DRT wrote:LGTrotter wrote:Surely we may be allowed a degree of latitude?
yes, we should. But speculating about the difference between 70 and 80 years or 80 years+ is, in my opinion, nonsense. If we had tasted the 1931s on release we could competently compare their longevity to the 1985s. But we didn't, so we can't.
Nonsense? Well of course, and pointless too when you consider the chances of any of us making it to find out. But I do not think this precludes us from discussing it anymore than, say, discussing the temperature of the rubber bands you can smell in your port. It also is fair enough that it is pointed out when we are talking nonsense.
As to the point about the 1931; no, none of us tasted it on release, but the 85s are 30 years old and there are notes on the 31 from the sixties, and the people who took those notes which allows some comparisons to be made. Probably not that accurate, but still, maybe enough to work with in making educated guesses/wildly inaccurate presumptions.
And as the 85s are half way to sixty it does not seem too much of a reach to speculate about whether they will make it that far. There are people buying 70, 80, even 100 year old vintage ports in the hope of a good drink, and sometimes they get something over the hill and sometimes they hit the jackpot. (And as Glenn has said this seems to have more to do with provenance than the name and year on the bottle). And while it may be unprovable I think Glenn is on balance right that should I die at ninety and they open my last bottle of Graham 85 it will still be good.
The reference to two decades of port drinking set me thinking, but I may return to this later.