ThePortForum.com

... for reasons too complicated to go into here.

I will need vinous, or more precisely, portious solace, but will also need to be able to work during the day, so will need to consume the bottle over three days, accordingly elderly port contra-indicated.

So: which of these should I open, to soothe my shattered nerves, tomorrow evening?

OBV 1983
Gould Campbell 1985
Graham 1985
Dow 1985
Croft 1991
Vesuvio 1992
Fonseca 1992
Gould Campbell 1994
Vesuvio 1994
Churchill 2000

Reasons would be appreciated.

winesecretary wrote: ↑20:01 Mon 19 Apr 2021 OBV 1983
Gould Campbell 1985
Graham 1985
Dow 1985
Croft 1991
Vesuvio 1992
Fonseca 1992
Gould Campbell 1994
Vesuvio 1994
Churchill 2000

GC85, G85, V92, and V94 are each slurpy deliciousness that would test your restraint, ergo perhaps not the best solace bottles or you might end up needing to open 3 of them in order to last 3 days.

For my palate, OBV83 is an interesting bottle, not a bottle that one turns to for solace.

Also for my palate, Ch00 is too young. You want solace, not a brash youngster that challenges you.

Cr91, F92, and GC94 can be "in between" stages, at least to me, at their current ages. If one would be equally happy with an "elderly teen" or a "newly mature" VP, then any of these would make excellent choices as they can be either. I still occasionally experience bottles that are slightly disjointed because they've been opened right in the middle of the transition. So perhaps a known quantity would be better?

That leaves us with D85. It is a reliably delicious, comforting, and solid choice.

A fully-reasoned answer, having had regard to all the possibilities. Perfect, thank you!

Sorry to hear it going to be a tough week George. I would go with one of the 1985s personally. Obviously an older port is out because they may not last for the 3 days, but I think an ‘85 gives that balance of maturity and robustness to see you through the period. My favourite of the 3 would be the Graham’s, but I would be happy with any of them. That also brings the Offley into play as it is one of the nicer ‘83s and a bottle I would like to enjoy again. The others are fine ports but that would be my choice. Maybe a good aged tawny in reserve to accompany the vintage and be there in case an extra glass is needed without affecting the need to keep the reins on, so you have that option without the need to finish a second bottle. Enjoy the port and I hope things go better than expected. There is always a quiet B&B near Weymouth to recharge the batteries after this week if needed!

What do we think Julian would say?

Well I couldn't find the Dow 1985 which I think is in an OWC at the back of a deep shelf and I had limited time to hoick 21kg cases stamped 'ENTREPOSTO GAIA' around. So I have gone with the Graham 1985, decanting sample of which was, as Glenn predicted, slurpily delicious.

I hope the week is proving to be less unpleasant than you'd anticipated and the wine is better than expected.

Thank you old bean. The week has suddenly resolved moderately positively. Hurrah. And the port is very, very good. I am really enjoying the Symington decade at the moment.

Of the major vintages, I cut my eye teeth on 55, 60, 66/67, 70 - that's what I was drinking in the 1990s and 2000s. 80, 83, 85, 91/92, 94, generally have only recently come together for me, maybe in the last five years. But I suppose these are now as old as those were then. 63, 75, 77 and I have always had an uneasy relationship.

80, 83, and 85 are all in a great spot right now. I've had more from those vintages in the last year (I was part of a small "Port pod" that gathered very carefully throughout the pandemic) than in possibly the entire rest of my experience with Port. That was basically our rule of thumb for our Port nights - bring a VP from the 80s or a 30-40 year old tawny.

They're all lovely right now, which just reinforces my opinion that VP needs to be 30 years old at least before you should consider moving it into your "these are ready for drinking" category. The good ones need to be closer to 40.

winesecretary wrote: ↑18:58 Wed 21 Apr 2021 77 and I have always had an uneasy relationship.

That's so interesting. 77 was the first vintage I ever tasted, probably 15 years ago now and it absolutely got me hooked (Grahams since you ask ). Ever since then baring maybe 3 bad bottles I've always loved it whenever I have it, and it's hands down my current favourite vintage.

It's possible my view has been permanently coloured by that first experience I suppose.

@ richmills - for me 1977 has always been either really good or disappointing. I think I have had more than my fair share of disappointing...

I missed this when you first posted having only now had the chance to catch up with the forum. For reasons you and I know but should not share here, I hope my email a little earlier also did a small part to improve your week.

I choose my '77s carefully, but absolutely love this vintage. El Vino on Fleet Street used to sell Fonseca 1977 off their wine list until I got to hear about it. Their stocks vanished over a six month period - I found F77 went remarkably well with calamari and chips.

@ Alex - it did, thank you!

F77 is one of the very good ones, seems to suffer much less from the cork problems than the average. Have never had a bottle that I rated below 'sorry it's empty'. GC on the other hand... I think I am below 50% hit rate. Which is a shame, because the good ones are splendid. I'd happily buy a case of GC77 at say £450 and hope for six good bottles but I simply can't risk buying port that is that unreliable at market. At market, my experiential analysis suggests F77 is actually cheaper per expected-good-bottle.

That being said, calamari and chips and F77... I do not think I could cope with that.

How odd... I cannot remember having ever had a "bad" bottle of GC77. They've ranged from good to splendid.

I once blind identified a splendid GC77 from magnum at a party, and at the time I didn't have that much experience with the Port. It just tasted like GC, and '77 as the age seemed approximately correct. Several witnesses were flabbergasted, though in reality it was as much a lucky guess as a fully-reasoned identification.

