Cellar diary

[uncle tom]

" An everyday tale of moving bottles around "

August 9th

Extracted an original case of Warre '83, slighly decayed exterior, bought from Strakers 13 years ago. Another case has hitherto met my needs, but time to get these bottles out and racked. Prised the lid using a wooden mallet and a large antique 'railway' screwdriver, secured on eBay last year, it really works a treat. Extracted or knocked down the exposed nails before going any further, using pliers and a small ball pein hammer.

Bottles in pretty good order - one badly decayed label, a few slightly so, no signs of seepage. One bottle base of neck level, all others level in neck. Bottles loaded into my four gang 'red riding hood' wicker baskets for the journey back to be weighed and tagged.

[uncle tom]

August 10th

Making the cellar tags for the W83 bottles.

Every year I have a little session, guillotining down a couple of hundred strung luggage tags. They start off a little under 4" x 2" and I cut them down to 1 3/16" (about 30mm) long, four at a time on the guillotine, before dumping them into individual owcs that once held Vesuvio bottles. I used to hand write the tags, but my rubbish handwriting caused too many mistakes, so for the past decade I've relied on a Dymo label printer, printing on to 12mm tape.

Next up will come the ordering of the bottles. As they've not been weighed before, and none have seepage issues, I'll order them by level alone, and if there's no odds between two bottles level-wise, the best label will win.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Tom - this is interesting and entertaining. Please do keep the diary going. You have at least one interested reader and, I suspect, many more.

[MigSU]

I'm hooked, I want to know what happens next.

[uncle tom]

August 11th

One of the perils of placing commission bids at auction is that you might not win anything. Worse is that you don't win your main target, but win another lot that you put in a shot to nothing bid on at the same sale.

I wasted a happy hour in hot North London traffic jams today, collecting a single bottle of Offley '84 LBV. It was a bargain in itself, and the bottle was in good order, but a lot of trouble to pick up..

Back to the W83, now on my sorting and weighing bench. I have in the past devoted some effort, trying to find a clever way of determining the level in bottles that are too dark to see through. I concluded that it was possible, but not practical - but in the process established what appeared to be the best light source for checking levels when the glass is very dark.

Hanging next to the weighing bench, is a simple lamp socket containing a smallish, clear glass, 40W incandescent bulb. The lamp is powered via a bathroom style pull switch. These bulbs are not supposed to be available any more, but I notice that there are still eBay listings for them. I have a small stash of spares. The incandescent filiament provides a line of very bright light that is quite effective.

Sorting the bottles did not take long. I start with a rough triage, good levels to left, poor levels to the right, middling in the middle, then work my way down the line picking the bottles up two at a time to compare.

Then came the tagging. Most port bottles have an indent on the neck below the top of the capsule that you can tie a string round, others have a lip at the mouth of the neck that a tied string cannot pass. I start with a simple half hitch, then hold the strings tight for about three seconds to stretch them slightly, followed by two further half hitches in rapid succession, before snipping of the tails off the strings. A single half hitch loosens very quickly of it's own accord, two will work loose over time, but three leaves a knot that is almost impossible to untie.

Next up, weighing and recording..

[uncle tom]

August 12th

I get the impression that weighing bottles feels a bridge too far for many people, but in terms of time expended, it's really quite short. It's also quite rewarding. My only regret about weighing is that I didn't start sooner.

You can spend a fortune on balances, but I didn't. I bought a simple lab balance designed for the schools market called the the PCE BS 3000 (still available for around £100) which weighs to 3000g with a resolution of 0.1g. I actually bought two, the other is in my factory, and they don't quite agree; differing by about 1g when weighing a bottle. There's also a little drift, depending on climatic conditions (I think). As the primary objective is to measure relative ullage within a case, the inaccuracies don't really matter, but before each session I check the balance against a reference weight, which is a sealed port bottle with 10mm glass marbles inside, filled to match the average (full) port bottle weight of a little under 1350g. I have a load more of these little glass marbles, in case anyone wants to make up a reference weight for themselves.

I have a standard written cellar record sheet that I fill in before transferring the data to the 'puter, which I then keep in case of computer problems or odd discrepancies. For every bottle I record capsule type, label condition, seepage (if any) capsule condition, level, and weight; not forgetting to record where I've put it.

The W83 duly recorded, all that remained was to go round the loose bits of label with a glue brush. I use a 1/4" bristle artist's brush and wallpaper adhesive made up much more strongly than recommended in a little pot - it keeps for about six months before going mouldy. I tuck the brush under loose flaps of label to put paste on the glass, and then carefully brush the label down onto it, before carefully using kitchen paper to wipe away any excess glue on the glass. When dry the paste does not add significantly to the weight.

As space in cellar one is tight and I already have some W83 there, I have decided to make this a 'basket case'. I first started dividing cases between locations with table wines, but two locations, and two quantities in each location was a recipe for errors, so I devised a system whereby the reserve quantity was always the greatest possible multiple of four bottles - the number that fits into a basket. If I drink the last bottle in the current drinking cellar, leaving only the reserves, my 'drink bottle' coding changes the first cellar store code to 'Vacant' - clueing me to liberate another basket full from the reserve store.

Total time expended processing this case, at a suitably leisurely pace, was a little under an hour. The weighing element, and recording of same, taking little more than ten minutes.

Next up - some bottles are due for inspection on the Watch list..

