ThePortForum.com

Quinta do Javali Vintage Maria Luísa 2018:

Quinta do Javali Maria Luísa Vintage é sinónimo de excelência e resulta da nossa constante exigência na qualidade. Em anos em que a excelência é atingida, o vinho merece a designação Maria Luísa.

Notas de prova
PDF

Cor escura e profunda, com auréola violácea e intensa. Na apreciação olfativa, destaca-se uma notável complexidade aromática, com notas frutadas de ameixa preta e amora. Em boca, fica confirmado que estamos perante um “enorme” Vintage Javali, com uma estrutura bem sólida, suportada por taninos opulentos e maduros. A fruta preta e o chocolate negro voltam a surgir num final longo e marcante.

Reminder: Jv = Quinta do Javali. Is Maria Luísa different juice, or merely more verbose branding?

That is difficult to say: the varieties are identical and the number of bottles produced is about the same as Quinta do Javali VP 2017 (suggesting it's the same product) but the pricepoint in their shop is even higher than for the "normal" VP. My guessing is: another name for the same product !

jdaw1 wrote: ↑20:04 Wed 16 Sep 2020Reminder: Jv = Quinta do Javali. Is Maria Luísa different juice, or merely more verbose branding?

I believe it is the designation for their special vines, which would suggest JvML

PhilW wrote: ↑20:52 Wed 16 Sep 2020

jdaw1 wrote: ↑20:04 Wed 16 Sep 2020Reminder: Jv = Quinta do Javali. Is Maria Luísa different juice, or merely more verbose branding?

I believe it is the designation for their special vines, which would suggest JvML

If so, then I agree with the abbreviation. But I think more research is warranted before adding to the list for something that has cropped up for the first time.

PhilW wrote: ↑20:52 Wed 16 Sep 2020I believe it is the designation for their special vines

Are all of Javali’s vines deemed ‘special’?

Glenn E. wrote: ↑23:35 Wed 16 Sep 2020

PhilW wrote: ↑20:52 Wed 16 Sep 2020

jdaw1 wrote: ↑20:04 Wed 16 Sep 2020Reminder: Jv = Quinta do Javali. Is Maria Luísa different juice, or merely more verbose branding?

I believe it is the designation for their special vines, which would suggest JvML

If so, then I agree with the abbreviation. But I think more research is warranted before adding to the list for something that has cropped up for the first time.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑07:32 Thu 17 Sep 2020

PhilW wrote: ↑20:52 Wed 16 Sep 2020I believe it is the designation for their special vines

Are all of Javali’s vines deemed ‘special’?

My Portuguese isn't good enough to tell. I got as far as determining that:
- they have released a Quinta do Javali VP in several previous years, and none of them included the Maria Luísa designation (all those labels simply say Quinta do Javali 20xx Vintage Port).
- they also produce various (non-fortified) wines, of which Maria Luísa is a particular brand; my translation capability gets limited here, it looks like they talk about it being from a specific line (of vines?), and a particular terroir - but that may be ephemeral marketing to describe a particular flavour profile, or could relate to specific vines (which could be the whole of QdJv, with grapes for their other wines coming from elsewhere, or could be a specific subset of vines at QdJv).
- the brief sheet for the QdJvML18 appears to say (again, limited translation capability here) that the QdJv18 has received the ML designation due to the particular quality, and of course just because they decide to use a designation relating to (potentially) "special"/particular vines at the QdJv property, may or may not imply that the wine is made from those vines either wholly, partly, or not at all and it't solely a marketing term.
It certainly seems to imply a "special" variant, with the additional term appearing to refer to some specific vines at the Quinta do Javali property; but that is as much as I can tell based on my limited capability of Portuguese translation, and I agree we need confirmation of whether/what it means from the producer.

This is a statement from the Quinta do Javali website (also available in English, my Portuguese is even more limited than Phil's )

"Quinta do Javali Maria Luísa Vintage is synonymous of excellence and results from our constant quality requirements. In years, when excellence is achieved, wine deserves the designation Maria Luísa."

Imho that doesn't mean it's a seperate vineyard but just a designation of quality. This is sustained by the fact that the composition of grape varieties is identical to that of the "regular" QdJ VP's and the number of bottles produced: 1279 in 2017 (no Maria Luisa) and 1301 (Maria Luisa, no regular) in 2018.

Q: is Javali Maria Luísa sufficiently different to Javali to have a different abbreviation? Your answer should compare and contrast with Fonseca and Fonseca Guimaraens.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑18:47 Thu 17 Sep 2020 Q: is Javali Maria Luísa sufficiently different to Javali to have a different abbreviation? Your answer should compare and contrast with Fonseca and Fonseca Guimaraens.

