ThePortForum.com

Posted: **11:53 Sat 25 Aug 2007**

Missing only one apostrophe, Conky wrote:Just thinking, although there's lots of years we wont be trying, through price or rarity. Aren't we missing the 94? I accept its on the young side, and possibly a touch of infanticide, but wouldn't that have been better than the 2000?
I'm begining to suspect 94 is going to be a 5 star year as it develops. That a discussion for 'Port Topics' but whats the thoughts? If we have to do a youngster, and this is one of the occassions were I agree. The comparison will be fascinating, shouldn't it be 94?

We have enough.
The T-shirts are printed. The T-shirts list the vintages. Therefore the vintages cannot be changed.

Posted: **12:32 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

I have now taken possession of the bottles from Tom

Posted: **12:56 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Admit it: you have looked at them lustfully.

Posted: **14:24 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Yes, I have, and by the end of the day I will post a photograph here so that you can too

Posted: **16:18 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

The review thread for the Fonseca vertical, and each of the separate TN threads, should each link to each other nicely. Rather than do that on the day, when there will be better uses for drinking time, ∃ review thread and individual TN threads for each of Fonseca 1920, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1975, 1977, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1992, and 2000.

Perhaps post the pictures of the bottles in that review thread?

Posted: **16:21 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Jdaw,

I see you have started the review thread and tasting notes. Good planning!

I was hoping to begin posting pictures of the bottles tonight. Should I add them to each individual TN or the review?

Derek

Posted: **16:30 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Pictures of a line-up of bottles are reviewable; pictures of individuals are TNable.

Please add more information about the re-bottling of the 1920.

Posted: **16:33 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Ok. I will try to have all pictures posted before the event, apart from shots of wine in glasses and extracted corks.

Derek

Posted: **17:19 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

F-Planners,

I think it would amusing to do this tasting blind. We could pour the wines, tasted them all, and then each of us try to guess which is which.

What do you think?

Derek

Posted: **19:44 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Thats a great idea, on one big condition.

We should just have a few sips blind. Have a laugh guessing, but then concentrate on each bottle. Having group discussions on its merits, and comparing them, when we know what they are.
I think blind tastings are fun, but such line ups & company, don't come often enough, and I would prefer the classic approach for the important first few hours. Sometimes, when your hopelessly wrong on blind tasting, I think it can inhibit your opinions (Like you dopes at the Crusting Pipe, when AHB had his Cruz example

)

After that first few hours, I'll enter that Buffoon stage, where I'll pretend I know more than I do, and find ordinary jokes hilarious!!!

Alan

Posted: **19:45 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Request: please don’t put “I am Pavlov’s dog† type comments in the review or TN threads (even though I am). Keep the chit-chat in this thread.

I much prefer not blind. I’m nowhere near experienced enough, particularly in Fonseca, to make good guesses, and would find it more educational to know what’s happening. Maybe, just, in Taylor. But for me sighted is much preferred.

Posted: **20:56 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

As a reward for the patience shown by one of our group tonight I have posted a photograph of the bottles in Jdaw's review thread here

Derek

Posted: **21:02 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

I am salivating. I am bouncing up and down in my chair like a child.

Bigger picture, for those requiring detail.

No complaints about the 1970 fill level.

Note: Editted by DT to reduce picture size. And then by JDAW to add the link to the larger picture.

Posted: **21:05 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Excellent!!! Well worth the considerable wait.

What are those bottles in front of those magnificant tiles???

Posted: **21:11 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Next important point...

Derek, when you decant them...DON'T YOU DARE!!!

Alan

Posted: **21:18 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Conky wrote:Next important point...

Derek, when you decant them...DON'T YOU DARE!!!

Alan

Who? Me? - I can't believe you think I would do such a thing

Posted: **21:32 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Conky wrote:Derek, when you decant them...DON'T YOU DARE!!!

That’s not fair to the lad. Derek, when you decant them:

You then have to drive, so have only the tiniest sample;
Write a proper note on D+0 colour, nose, and taste, and post in the appropriate threads (’20, ’63, ’66, ’70, ’75, ’77, ’80, ’83, ’85, ’92, ’00);
And post here to say that the job is safely done and that you are on your way.

Posted: **21:40 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Jdaw,

I will happily comply with the above but please note that the 1920 will not be opened until I get there and the 1985 will already be at Conky's.