[winesecretary]

This is genuinely compelling reading. I applaud, and please do continue, what I call fascinating detail and others, who are wrong, might call minutiae. The bit about the wallpaper paste not adding significantly to the weight of the bottle is genuinely the kind of thing that makes me feel better about life after another dreary 14 hour day. Please do keep it up.

[uncle tom]

August 13th

Before attending to the watch list, this year's fifth flight of six bottles for home consumption need to be loaded on to Death Row.

First up, the first bottle from a previously untouched stash. The computer's choice being a lone bottle of Malvedos '86.

Next a bottle of a wine or from a vintage that is in overstock. The computer's choice of Calem '85 was a little tenuous as the wine is not in overstock and the vintage only slightly so, but it was propelled by the stash's status as a 'drink up' candidate - it has a terrible track record for VA.

The third bottle is qualified by a less than perfect level. The computer chose a Gould Campbell '70 with BN level - but as much for its level as for the length of time since one was last quaffed.

The fourth is qualified by length of time since last drunk - it being over five years since I last popped one, the computer chose a Noval '75.

The fifth bottle on the lineup is a wine flagged to drink up or clocked for seepage. Croft '77 is a lacklustre wine that needs to be drunk out of its misery, so the computer chose that one.

And finally, the last bottle from a stash, but not in this case the last bottle I own. The computer chose a Cockburn '63.

Not the greatest flight, but there's a certain lack of guilt when there are no all-time classics on the shelf.

Now on to the Watch List.

I inducted a case of Churchill '85 last year, and clocked three sticky capsules as I did so. Two had lower levels that confirmed a little seepage, but the third didn't, so I washed the offending capsules and put the case 'On watch' to do a re-check a year down the line, by which time the worst offender had been drunk. The second worst had lost 300mg, with a resumption of visible seepage. The computer will likely consign it to death row within the next year. The other sticky capsule however, was perfectly dry and actually showed the lowest ullage of all of them.

I sometimes suspect that messy bottling lines, years before, can give a false impression of seepage issues.

Next up, with the girfriend away for the weekend, I shall probably get the wax pot out..

[MigSU]

Very nice.

[Mike J. W.]

This is certainly an interesting read and I feel a little like Garth in Wayne's World (we're not worthy); however, I do have a question for you. You stated that the computer picks your Port for consumption? How does that happen? Do you have someone write software for your cellar or is it a set of function statements in an Excel spreadsheet?

[uncle tom]

Do you have someone write software for your cellar or is it a set of function statements in an Excel spreadsheet?

It's a bit of Excel Visual Basic code that I wrote myself - the longest macro I've ever created. It was a weird journey into analysing my own decision making process that took several years to perfect. Whenever I disagreed with it's choice (it actually gives me an ordered shortlist each time) I asked myself why, and went back into the code to adjust it.

In its current incarnation it evaluates 79 different variables and runs to 1712 lines of code. It takes around five to ten seconds to make each choice.

[uncle tom]

August 14th

With the cat away, time to get out the wax pots. I've not done any waxing for about a year now. On my main stock spreadsheet, I have a column for flags. If a case has any bottles that would benefit from waxing, it gets flagged with a lower case w - an upper case W is used to signify the Watch List.

I use one pint stove enamel camping mugs to melt wax, and have amassed about fifteen in different colours. Bottle wax comes in slabs that are difficult to cut, so a few years ago I re-cast my stock into soap moulds, which makes topping up the pots much easier.

First pot out - pink - with just one bottle to wax in that colour - a 1961 Dow LBV whose original pink wax had got wet and aromatic. The process starts by taking two sheets of kitchen paper and rolling them horizontally into a tight roll. This I then half hitch round the neck of the bottle. This stops any drips from the cleaning process running down and spoiling the bottle's 'patina'.

Next the old capsule of the bottle went under the tap with the water running luke warm, and using a plastic kitchen scourer (but no soap) I gently washed off the historic grime and more recent seepage.

Then with the bottle stood up, I brushed some hydrogen peroxide into the cracks in the old wax. This froths when it contacts grime, lifting it away.

There are only two chemicals I use when waxing bottles - hydrogen peroxide, which is nothing more than water and oxygen, and acetone, which occurs naturally in wine to a very small extent, and also in human breath, so is not an alien contaminant. Be aware that peroxide and acetone can form an unstable explosive if mixed, so keep them apart.

Wax takes time to melt in the pot. It is a very poor conductor of heat, and can easily start to boil before it has fully melted if you try to rush things. I warm the pots in a dry saucepan with a steel plate in the bottom to spread the heat. I used to add a little olive oil, but find that isn't necessary. The wax pots are wrapped in foil when not in use to keep dust off, and I spread that over the top of the saucepan to conserve heat. Using an electric hob, I put in on power level 2. It takes the best part of an hour to warm through.

Wax is as dangerous as cooking oil when it comes to fire hazard, so I always turn off the heat if I have to go out for a few minutes, in case I get distracted.

The peroxide having dried off, I ran a paper towel soaked in acetone round the top the bottle to give it a further clean. This made the old wax look brand new.

The wax tends to melt from the outside of the pot inwards, so while waiting for the core of the wax to melt, I did a little priming, using a small disposable artist's brush. This I used to paint wax into cracks in the old wax to discourage air bubbles. I also paint wax over bare glass near the top of the bottle and also bare cork, when there is any, to reduce thermal shock to the bottle, and in the case of cork, improve adhesion.