To be honest, the only one that can answer that question is the producer, not me (but I think it isn't!!)

jdaw1 wrote: ↑18:47 Thu 17 Sep 2020 Q: is Javali Maria Luísa sufficiently different to Javali to have a different abbreviation? Your answer should compare and contrast with Fonseca and Fonseca Guimaraens.

FG is an excellent comparison, albeit in the opposite direction. If JvML is in fact a designation of quality that they're going to use more than once, then it seems appropriate to give it its own abbreviation as we have done with FG.

Its own abbreviation is also warranted if it is a vineyard designation, though given the size of the release relative to normal Jv releases that does not seem to be the case.

My only concern is that they're actually going to use it. I don't feel compelled to create an abbreviation for every one-off that some producer decides to produce and then forgets about. Note that we did not create an abbreviation for 2007 Niepoort Pisca and Dirk has not made it since. Perhaps we should assign it NiPi and see if that prompts him to make it again?

Right. But Niepoort Pisca became Bioma in 08. We have now had... five Biomas? It has longevity as a name.

But, that is not determinative. To my view, crucially, it is actually different from that wine from which it is distinguished. Thus, Pisca makes the actually differential cut, as does Bioma.

ML appears to be a marketing thing. We should ignore marketing things since it is not distinct from the underlying vineyard.

winesecretary wrote: ↑23:23 Thu 17 Sep 2020ML appears to be a marketing thing. We should ignore marketing things since it is not distinct from the underlying vineyard.

I am not saying that you are wrong. But you haven’t engaged with the precedent of Fonseca versus Fonseca Guimaraens.

Guimaraens is problematic, I agree, as it has appeared as Vintage, LBV and SQVP...

winesecretary wrote: ↑23:23 Thu 17 Sep 2020 Right. But Niepoort Pisca became Bioma in 08.

Right. So an abbreviation for Niepoort Pisca would be kind of useless since it was only made once, whether or not it is actually different than Bioma. (Which, according to Niepoort, it isn't. Second paragraph, last sentence.) And we already have an abbreviation for Niepoort Bioma (NiB).

winesecretary wrote: ↑09:57 Fri 18 Sep 2020 Guimaraens is problematic, I agree, as it has appeared as Vintage, LBV and SQVP...

Not as SQVP, as it isn't a Quinta. It is a "second label" Vintage Port typically produced in off years when others are making SQVPs, but it isn't an SQVP itself. (Note that SQVP isn't a formal category, it's just something us geeks use to refer to Vintage Port from a single quinta that is usually only produced in off years and is typically less expensive than fully declared VP.) I don't recall whether or not they have ever produced both F and FG in the same year, but they could.

Appearing as an LBV isn't an issue because, well, every producer does that.

Back to Javali Maria Luísa. I don't think we should make it official until they produce it again, but if they do actually continue to use the name to represent a higher-quality version of their Port, then it is worthy of its own abbreviation just like FG.

@ Glenn - my apologies, I should have been more specific. Guimaraens - branded SQVPs from Quinta do Mileau were made in (at least) 1944, 1946 & 1947 (Book page 311); and Guimaraens -branded Quinta do Cruzeiro was made in 1982 (Book page 173) (vintageport.se adds 1978). VWAP has Guimaraens - branded 1958 LBV bottled 1962 for sale.

Ah, I see what you're saying now.

Puzzling, as those look like a separate company (though they're obviously not). Winesearcher has this picture of the 1982 Guimaraens Quinta do Cruzeiro bottled and shipped by Guimaraens Vinhos S.A.R.L. Fonseca is currently bottled and shipped by Quinta and Vinyard Bottlers Vinhos S.A., but I have bottles of Fonseca from a couple of different bottlers including both of the above plus a Fonseca Guimaraens Vinhos S.A. Seems that they've been changing the name of the bottling company fairly regularly.

Vintage Port and its declarations are entirely neat and organised, except when they aren’t.

Oscar Wilde wrote:And, though it sounds absurd to say so, he is really not so ugly after all, provided, of course, that one shuts one’s eyes, and does not look at him. The Lizards were extremely philosophical by nature, and often sat thinking for hours and hours together, when there was nothing else to do, or when the weather was too rainy for them to go out.

FG was mentioned mischievously, precisely because it’s so awkward.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:24 Sat 19 Sep 2020 FG was mentioned mischievously, precisely because it’s so awkward.

Based on usual practice and the above picture, we should have a separate abbreviations for Fonseca Guimaraens and the various Guimaraens SQVPs. Potentially also for a straight Guimaraens VP, if such a thing was ever produced.