I do not plan to publish the 0+0 notes here until after everyone has had a chance to taste the wines to ensure I do not influence anyone's judgement.

Derek

Posted: **21:48 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Derek T. wrote:Jdaw,
I will happily comply with the above
Derek

Your all heart!!!

I stick by my Post!

Alan

Posted: **21:50 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Please note that pictures of capsules and labels have now been taken but will not appear in the TN threads until I have a fast internet connection.

I am currently limited to 56kbs modem speed at home so uploading the picture of the line-up was challenging and frustrating, although not nearly as annoying as Conky's continual whinging by text message that he couldn't see it

For those who have not met Conky yet, please note that he has the patience of a 5 year old on a long car journey - "are we there yet?, are we there yet?, are we there yet?"

Derek

Posted: **22:01 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

I was going to apologise, until you said it was a picture. The time you took I thought it was an Oil Painting!!!

Posted: **22:39 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

I thought others might be interested to read the notes of Michael Broadbent on the wines we will be drinking - if nothing else, just to make Jdaw keep bouncing up and down with excitement

...

1920 ****
Broadbent's book has no note on the Fonseca 1920 but has notes from Croft, Graham and Taylor, all of which recieved 4 stars. His general description of the vintage is:

Twenty-three shippers. Small production but high quality, good, ripe, fairly robust wines. Sturdy, and if well kept can still be very good.

Note: Unfortunately, our bottle has a less than perfect history to say the least!

Fonseca 1963 *****
From start (June 1965) to finish a consistently beautiful wine. One of the top '63's and one of the best-ever Fonseca's. Half a dozen notes in the 1990's, but in the mid decade losing colour but still lovely, and a gragrat, elegant, Oporto-bottling in 1998 surviving 'Dark Chocolate and Hazelnut Praline' (oh dear! Why do these American gourmets do this?). Most recently, medium-deep, richly coloured; cinnamon and cress fragrance; still sweet, fairly assertive, tall, shapely, lissom. Drink now-2015

Note: Ours looks like a UK bottling but has no markings to reveal the name of the bottler

Fonseca 1966 *****
Eight notes. Still opaque, rich and magnificant in the 1970's, including a fine Justerini's bottling, and a deeply coloured yet delicate and flowery Harvey's bottling in 1980, a rich ripe Berry Bros in 1985 and other equally lovely bottles either side. Then a glorious bottle in 1990, its fragrance lingering in the glass for five hours. The next two, both coincidentally at Saintsbury Club dinners, in 1994 and 1998. Both wines appeared quite deep for their age; both had a flawless bouquet, crisp, rich, classic. Both were sweet with lovely fleshy texture, fruit, flavour and finish. Might surpass even the '63. Now-2030

Note: The bottle we will be drinking is the Justerini's bottling

Fonseca 1970 ****
Virtually black when young and, in the early 1990's, still very deep, with the plumminess of maturity-in-waiting; Restrained though fruity nose; initially very sweet, now merely sweet, full-bodied, rich, ripe, fleshy, with fruit and grip. A bottle decanted at home at 10:10am noted as very sweet and slightly chocolatey. At 3.45pm after my guests had departed, ripe, liquorice, high-toned. On the palate fairly sweet, rich, positive, lovely, with dry finish. Then, in magnums, at Christie's Port and Cigar dinner at Brooks's, October 2000. Next at Vintners Hall in November 2001; not a big wine, but delicious. And two recent notes, the first in April (2002) at a Past Masters' dinner, disapointing, good flavour but lean, even thin. A month later low-keyed nose but very rich on palate.

Note: Ours is a UK bottling by Morgan Furze & Co

Fonseca 1975 ***
Initially huge, opaque, very sweet, in fact quite a big wine but starting to lose all three elements after a decade. Then four consistent notes all in the same year. Medium-coloured, moderately sweet, though not a top Fonseca, still exhibiting style and texture. A very pleasant end to our annual grouse dinner at Wiltons in Aug 1994. Drink soon.