Aside from creating a perfect capsule, waxing also requires the creation of a good seal where the wax meets the neck of the bottle, especially with old bottles where the cork is failing. To ensure that I gave the glass a final wipe with an acetone soaked paper towel to degrease it, immediately prior to dipping.

After removing the paper collar I'd placed earlier I then dipped the bottle. I dunked the neck vertically into the wax and them immediately removed it, holding the neck horizontally over the pot whilst spinning the bottle in my hands until the excess wax has dripped off, then slowly bringing the bottle up to the vertical, spinning all the time.

Finally it was bubble time - waxing old leaky bottles usually causes some bubbles to appear, which I deal with by holding a burning a match very closely above the offending bubble, which first pops it, and then magically causes it to heal over again. I use long cook's matches for this. In this case just one bubble appeared, which then reformed after I had first popped and healed it, so had to be done again.

That's enough for today - more tales from the wax pot tomorrow!

[MigSU]

The Surprising Adventures of Sir Digby Chicken Caesar Uncle Tom.

[winesecretary]

There is a lovely pace to this series which reminds me of the diary of Parson Woodforde (of which I am an unashamed fan, and indeed I am a member of the Parson Woodforde Society...)

[uncle tom]

After the pink wax came black. First to put a fresh capsule on a recently and very reasonably acquired bottle of Cockburn crusted, bottled in 1950, that had a sound cork but had lost the top of it's black capsule. Following the usual routine, I noted that the old capsule was wax, as it barely coloured the acetone rag. A lot of mid 20th century black capsules appear to be pitch, which colours the rag mightily.

Then came a bottle I've been reluctant to wax, but with an ullage rate approaching 1000mg p.a. (despite no visible seepage) my desire to preserve it for another 30 years demanded attention.

This was the near identical twin of the 1851 bottle I opened ten years ago (and immortalised on YouTube) for the 50th birthday of Richard Mayson.

There was very little remaining of the orginal wax, but when preparing, the acetone rag showed it be very soluble and an orange brown colour. As this bottle predated the modern petrochemical industry, a little digging suggested that this residue is probably Carnauba wax.

I normally wax with a colour that is sympathetic to the original, but in a case like this, prefer to use a different hue, so the original can eventually be identified again.

Next up - time to induct another '97 to current drinking..

[Andy Velebil]

Tom,
1986 Malvedos, last I had it, was an amazingly good VP with plenty of years left ahead of it. Just FYI.

[uncle tom]

August 15th

Only two stashes so far inducted into current drinking from '97, at 24, my newest drinking vintage; so time for another. I've plenty of Crasto, including a dozen that I bought in 2006 and have been in rack 21 in my holding cellar since that rack was installed a decade ago.

Hand numbered tags, only the levels recorded, and no inspection date, so tagged before June 2007 when I started keeping date records for inspection.

Fourteen years of dust later, the bottles all look fine. Re-tagged with printed numbers and kept in the original order. With glass too dark to see levels I would otherwise order them by weight, but there's only a couple of grams variation between the lot of them. Basket cased, eight ready to return to long term storage and four tucked into current drinking - rack position 03A16 to be precise.

I always load bottles in the racks from the bottom to the top, so the highest bottle is the next to be drunk, but give the storage position as the lowest position occupied. Rack 3 is a double depth rack, so these bottles occupy the first column from the left (A) and the 15th and 16th holes down.

What next? Time to do a little routine inspection..

[Glenn E.]

Only two stashes so far inducted into current drinking from '97, at 24, my newest drinking vintage; so time for another. I've plenty of Crasto, including a dozen that I bought in 2006 and have been in rack 21 in my holding cellar since that rack was installed a decade ago.

I look forward to a tasting note in the next year. I only have a single bottle of 1997 Crasto, but it is a magnum so I have high hopes that it will be good or possibly excellent. It is Crasto, and VP, so even in magnum it is unlikely to rise to the level of outstanding.

[winesecretary]

Am particularly enjoying the multiply-cellared concept (e.g 'holding cellar') as physical cellars rather than merely abstract storage facilities.

[uncle tom]

August 16th

One of the beneifts of tagging individual bottles with cut down cream coloured luggage tags is that they readily give away seepage issues. Not only does a leaky bottle soak and stain the tag, but the port wetted card is quite aromatic, so your nose can tell if there's a leaky bottle nearby.

Thus it is that a couple of times a year or so I creep slowly round my oldest bottles, small torch in hand, and without causing too much air disturbance, nostrils at the ready to spot any issues.

When found however it sometimes transpires that the bottles have been playing tricks - some bottles leak without soaking their tags, but instead drip down onto the necks of bottles below, giving them a false appearance of seepage, so one has to check the bottles above before jumping to conclusions.

Not on this occasion however. A few minor sinners were found - a Croft '60 showing slight wetting of the wax - it's never a chore to drink through one of those - a Malvedos '64, only secured a couple of years ago, sporting some fluffy white mould on the capsule - will put on watch and wax if necessary. A Fonseca '63, last bottle from my least cherished stash of this wine, also showing a little white fluff - to wax or drink? Maybe the latter.. and finally a curious bottle of Dow '45, that was very kindly gifted to me.

Curious because the label loooks correct, the glass looks correct, the wine has an excellent level and colour, and the flaky sedimentation in the neck is consistant with it being genuine and well cellared..

