) a few bottles to each of the grape givers, in the humble and sincere hope that what they taste doesn't feel like an insulting waste of otherwise perfectly elegant grapes.
We don't need excessive quantities. The experience/memory will more than justify the experience, IMHO.
will already know that the 2014 harvest will be of excellent vintage quality. 