Fonseca 1977 ****
On 1 January 1980, the London agent invited orders for immediate shippment at £48 per dozen bottles F.O.B., in wooden cases with 'lead capsules, branded corks, labels and chalk marks'. Minimum order five cases. No free storage. Quantity small ... excellent quality.'Very impressive at the opening tasting: deep purple; hard, spirity nose; powerful, well-balanced. At the end of the 1980s still fairly deep, plummy; classic, black cherry fruit nose; very sweet, fairly full-bodied, lovely texture. A great future predicted. However, like a lot of '77s, beginning to lose colour by the mid-1990s, a bit spirity and lean but sweet, with delightful fruit. Showing well at Warren Winiarski's 30th anniversary dinner in the Napa Valley, March 1998. Most recently: sweet, glorious flavour, perfect now. Now-2025

More to follow...

Posted: **23:25 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Derek T. wrote:I thought others might be interested to read the notes of Michael Broadbent on the wines we will be drinking - if nothing else, just to make Jdaw keep bouncing up and down with excitement

Or bouncing up and down with exasperation at mis-quoting someone else’s correct use of an apostrophe.

Yes, good idea though, mis-quotation aside.

Posted: **23:27 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

Derek T. wrote:Drink now-2015

So we’re drinking this at the earliest date in the drinking window. How rudely impatient of us.

Posted: **23:33 Sun 26 Aug 2007**

jdaw1 wrote:
Derek T. wrote:Drink now-2015
So we’re drinking this at the earliest date in the drinking window. How rudely impatient of us.

I think you'll find that:

Michael Broadbent wrote:Drink now-2015

Posted: **00:28 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

TPF Offline #2 Checklist Update #2

Fonseca 1920 - on Death Row, decant 15 minutes before serving
Fonseca 1963 - on Death Row, decant at T-6 Hours
Fonseca 1966 - on Death Row, decant at T-6 Hours
Fonseca 1970 - on Death Row, decant at T-6 Hours
Fonseca 1975 - on Death Row, decant at T-4 Hours
Fonseca 1977 - on Death Row, decant at T-6 Hours
Fonseca 1980 - on Death Row, decant at T-6 Hours
Fonseca 1983 - on Death Row, decant at T-6 Hours
Fonseca 1985 - on Death Row, decant at T-24hrs
Fonseca 1992 - on Death Row, decant at T-10 Hours
Fonseca 2000 - on Death Row, decant at T-24 Hours
Tatsing Mats Production - Jdaws Task (completed)
Tasting Mat Delivery - Jdaw's Task
T-shirts - Jdaw's Task
Glasses (39 available) - Conky to investigate potential source
Accomodation - all doss down at Conky's - Derek & Ghandih to bring sleeping bags
Steaks & BBQ - Conky's Task
Cheese - Ghandih's Task
Cheese assistance - KillerB's Task
Cigars - Derek's Task
Camera - Derek's Task
Laptop with 3G/Wireless and http://www.flickr.com account - Derek's Task
Collecting Jdaw from Airport - Alan's Task
Visiting Orange with jdaw - Alan's Task
Lovely Debs Prezzie - Each guest to bring small token of appreciation, including Conky
Breakfast - Lovely Debs Task

Derek

Posted: **02:39 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

jdaw1 wrote:∃ review thread and individual TN threads for each of Fonseca 1920, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1975, 1977, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1992, and 2000.

Quoted for ease of access of linked threads, into which Derek T. seems to be putting pictures.

Posted: **20:54 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Pictures have now been inserted up to 1983. The others require to be re-taken due to the riduculously small writing on the labels which has caused my otherwise steady hand to appear to have blurred the images

Posted: **21:10 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

It appears we have an aristocratic bottle in the line-up

Derek

Posted: **22:20 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

I say I say I say, I can’t wait.

Posted: **22:22 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

jdaw1 wrote:I say I say I say, I can’t wait.

Are you jumping up and down like a child again?

Posted: **22:43 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

All of the pre-match pictures have now been posted, unless Corky delivers some of the F85 to be pasted into the TN thread

Derek

Posted: **22:47 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Where is KillerB? Is he meant to have returned?

Posted: **22:52 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

As today has been a Bank Holiday in the UK, which was tagged onto the end of his planned holiday, I suspect he will return tomorrow.

Derek

Posted: **23:19 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Oh, yep - back. Hi.

Posted: **23:26 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Thank the Lord!!!!!