..but the capsule looks wrong - a badly corroded gold and green foil.

The emergence of a little bit of seepage is almost reassuirng however. It raises the chances that the capsule is the only part of the bottle that is not authentic - and gives me an excuse to remove that foil to see if the cork is original.

That, however, can wait for another day..

[uncle tom]

August 17th/18th

A little pottering around. Berry Bros bottlings from the 1960's are very attractive to look at, and generally well executed, but getting those slightly quaint labels to stay on the bottles was not always their forte. I have today had to re-affix three out of five on a stash of Noval '63. I think the problem was that they often aged the bottles before labelling them (as was common practice) but didn't then clean the glass that the label had to stick to.

Nine years ago I secured a dozen Delaforce '58's of which there are now five remaining. My inspection regime for bottles aged 60 to 70 years is a nominal once in eight years, but in practice I inspect one bottle in eight each year - the ones least recently inspected. Today this stash was due.

These were the best of the dozen, ordered initially by level alone, with levels now ranging from from IN through to VTS++. One of the capsules (bottle C) is slightly chipped, the others sound. The ID comes from the wax capsules, the corks are branded Harveys. And the rates of ullage (p.a.) ?

A) - 66mg
B) - 149mg
C) - 132mg
D) - 314mg
E) - 50mg

So in the flags column on my database will now appear #D - telling me to skip bottle E in favour of D when next choosing a bottle

[uncle tom]

August 19th

Spent a while this morning bidding at Rosebery's sale. They were liquidating a fairly large cellar of a probably deceased gentleman, and the very casual manner of the cataloguing, with no photos, made me wonder if some bargains might result. I won't know for sure until I collect them, but I secured just over 80 bottles of mostly claret and burgundy, with an average age of more than 40 years, for £400 inclusive..

Time to investigate that Dow '45

The atypical capsule was very corroded, and crumbled as I scraped it off. I pondered the many corroded capsules I've broached in the past to estimate an age. Not less than 40 years I felt, easily 50. The cork is unbranded, so I assume the bottle was re-corked. Was it an honest re-cork - or mischief at play?

My feeling, given the capsule condition, is that the bottle would not have been of great value and veneration as to tempt mischief when it was re-corked. Anyone minded to re-fill an old empty bottle at that time would surely have favoured a '27 or '96 rather than a '45. They would also have tried to replicate the original capsule, instead of installing something so obviously different.

As the content of the bottle looks correct, I'm going to wax this bottle and book it as re-corked, by person unknown.

[uncle tom]

August 21st

My wings are slightly clipped at the moment, as the alternator on my car has packed up and it may be a fortnight before it can get fixed. I can borrow the works transit van when necessary, but it's not quite the same. The alternator has not done badly - lasting 17 years and 249,000 miles, before giving up.

Time for a few more inspections, and a little stash that I approach with some trepidation - the nine bottles remaining of the case of Noval 31 I bought nearly fifteen years ago now, last inspected in spring '16.

And they are all looking good, all still with levels in neck (two of them only just), and with ullage rates ranging from 94mg to 188mg p.a. - not at all bad for 90 year old bottles.

[winesecretary]

What a heartwarming conclusion on the Noval 1931 - your penultimate paragraph had me on tenterhooks...

[jdaw1]

What a delightful diary, blending care with decadence.

[uncle tom]

August 24th

Took the works van on a trip down to Rosebery's saleroom in south London - noted the new emission zone signing, ready for October, but not covered up, which was a bit confusing. Can't help feeling that Khan's London is putting up big signs saying 'go away - we want to be alone' - not sure this is going to play out well, long term.

So much scope for breaking rules accidentally when driving around London now, with cameras everywhere, ready and willing to punish accidental misdemeanours. Three to four decades ago I saw London driving as a pleasurable challenge - now it's just miserable.

Got to Rosebery's and was relieved to find they had some off-street parking space. Just as well I took a supply of wine boxes, my winnings, all 83 bottles, were loose in mesh baskets. I also picked up a weird lot of framed sheets of stamps a few lots after the wine. Dating from the 1980s, these mint stamps had a face value of £82, but were knocked down to me on the opening bid of £10 - does the rule still apply that post offices have to swap mint stamps for cash on request still apply? If not, my correspondence will be decorative, going forward..

Detoured on the way back to Stacey's saleroom in Rayleigh where I'd picked up a dozen bottles on a shot to nothing bid. A couple of moderately interesting old LBVs covered the bid, the rest just basic quaffing. Arriving I drove into the car park past a line of people waiting for Covid jabs, only to find the only way out was to reverse back past said people, carefully, and reverse back into a busy road - never fun in a van.

My stash from Rosebery's looked very eclectic, most bottles appearing unique, and mostly with very badly decayed labels. First bottle out when I got home was the least promising - a non vintage French rose that looked about 50 years old. The cork just had the classic 'mis en bouteille' etc wording. I wondered if it might be at the sweet end of the scale, and able to survive the years, but no. The wine had not turned to vinegar though.

Next up from the stash a riesling shaped bottle with remnants of German gothic lettering, now in the fridge. As back up, a bottle of Haut Plaisance '70 - slight seepage evident, but good colour.

Port-wise, the Malvedos '86 was young and rich, the Calem '85 had less VA than some I've had, but not free of it; and along the way I've quaffed a Fonseca '03 LBV and half a bottle of FUR - I'll probably decant the GC70 tomorrow.