A decision is needed, and I think it should be the following. As yet, there is no need for a new abbreviation for Quinta do Javali Maria Luísa. It might be that, in time, one becomes appropriate, but with the information we have now, not yet.

Any strong objection?

jdaw1 wrote: ↑14:20 Sun 20 Sep 2020 A decision is needed, and I think it should be the following. As yet, there is no need for a new abbreviation for Quinta do Javali Maria Luísa. It might be that, in time, one becomes appropriate, but with the information we have now, not yet.

I'm not aware of any urgency for a decision, however if one is needed in the short term I would agree with staying with Jv18 for now until we know better. FYI I did email the winemaker on Friday to ask the obvious questions, but have not had a response as yet - I will report back if/when I hear anything.

Glenn E. wrote: ↑01:35 Sun 20 Sep 2020

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:24 Sat 19 Sep 2020 FG was mentioned mischievously, precisely because it’s so awkward.

Based on usual practice and the above picture, we should have a separate abbreviations for Fonseca Guimaraens and the various Guimaraens SQVPs. Potentially also for a straight Guimaraens VP, if such a thing was ever produced.

Indeed, we should have a separate Guimaraens abbreviation, as it appeared as its own VP brand for many years; I would suggest Gm. As for the SQVPs - for Fonseca quinta do Panascal we already have FP, and with regard to Cruzeiros there is only the '78 (labelled FG78 but cork Cruzeiro) and the '82 (labelled Guimaraens Quinta do Cruzeiro), and we have typically been less keen on assigning abbreviations for one-offs. So F, FG, FP, Gm would be sufficient imo. GmM could be added also for Guimaraens Quinta do Mileau (3 vintages) if wanted.

My opinion is that the need for an abbreviation should arise from the winemaker’s intention to make a distinction between winemaking philosophies.

Thus the winemaker clearly intends Croft Vintage Port to be viewed as distinct and different from Croft Quinta da Roeda Vintage Port; or Fonseca to be viewed as distinct and different from Fonseca Guimaraens. All should have separate abbreviations, even if only produced once. Quinta do Tedo produced their Savedra selection for the first time a few years ago (perhaps 2007? I forget and don’t have access to my notes as I write this). That was intended to be viewed as a different wine from the standard Tedo blend so should have received an abbreviation as soon as we became aware of it.

We are not clear whether the Javali Maria Luisa wine is a different selection, or a different wine-making approach — or just a particularly delicious vintage. I vote that we wait and see. Hopefully time will reveal the answer.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑14:20 Sun 20 Sep 2020 A decision is needed, and I think it should be the following. As yet, there is no need for a new abbreviation for Quinta do Javali Maria Luísa. It might be that, in time, one becomes appropriate, but with the information we have now, not yet.

Any strong objection?

None here.

PhilW wrote: ↑16:01 Sun 20 Sep 2020

Glenn E. wrote: ↑01:35 Sun 20 Sep 2020

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:24 Sat 19 Sep 2020 FG was mentioned mischievously, precisely because it’s so awkward.

Based on usual practice and the above picture, we should have a separate abbreviations for Fonseca Guimaraens and the various Guimaraens SQVPs. Potentially also for a straight Guimaraens VP, if such a thing was ever produced.

Indeed, we should have a separate Guimaraens abbreviation, as it appeared as its own VP brand for many years; I would suggest Gm. As for the SQVPs - for Fonseca quinta do Panascal we already have FP, and with regard to Cruzeiros there is only the '78 (labelled FG78 but cork Cruzeiro) and the '82 (labelled Guimaraens Quinta do Cruzeiro), and we have typically been less keen on assigning abbreviations for one-offs. So F, FG, FP, Gm would be sufficient imo. GmM could be added also for Guimaraens Quinta do Mileau (3 vintages) if wanted.

All sounds correct to me.

AHB wrote: ↑19:17 Sun 20 Sep 2020 My opinion is that the need for an abbreviation should arise from the winemaker’s intention to make a distinction between winemaking philosophies.

Thus the winemaker clearly intends Croft Vintage Port to be viewed as distinct and different from Croft Quinta da Roeda Vintage Port; or Fonseca to be viewed as distinct and different from Fonseca Guimaraens. All should have separate abbreviations, even if only produced once. Quinta do Tedo produced their Savedra selection for the first time a few years ago (perhaps 2007? I forget and don’t have access to my notes as I write this). That was intended to be viewed as a different wine from the standard Tedo blend so should have received an abbreviation as soon as we became aware of it.

We are not clear whether the Javali Maria Luisa wine is a different selection, or a different wine-making approach — or just a particularly delicious vintage. I vote that we wait and see. Hopefully time will reveal the answer.