I've almost run out of ammo - the porno-drug-marketing freaks have had me pinned in for a week. I need dry socks and a new service revolver

Derek

Posted: **23:37 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

My outbox just shrank. (Conky joke imminent: everyone duck.)

Posted: **23:40 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

A few days ago I declared myself inter alia "Cigar Man". This week I plan to purchase 5 cigars for us to burn in the evening of 1 Sep 07.

At present I am focused on buying 5 Cohiba's - probably the 2nd or 3rd size depending on availability.

Now is the time for anyone to object or request an alternative.

Derek

Posted: **23:45 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Please, wider rather than longer, given a trade-off. Wider smokes burn cooler, which I prefer.

Posted: **23:46 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Dont be distracted from the enlightened path of 'Cabanas'. Mr Manilow would expect no less. and I have Patagas cigars for Julian if he gets funny.

Did you know cigars mature? They say around 7 years in a humidifier. Mines in a non-humidifying box. And so will yours be. But they'll be nice, all the same.

Posted: **23:51 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

I know marginally less about cigars than I do about neuclear physics. Please advise, should I be buying "what is your best cigar for smoking now?" or should I phone Conky when I am in the shop and tell him what they are offering?

Derek

Posted: **23:57 Mon 27 Aug 2007**

Derek T. wrote:I know marginally less about cigars than I do about neuclear physics.

Assuming the physics you meant is nuclear, the same is true of me.

Partagas D? Montecristo #2?

Posted: **00:00 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

Have an amount your prepared to spend. You want a packet of 5. You want the larger 'ring' size, rather than the length. You want his best deal possible. You explain its your very poorly fathers 70th, and your worried about him, and want it to be a Big Night. He's always loved Cohiba's.

Shouldn't be a dry eye in the house, and if he's got a heart, he'll upgrade.
Same logic as avoiding Hotel Bills,etc.

Posted: **00:03 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

Unfortunately, no, it's neuclear physics I don't know about. It's a very exclusive subject and probably not something we have yet released to the Colonies.

Cigars - girth over length - noted

Derek

Posted: **00:12 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

Conky wrote:your very poorly fathers 70th … He's always loved Cohiba's

A tedious salesman, perhaps one with medical training, might advise a plan we wouldn’t want.

Posted: **00:19 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

jdaw1 wrote:
Conky wrote:your very poorly fathers 70th … He's always loved Cohiba's
A tedious salesman, perhaps one with medical training, might advise a plan we wouldn’t want.

Agreed. I am 42. I will enter the shop and declare that I want a [5] cigar[s] that will ensure I do not reach 60. That should do it.

Derek

Posted: **00:23 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

Derek T. wrote:should I phone Conky when I am in the shop and tell him what they are offering?

These are hard times when the best advice is to take Conky’s advice† , but this one time it might be the least bad course.

† The advice won’t be wrong. It will be verbose, ungrammatical, and not quite to the point. Perhaps entertaining.

Posted: **00:26 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

jdaw1 wrote:
Derek T. wrote:should I phone Conky when I am in the shop and tell him what they are offering?
These are hard times when the best advice is to take Conky’s advice† , but this one time it might be the least bad course.

† The advice won’t be wrong. It will be verbose, ungrammatical, and not quite to the point. If entertaining.

Agreed. The advice of a nutter is often better than no advice at all

Derek

Posted: **00:27 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

You quoted as I edited.

Posted: **00:29 Tue 28 Aug 2007**

A fact that is undeniable

ThePortForum.com

The Port Forum Offline #2 - 1st Sep 2007

The mats and T-shirts are printed.

Admit it: you have looked at them lustfully.

Fonseca vertical: Review and TN threads

Where pictures should be posted

F plan

I am salivating.

That’s not fair to the lad.

bouncing with exasperation

we’re drinking this at the earliest date in the drinking win

Re: we’re drinking this at the earliest date in the drinking

Re: Fonseca vertical: Review and TN threads

I say I say I say, I can’t wait.

Re: I say I say I say, I can’t wait.

Where is KillerB? Is he meant to have returned?

My outbox just shrank.

wider rather than longer

Partagas D? Montecristo #2?

Re: Partagas D? Montecristo #2?

A tedious salesman, perhaps one with medical training,

Re: A tedious salesman, perhaps one with medical training,

Terrible advice

Re: Terrible advice

You quoted as I edited.