What needs doing in the cellar? A couple more cases need to be inducted - I aim to induct 162 bottles of VP over any period of 12 months. My next target will probably be a case of Croft Roeda '80, that got hastily dumped into a rack a couple of years ago, after it's owc started to fall apart when moved.

[winesecretary]

I induct all accumulated wine every time I vist my cellar, it is literally my first job that weekend. Otherwise it never happens. [I fear it may be too late for this learned experience to help Tom...]

[uncle tom]

I induct all accumulated wine every time I vist my cellar,

By induct, I mean bring vintage port previously classified as kindergarten (too young to drink) or ladies in waiting (old enough, but not yet serviced) into current drinking..

[uncle tom]

August 26th

I decided that rather than wax over the failing replacement cork on the Dow 45, I’d re-cork it a second time.

A while now since I last re-corked anything, so time to dig out my various tools.

I have two French made floor standing corking machines. This might sound greedy, but after discovering five years ago that the design couldn’t handle magnums, but that with a little re-engineering one could, I bought a second off eBay, with the intention of doing just that.

The bottle to be re-corked sits on a platform attached to a vertical shaft, which runs inside a spring to support the platform. By cutting down the shaft and changing the spring, a taller bottle could be accommodated.

Since then however, the need to re-cork a magnum has yet to recur, so it remains ‘a round tuit’.

Removing the old cork required some care, as I could see it was minded to drop into the bottle. I carefully caught it with a simple Screwpull and gently drew the slightly dropped cork back to it's proper position at the top of the bottle.

Then removing the screw from its frame, I wound the spiral right through the cork and gently eased it out. The cork fragmented however, and only about 90% emerged.

Time to deploy my other instruments. First out a fisherman’s penknife, which has a flat hooked scraping tool. I’m not sure what indignity this is supposed to inflict on some poor unsuspecting fish, but it is very good at removing remnants of cork stuck to the side of the neck.

Next I needed to deal with a few crumbs now floating on the surface. For these I use a pair of oversized tweezers, about 12” long overall, which nimbly fish bits of cork out of the wine.

Finally I cleaned round the top of the neck, both inside and out, with a cotton bud soaked in hydrogen peroxide.

I had already selected a vintage quality cork to use as a replacement, which I first sniffed to check for any sign of TCA, and then washed in a tumbler with a sulphur sterilising solution.

The still wet cork popped into the jaws of the corking machine, the bottle was speedily and very professionally re-sealed.

It’s a very satisfying machine to use.

[jdaw1]

a fishermen’s penknife, which has a flat hooked scraping tool. I’m not sure what indignity this is supposed to inflict on some poor unsuspecting fish, but it is very good at removing remnants of cork stuck to the side of the neck.

I want. Please post a link to the type you think optimal.

Separately, how confident are you that the recorking process described does not damage the goods?

[uncle tom]

I want. Please post a link to the type you think optimal.

I bought mine over a decade ago, chunky, classic design and well engineered, with about a dozen attachments, but no obvious maker's name.

Searched Google images: nada - eBay: nada - a fisherman's chandlers with over 100 different folding knives listed: nada..

I went through the Vitorinox site to see if I could spot the blade shape on anything else - but no joy..

Essentially it's a penknife blade, sharp down one side, with a blunt end that has been rolled over to create a small hook about 3/8" wide and about 3/16" deep.

Separately, how confident are you that the recorking process described does not damage the goods?

Very. I re-corked several old bottles before I mastered the art of making the perfect wax seal, and have since drunk most of them. No evident issues at all.

[jdaw1]

Mindful of Cork Questions: Wine Wizard, whence come your corks, and how old are they?

[uncle tom]

Mindful of Cork Questions: Wine Wizard, whence come your corks, and how old are they?

From the little wine supplies shop in Pinhao IIRC

That piece seems a little excited. Cork is a very enduring tannic wood that looks after itself remarkably well. Mine are a few years old now and live in a wooden box in the cellar. They are not dried out, they are not mouldy, they seem absolutely fine. But I soaked it in a sulphur solution just to be on the safe side.

[uncle tom]

August 27th

Whilst traversing Tesco I spied some diced beef on the bargain shelf, still in date but only just. However as beef keeps well past date without issue, I grabbed some - all I needed was some undrinkable red wine to marinate it with.

I looked at my recently acquired stash. A bottle of Fronton - Bellevue La Foret 1978 - leaking and ullaged to low shoulder - seemed a good candidate.

But the wine was lovely - too good to put in the pot - nearer to a Burgundy than Claret in style.

No-one seems to regard Fronton wines as 'investment grade' so you hardly ever see them at auction, but I shall be on the look out for more old specimens now.

The beef remained in the fridge and I enjoyed the wine with a takeaway, followed by a still very young Gould Campbell '70.

[uncle tom]

August 29th

Another case inducted to current drinking - my last case of Croft Roeda '80. I've got quite a bit of this, no superstar, but a reliable mature quaffer.

Seven bottles with level in neck, the others base of neck. I define 'In neck' as being any level that is at least 1/8" (3mm for the metricated) into the neck. If the level is more than half way between the base of neck and cork the level becomes IN+ and less than 3/8" from the base of the cork as IN++ (aka 'High fill')

With her indoors away again I waxed the D45, and while I was at it gave the F63 a dip to save it for another day. Also waxed a Warre '34 - no sign of seepage, but surreptitiously losing nearly 1000mg a year.