I now own 7 such magnums, in no small part because of how good that magnum of GC77 was at that party.

All that said, F77 is spectacular and typically my wine of the vintage. I used to like the Taylor better, but have come around to Fonseca lately.

I also have very good luck with G77. I've heard from many who have experienced various problems, but I've yet to have a bad bottle. It's a lovely Port given sufficient decant.

Glenn E. wrote: ↑00:10 Fri 23 Apr 2021 F77 is spectacular and typically my wine of the vintage. I used to like the Taylor better, but have come around to Fonseca lately.

No arguing the F77 is lovely, but I still currently prefer Taylor as my favourite of the vintage, then Fonseca, then Warre and Grahams in that order. All of them wonderful.

I have to hold my hands up and say I've never tried the Gould Campbell, one to look out for at the right price I guess.

I've just been through the 22 notes on GC77 on the tasting note list, ranging in date from 2004 - 2018. There are 8 positive bottle reports. There are 5 obviously faulty (corked) bottles. The other 9 are somewhat mixed with some thinking they are not right and others thinking they are just having a bad day. In percentage terms that's about on a par where I am with GC77. Given Glenn's universally positive experiences with it I do wonder whether the ones that went to the US were a different bottling run. Or - lightbulb moment - I remember Glenn saying either he could not perceive or was not put off by TCAI That may be it...

winesecretary wrote: ↑12:01 Fri 23 Apr 2021 Or - lightbulb moment - I remember Glenn saying either he could not perceive or was not put off by TCAI That may be it...

Lucky man.

winesecretary wrote: ↑12:01 Fri 23 Apr 2021 I've just been through the 22 notes on GC77 on the tasting note list, ranging in date from 2004 - 2018. There are 8 positive bottle reports. There are 5 obviously faulty (corked) bottles. The other 9 are somewhat mixed with some thinking they are not right and others thinking they are just having a bad day. In percentage terms that's about on a par where I am with GC77. Given Glenn's universally positive experiences with it I do wonder whether the ones that went to the US were a different bottling run. Or - lightbulb moment - I remember Glenn saying either he could not perceive or was not put off by TCAI That may be it...

We've discussed this before with no firm conclusion. The USA bottles don't seem to have the same incident rate of TCA as those in the UK. (Speculation) There was a lot of it made so it is entirely possible a part of the bottling run went to one area and when they refilled the cork hopper on the bottling line those bottles went to a different area. One batch of corks not being so good and the other good.

winesecretary wrote: ↑12:01 Fri 23 Apr 2021 Or - lightbulb moment - I remember Glenn saying either he could not perceive or was not put off by TCA. That may be it...

That's correct. I cannot smell or taste TCA, so corked bottles don't bother me a bit. If they're really badly corked they might taste a bit subdued to me, and I do occasionally get a bit of a funky/mineral/metal note, but it's generally safe to hand me a glass of corked Port and watch everyone else recoil as I drink it.

Is that the problem with GC77? A high prevalence of corked bottles, much like Ck83?

winesecretary wrote: ↑12:01 Fri 23 Apr 2021I've just been through the 22 notes on GC77 on the tasting note list, ranging in date from 2004 - 2018. There are 8 positive bottle reports. There are 5 obviously faulty (corked) bottles. The other 9 are somewhat mixed with some thinking they are not right and others thinking they are just having a bad day. In percentage terms that's about on a par where I am with GC77. Given Glenn's universally positive experiences with it I do wonder whether the ones that went to the US were a different bottling run. Or - lightbulb moment - I remember Glenn saying either he could not perceive or was not put off by TCAI That may be it...

This is why we took tasting notes. During lockdown I have been slack about posting TNs. Indeed, slack about writing them. I, and we, should do better.

Henceforth I will take and post TNs, starting with the Graham colheitas tasted today (1994, 1990, 1982, 1974, 1963).

Others: when my example is splendid then please follow it, and when it isn’t, do better — and lightly reprimand my failures.

I know the feeling about a terrible week! Although I imagine there are few ills that a Graham 1985 could not cure.

Alex’s post reminds me of how much I miss doing “normal” things like having El Vino’s rather distinctive style of food (& service!) with some Port either for lunch or in the evening. I’m crossing my fingers for it soon...

I do remember once drinking a glass of Delamain 1991 (a Reid Wines bottling I think) and thinking 'such problems in life, as one cannot resolve while sitting quietly drinking a glass of this, are in truth incapable of resolution'.

@ Glenn E - others will chime in, but for me the primary identifiable GC77 problem in the UK is TCA. But in varying degrees. On TFP posted notes, which broadly reflect my own experience, it's 1/3 lovely bottles, 1/4 badly TCA affected, and 5/12 'possibly not right'. For me, experientially not quite as bad as Ck83, where I've never had the pleasure of a good one...

Hmm in my view GC77 is a fantastic port if not TCA contaminated. Some say GC77 share the same base juice as SWC77. SWC77 is not TCA infested though. The statistics of the tasting notes for GC77 do not lie.
However the TCA problem can be easily avoided by focussing on GC77 Magnums which are not TCA affected. Usually JDAW1 is at hand to point out such things...
So in my view the perfect solution to your bad week is looking into the magnum corner of your cellar.

regards

WS1

@ WS1 - I will probably be banned from the board for saying it, but I own only a single magnum of port, Niepoort 2017. Mind you, the thought of cracking it open does fill me with pleasure, so you may be onto something here...