I like this explanation, but I still think we should normally defer until such time as an abbreviation is needed, or at least until the wine has been made more than once. The list already risks becoming unmanageable due to size. If we instantly created abbreviations for every VP produced it would balloon past that point very quickly.

AHB wrote: ↑19:17 Sun 20 Sep 2020 My opinion is that the need for an abbreviation should arise from the winemaker’s intention to make a distinction between winemaking philosophies.

Thus the winemaker clearly intends Croft Vintage Port to be viewed as distinct and different from Croft Quinta da Roeda Vintage Port; or Fonseca to be viewed as distinct and different from Fonseca Guimaraens. All should have separate abbreviations, even if only produced once. Quinta do Tedo produced their Savedra selection for the first time a few years ago (perhaps 2007? I forget and don’t have access to my notes as I write this). That was intended to be viewed as a different wine from the standard Tedo blend so should have received an abbreviation as soon as we became aware of it.

We are not clear whether the Javali Maria Luisa wine is a different selection, or a different wine-making approach — or just a particularly delicious vintage. I vote that we wait and see. Hopefully time will reveal the answer.

I've just heard back from the Quinta do Javali winemaker that the "Maria Luisa" designation is intended to indicate a particularly high quality vintage of their port (in comparison to their other years, and whether a generally declared year or not), not a different process or specific vines.

Great list, dear Phil. Some changes/add ons requests:

OPO - OPORTUNIDADE
ChR - Churchill Quinta do Rio
Db - Douro Boys

Thanks and best

Axel

Axel P wrote: ↑17:59 Mon 18 Jan 2021OPO - OPORTUNIDADE

On 04 Jan 2016 (review, placemats) “Ud” was used for Unidade. It seems much more sensible to emphasise the part of the name that isn’t “Porto”.

Axel P wrote: ↑17:59 Mon 18 Jan 2021ChR - Churchill Quinta do Rio

Works for me.

Axel P wrote: ↑17:59 Mon 18 Jan 2021Db - Douro Boys

The ‘B’ has to be a capital, which would clash with Dow Bomfim. So I’d prefer “DBy” or “DrB”.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑19:24 Mon 18 Jan 2021

Axel P wrote: ↑17:59 Mon 18 Jan 2021Db - Douro Boys

The ‘B’ has to be a capital, which would clash with Dow Bomfim. So I’d prefer “DBy” or “DrB”.

What about DoB? DBy makes me initially think Dow <something>. I know that doesn’t automatically follow...we have DG for Duff Gordon, but DoB avoids any question? As does DrB or course...

flash_uk wrote: ↑21:35 Mon 18 Jan 2021What about DoB? DBy makes me initially think Dow <something>. I know that doesn’t automatically follow...we have DG for Duff Gordon, but DoB avoids any question? As does DrB or course...

No objection to DoB from me. I say neither worse nor better than DrB. Others?

Prefer DrB for clearer differentiation from Dow Bonfim.

I slightly prefer "DoB" aesthetically, but am convinced by Phil's argument for differentiation from Dow Bomfim. So I vote "DrB" also.

("Douro" is pronounced closer to Dur-Oh than to Do-Row, so the 'r' does not seem significant to me to the pronunciation.)

DuB ?

Glenn E. wrote: ↑16:23 Tue 19 Jan 2021I slightly prefer "DoB" aesthetically, but am convinced by Phil's argument for differentiation from Dow Bomfim. So I vote "DrB" also.

Ditto. Which is a majority.


It seems that the majority prefer:
Ud = O-Port-Unidade = O-Pᴏʀᴛ-Uɴɪᴅᴀᴅᴇ
ChR = Churchill Quinta do Rio
DrB = Douro Boys

Axel, Mike, and Simon have been PM’d asking for non-disagreement.

¿OOI, where is Churchill’s Quinta do Rio?

Non-disagreement compliance assured. Always good to look at all the options though.

All OK by me

With hindsight, this thread should imo be named "Port brand abbreviations" rather than port houses (or shippers), since it includes both BOBs (Buyer's own brands) and sub-brands (e.g. FG, Silval and others). Subject to agreement (or no objection) I plan to change the thread title.

PhilW wrote: ↑21:34 Sun 19 Dec 2021With hindsight, this thread should imo be named "Port brand abbreviations" rather than port houses (or shippers), since it includes both BOBs (Buyer's own brands) and sub-brands (e.g. FG, Silval and others). Subject to agreement (or no objection) I plan to change the thread title.

I agree.

Changed.

nac wrote: ↑12:58 Fri 07 Feb 2020 Unless I can't see it, the list of abbreviations seems to be missing Churchill's Fojo?