A few casual inspections to fill up my sheet prior to filing it - a Harvey's bottled pristine Sandeman '55, a couple of Ferreira '60's with exceptional levels, a rough looking Vargellas '57 with stained selo, but only losing 66mg p.a.; and A Niepoort Garrafeira 1933 - waxed over foil capsule, last checked six years ago. Not sure whether to list the label 'bin soiled' as they were always designed to look that way.

Need to do some more inductions to keep up to speed with the system - will drop into my holding cellar on Tuesday.

[uncle tom]

September 1st

The works van being needed for works biz and my car still awaiting a new alternator (this Friday, hopefully) I delayed venturing over to my holding cellar until today.

I was armed with four baskets. After placing four of the Croft Roeda ’80 bottles in my current drinking cellar, two of the baskets conveyed the other eight. I also basket cased some Vesuvio ‘91 and Dow ‘91 in the interests of making space.

I have a longer term ambition to get all bottles out of their original cases by the end of their 36th year, and also to get most bottles first weighed six years prior to being wanted, in order to order them by ullage rate when weighed a second time, and inducted into current drinking.

On both counts I have some way to go and am not rushing things – I aim to get 162 75cL bottles first weighed every year. I have now finished processing all the bottles from the 1970s, and plan to complete the 1980 vintage next year. However I still have a fair tranche of 82’s and 83’s left, and only half my ‘85’s have so far been processed.

Today however, I approached the other end of the objective, liberating a dozen Churchill 2003s for attention. These were not sorted, tagged, or fully recorded, merely numbered with a liquid chalk pen on the right shoulder and weighed. As I normally grab bottles with my left hand, I find this location for a number is the least likely to get accidentally rubbed off. A right handed person might prefer to mark the other side.

Mindful of the diced steak that is beginning to get little aged in the fridge, I filled a basket from my Rosebery’s stash – looking for potential cooking juice. A 1987 Esporao from the Lisboa region perhaps?

- It is again far too good for cooking with, so the steak has gone in the freezer.

[uncle tom]

September 3rd

Time to plan a re-stack of one of the bays in my holding cellar - bay 6 to be precise. It's a bit depleted and untidy, and I want to re-stack it and add some recent purchases at the same time.

First off I copied the 30 cases currently residing there from my stock database onto a fresh spreadsheet, and decided which I will want to extract over the course of the next year, which I'm likely to extract over the next three years, and which can be re-stacked for the long haul. Six stashes are flagged for the coming year, and will be transferred to a shelving unit near the cellar door. Eleven cases flagged for the medium term - these will be put to one side and then placed at the top and front of the re-stacked bay.

The bay itself is 60" wide, 60" high and 30" deep. To make sense of the many case shapes used for port, I classify them into one of four categories:

Cases with a horizontal dimension that is 12.5" to 13.5" (A); cases with a horizontal dimension of 15.5" to 16.5" (B); those whose two horizontal dimensions fit both size parameters (AB); and those that fail to have either horizontal dimension (C).

In practice, (C) cases are almost entirely those with bottles that are not 75cL.

The maximum of the two dimensions, 13.5" and 16.5", adds up to 30" - the depth of the bay. I stack (B) cases at the back of the bay, and (A) cases in front of them. (AB) cases are then deployed at either position to balance the numbers, and C cases are usually put at the top, or on the shelving by the door.

As I stack, so I record the location. The holding cellar is cellar 3, this is bay six, so the storage codes start 3B6. Then comes the horizontal position, LL = Left, CL = Centre Left, CC = Centre, CR = Centre Right, RR = Right; and finally F or Fore or A for Aft, to give me a six character storage code.

~~~

I finally begrudged some old wine for the cooking pot. A claret bottle, capsule corroded to the point of being illegible, label rotted ditto, top of cork went to countless pieces when I tried to remove it. The wine was a little dried out, beefy, but perfectly quaffable. A libation made in the kitchen, I drank the rest of it. The bottom of the cork had fallen into the bottle and had some legible branding. Peering through the glass I could make out part of the vintage date - 193..?

My pre-war marinated stew was very nice..

[JacobH]

Got to Rosebery's and was relieved to find they had some off-street parking space. Just as well I took a supply of wine boxes, my winnings, all 83 bottles, were loose in mesh baskets. I also picked up a weird lot of framed sheets of stamps a few lots after the wine. Dating from the 1980s, these mint stamps had a face value of £82, but were knocked down to me on the opening bid of £10 - does the rule still apply that post offices have to swap mint stamps for cash on request still apply? If not, my correspondence will be decorative, going forward..

The bottom has fallen out of the stamp market over the last decade or so. I think the traditional stamp catalogues over-value stamps by a factor of about 10 on average, compared to what you can buy them for via. a dealer or online. I sometimes buy things on ebay from stamp dealers, and they inevitably come in an envelope stamped with vintage stamps. Interestingly, they almost never seem to get cancelled: I wonder whether they flummox the automatic machines and the people who are supposed to do them manually don’t like using a permanent marker to put a cross on unusual stamps? I think the ½p value is no longer recognised, even when combined with a larger figure so 2 × 2½p stamps = 4p of postage but I have no idea if that is actually enforced on a regular basis. I don’t think you can return stamps to the PO these days for cash, although there are companies who offer to buy them for a percentage of the face value. I have no idea what those percentages are or what they then do with them.

[uncle tom]

September 5th

A lazy weekend. The Noval '75 has been an absolute darling - my best VP of the year to date, will finish it shortly (sadly)

The grand re-stack of bay 6 will take place sometime this coming week, in the meantime I put away the chalked and weighed Ch03. When bottles are racked, but not tagged, I give one bottle a cheap plastic key fob tag with the metal ring removed and a rubber band put in it's place, marked with it's case number. Rubber lasts forever if it's away from two things: UV from sunlight, and ozone from electrical equipment. Although too small in quantity to detect by smell, the ozone from a microwave seems to kill any rubber bands nearby in a matter of weeks.

I digress. Having delivered back the dozen freshly weighed Ch03 I needed to pick up a bottle of Senhoro do Convento LBV 2003, which left 11 vacant places in the baskets. I was reminded of a case of T85, bought pristine, but loose, eight years ago from Christies. Well, almost pristine - one bottle was wet from apparent seepage, but when drunk through there was nothing under the capsule to suggest a problem. The other 11 bottles duly loaded in the baskets, all looking very sound, I had another quick dive into my Rosebery stash. The burgundy bottles have almost all lost their neck tags that normally indicate the vintage; however the glass being usually pale, cutting the foil often reveals. First up a very clear 1966, plus a lot of extra text that will take some research. Second a badly ullaged bottle that looked like low end burgundy circa 1960s/1970s; short cork, badly ullaged, cork blackened and illegible - glass embossed round the base with the words 'not to be refilled' in both English and French.

Although a humble player, probably never intended to survive more than a year or two after bottling, it has been a delight to drink this evening..

[uncle tom]

September 9th

This week's late summer heat has been no weather for lugging around cases or carrying bottles in hot cars, but a little pottering around in the cool of the cellar is most agreeable.

Some inspections of odd old bottles - an old bottle of Feuerheerd 'Commandador' - is it a tawny, is is a ruby? I've no idea - nor any real plan as to when to drink it. Although no visible sign of seepage, its ullaging at 559mg p.a. so the T stopper is probably on its last legs. Then there's the bottle of Fonseca 'Very old tawny' with a note on the label saying it was received as a Xmas present from 'PNG' in 1969 - so a very much older tawny now.

I will never know who PNG was (or maybe still is..) or what they would make of their Xmas gift being still unopened 52 years later.

Inspected a nice stash of Berry's bottled Taylor '55. Four bottles remaining of an original six, two of whom still have a high fill level. Ullaging at 99mg.

Opened another one of my Rosebery bottles last night - Avery's bottled, burgundy bottle shape, unbranded cork, no clue to vintage and only remnants of the label: something Montrachet possibly? The wine looked murky so I suspected it had gone sick, but no - it was just still a very dark wine, which I drank with indecent speed before moving on to the Senhora do Convento 2003 LBV - a wine of a standard that could easily be passed off as VP.

Time to inspect a few LBVs..

[winesecretary]

That Rosebery's bottle sounds like a burgundy that had been 'improved' with with some syrah. It can be surprisingly good with 40-50 years of ageing...

[uncle tom]

That Rosebery's bottle sounds like a burgundy that had been 'improved' with with some syrah. It can be surprisingly good with 40-50 years of ageing...

When did the English merchants stop bottling claret and burgundy? The practice seems to have ended at much the same time as VP bottling was confined to Portugal, but I don't know the exact timeline..

[jdaw1]

When did the English merchants stop bottling claret and burgundy? The practice seems to have ended at much the same time as VP bottling was confined to Portugal, but I don't know the exact timeline..

The Wine Society Spring List, May/September 1980:

Bottle size

In common with the rest of wine merchants, the Society continues to use 70 cl content bottles for most of its own bottlings of fortified and table wines. The 1976 and 1975 clarets, bottled in 73 cl content, are exceptions. The reason for this is that 75 cl content bottles, which we hope will eventually become normal, have been very difficult and expensive to obtain in this country, since there is little demand for them from the larger firms. The Australians, Californians and South Africans use 75 cl content: and some French, Italian. and German bottlers do, as marked in the list, although 70 cl is more common in Italy and Germany and 73 cl in Bordeaux, Burgundy and the Loire. Our Alsace wines come in 70 cl content bottles and the standard Champagne bottle holds 75 cl, Eastern Europe and Spain usually bottle in 70 cl, unless indicated. Whisky. Gin and Vodka will be bottled in 75 cl fractionally less than the old 26⅔ fl.oz. size; Cognac is bottled in 70 cl, the old, 24 fl oz, as is traditional.