Since it exists - viewtopic.php?p=102031 - should it be ChF?

This still seems to be missing from the list. Suspect we’re unlikely to find any more, but think it should be in for completeness.

nac wrote: ↑21:24 Tue 21 Dec 2021

nac wrote: ↑12:58 Fri 07 Feb 2020Unless I can't see it, the list of abbreviations seems to be missing Churchill's Fojo?

Since it exists - viewtopic.php?p=102031 - should it be ChF?

This still seems to be missing from the list. Suspect we’re unlikely to find any more, but think it should be in for completeness.

Added.

Quinta da Côrte, non-Delaforce? Any objection to Ct.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑00:14 Sat 26 Mar 2022 Quinta da Côrte, non-Delaforce? Any objection to Ct.

Potentially fine. Some thoughts for consideration:

Separately, I use these abbreviations as part of image filing for the VPID.
The requirement there is similar - unique, clear - but with a preference for clarity/memory/understandability over brevity.
Therefore, while I use most abbreviations as-is per this list, I often use a pre-pended "q" for the quinta-branded releases.
In this case "qC" being possible; not already used, and different from any other C.
Similarly I have used qLR (or qdLR, I haven't been rigid to date since brevity less an issue for me) for Quinta de La Rosa. LR is fine currently, but there will likely be more conflict between quinta brands and other existing abbreviations, and the simple "q" prefix could be used to reduce the issue.

n.b. no actual objection to Ct per previous/current method, but seemed like a good time to raise this.

Quinta da Pedra Alta declared a 2018. The natural abbreviation is Pd: any objections?

jdaw1 wrote:Quinta da Pedra Alta declared a 2018. The natural abbreviation is Pd: any objections?

I would have expected PA.

PhilW wrote: ↑21:34 Sat 26 Mar 2022

jdaw1 wrote:Quinta da Pedra Alta declared a 2018. The natural abbreviation is Pd: any objections?

I would have expected PA.

That’s fair. Alta is a low meaning word, but I didn’t heed that for ChAA. So we have 1½ votes for PA, and ½ for Pd. Others?

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:00 Sat 26 Mar 2022

PhilW wrote: ↑21:34 Sat 26 Mar 2022

jdaw1 wrote:Quinta da Pedra Alta declared a 2018. The natural abbreviation is Pd: any objections?

I would have expected PA.

That’s fair. Alta is a low meaning word, but I didn’t heed that for ChAA. So we have 1½ votes for PA, and ½ for Pd. Others?

Pedro Alta, and its importer Bancroft Wines, were at The BFT, and were asked. They much preferred PA over Pd. Done.

For the 1992 placemats Gt was used for Gilbert. Objections? And is this the same as the “Gilberts” on p538 of edition 1 of the book?

Which in turn suggests Gb for Gilbey (pp538–9 of edition 1 of the book). Objections?

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:22 Sun 10 Apr 2022 For the 1992 placemats Gt was used for Gilbert. Objections? And is this the same as the “Gilberts” on p538 of edition 1 of the book?

Which in turn suggests Gb for Gilbey (pp538–9 of edition 1 of the book). Objections?

No objection; one question - per previous discussions, we tend not to assign an abbreviation unless there are at least ~3+ releases of VP; do these both meet that criteria?

Alex Bridgeman wrote: ↑22:22 Tue 10 May 2022a bottle of Quinta de Vale da Figueira 1997

Fg? Note, ≠ FG.

PhilW wrote: ↑08:01 Mon 11 Apr 2022No objection; one question - per previous discussions, we tend not to assign an abbreviation unless there are at least ~3+ releases of VP; do these both meet that criteria?

I recently acquired a bottle of Harvey's 1985 Vintage Port. Wine-searcher tells me that 1985 (image matches the label on my bottle), 1983 and 1954 were released. Not sure this meets the bar for inclusion as it appears to be a rarity.

SCP wrote: ↑11:57 Wed 11 May 2022

PhilW wrote: ↑08:01 Mon 11 Apr 2022No objection; one question - per previous discussions, we tend not to assign an abbreviation unless there are at least ~3+ releases of VP; do these both meet that criteria?

I recently acquired a bottle of Harvey's 1985 Vintage Port. Wine-searcher tells me that 1985 (image matches the label on my bottle), 1983 and 1954 were released. Not sure this meets the bar for inclusion as it appears to be a rarity.

I've had the Harvey 1962 a couple of times, and am aware of the 54, 58 and 85; didn't know about the '83. As you say, borderline for inclusion, though I have used the abbreviation Hv for Harvey previously; not currently on the list though I'd happy to add it - Hv?