[JacobH]

That is really interesting. I’ve often wondered about this but never seen it set out so clearly. I wonder why the traditional bottle size in England was 24 fl oz rather than 25 which would be 1¼ pint (or 1 pint, 1 gill)? Also why the premium French wines were sold in 73cl rather than 75cl, which seems the more obvious size (as ¾ litre)?

Perhaps the differences between the round numbers at the bottling numbers was to allow for wastage?

[uncle tom]

September 18th,

After a few days pottering around doing other things, a little session of weighing LBVs. Two little stashes, both with driven corks, first weighed six years ago.

First up, my six remaining bottles of a case of Duff Gordon 1991, ullaging at between 49mg p.a. and 82mg p.a. Then six bottles of Warre 1995, ullaging at between 17mg and 50mg, with four of the six recording 34mg.

When I first started weighing bottles, I focused on the older bottles and only made a very few second weighings of young wines. The numbers on these two stashes are coming in somewhat lower than I expected, although the Duff Gordon bottles with slightly lower levels have already been drunk through.

Is my plan for a six year interval between first and second weighings going to be long enough to separate the sheep from the goats? Should I weigh bottles to a greater resolution than 0.1g?

The obvious step of buying a balance that reads to 0.01g is complicated by the fact that at that resolution, draughts, including one's own breath, can send the number up and down with ease. Changing to measuring in grains is tempting (0.065g) but whilst many balances will read in obscure units not known on these shores, not many list grains in their list of displayed units.

Maybe the six year interval will be enough to flag up weakling corks - maybe these twelve bottles are all better players - will wait until I have more six year data on young wines.

The computer checks my inspection record on a rolling basis - counting the number inspected in each age group over the previous 365 days, and comparing that with the annual target number. Thus instructed, some 70-79 year olds have been given an inspection, also three 100yr plus bottles.

One of those is of a vintage we'll never have a horizontal of, and a shipper we'll never have a vertical of. It has a decent pedigree (bought a long time ago from a long time friend of Michael Broadbent) and the bottle glass looks reasonably correct, but the capsule has been replaced or reinforced, and the label re-affixed with Sellotape. Ullage rate and wine colour look consistent with a very old bottling.

More than that I won't say, as I think this will be my candidate for this year's Xmas bash..

[uncle tom]

22nd September

A case of Vesuvio '95 liberated from its case today, the case itself somewhat battered as it had long since been deprived of it's cardboard outer, so will go on the pub's kindling pile. But what to do with the pottery bin tag? Seems such a waste to bin it.

Four of the bottles have fairly easily seen levels, but two are completely opaque. Modern glassmakers still struggle to get colour consistency sometimes. Also odd is that while some bottles from the 1960's have a dry weight that is almost identical, the weights of these bottles are all over the show, despite consistent levels. Very aged glass making machinery, I suspect.

As I've already got one six pack of V95 weighed and tagged, these bottles have been chalk numbered and will be returned to the holding cellar. Why did I choose this case? - It was in the way while I was re-stacking.

Next to do - a few more inspections, 50-60 yr olds this time.

[Alex Bridgeman]

*Sigh*

I am so enjoying the Cellar Diary entries. Thoroughly enjoyable gentle reading.

Thank you Tom. Please don’t stop.

PS - I use my spare Vesuvio bin labels as garden markers. A black wax pencil on the reverse side of the label allows me to write the name and date of sowing.

[uncle tom]

September 25th

I finished consuming my first case of Fonseca 85 (a six pack) last December, so time to get another into service. This one bought from Bonham's 11 years ago as a full dozen owc but the case itself was not in very good shape. For the past nine years these bottles have lived, upside down, in a crate in my holding cellar.

No leaky bottles, but two had a very slight discolouration of the selos. All bottles completely opaque so had to be judged on weight alone. One of the two with a stained selo was also the lightest, so a strong hint of ullaging. The other was mid range weight-wise but also had a cork that had not quite gone fully home. These two will be the first candidates for execution. The other ten spanned a fairly even weight range of 12g, whereas from ullage alone I would expect a weight range of about 3-4g at that age, so another candidate for old glass making machinery. I've noticed from past weighings that the old machines tended to be used when the bottles have dates or crests applied on the shoulder.

My last flight of VP for home consumption finished last night - one where every bottle showed better than expected, or in one case, feared. So the next task is to load the next six. Tonight, however, reminded by a thread elsewhere, I shall pop a Rozes 40yr, bottled in 2005.

[uncle tom]

September 26th

The Rozes 40yr was better than my past recollection, but if you are not fond of marzipan you will not like it's nose. After two glasses I got quite a sugar overload, so will take the rest more gently. No rush to drink these - plenty of beef to keep it alive for decades.

Now for the next flight for home consumption, the computer to the rescue as usual.

First bottle, the first from a previously untouched stash - a Martinez '87. This bottled propelled to the fore by virtue of slight seepage signs.

Next up, a bottle or vintage that is in overstock, on this occasion both - Taylor '60. Also aided by evidence of a little seepage.

Then a bottle that has either a poor level or high ullage, this time a Delaforce '85, obscure glass but a high ullage rate of 322mg p.a.

The fourth bottle has to be a wine that has not been recently drunk at home. The computer picked a Niepoort 1991 - last sampled over 12 years ago on 26/3/2009.

The fifth bottle has to be a 'drink up' candidate, and in this flight I've planted a bottle, as the computer doesn't handle unknown vintages. Known to be Noval after removing the foil, but the vintage date is hard to discern - probably 60's. As it's an odd bottle with a VTS level, one to drink through.

And the final bottle on the flight, a bottle that is the last from its stash, but in this case a rather messy odd bottle - a Borges '79

All six bottles will be shortly stood up in a little pine cupboard in the cellar that I had fashioned for the purpose, the bottles in a neat single row with a a 1960 crown coin indicating the next bottle to be drawn. At the side is a stack of half crowns bearing notable vintage dates - one is moved from left to right each time I start a new flight. This being the sixth flight of the year, the sixth coin bears the image of Edward VII and the fine date of 1908.

[JacobH]

Might we have a photograph of your pine cupboard, please?