Nose and palate both exuberantly full of dark red fruit. There was some argument around the table about whether it lacked tannins. I'm not sure. I think the fruit was just effectively masking them. I thought it would hold many years.
For several experiences with this wine, I thought it impossibly youthful, boisterous, beastly, and tannic. It was 30-35 years old but seemed barely 15, if that.
Then I didn't get to taste it for a few years. No worry, I thought, it is a beast that will last forever.
And then I got to taste one again and I was shocked. It was fully mature, mild, smooth... not at all like the Port I'd become accustomed to. There must be something wrong with the bottle, I thought, but there wasn't anything that we could find at that sitting. It was simply much closer to a 1980 Fonseca than what we expected from a 1980 Dow.
Where on this spectrum would you say this bottle falls? It no longer sounds beastly, but at 41 years old one wouldn't expect that. But this bottle does still sound fruity and bold, though possibly low on tannins?
Dissapointing to say the least (least favourite of the evening). Rubbery nose - perhaps smelt a bit like artificial bathroom cleaning products. I didn't finish my glass.
It's funny because I shared a bottle of the '80 Dow this summer with friends. It was a pretty well integrated bottle of Port and was preferred over the '77 Fonseca and '94 Fonseca served side by side. Both Fonseca's were definitely off that night. If it's being described as "Rubbery nose - perhaps smelt a bit like artificial bathroom cleaning products", I wonder if it was an off bottle?
Mike J. W. wrote: ↑21:21 Thu 21 Oct 2021
It's funny because I shared a bottle of the '80 Dow this summer with friends. It was a pretty well integrated bottle of Port and was preferred over the '77 Fonseca and '94 Fonseca served side by side. Both Fonseca's were definitely off that night. If it's being described as "Rubbery nose - perhaps smelt a bit like artificial bathroom cleaning products", I wonder if it was an off bottle?
Possibly, but there was no suggestion of it being spoilt from the others attending - just an odd bottle. It could also very possibly be a dirty glass - this has definitely misguided me before.
This is a disappointing showing. I have been seduced by this bottling in the past. Despite being a very pleasant drink, it was always promising more to come. Thank you for the note. I am of a mind to try one when it is cool enough again.
Darkest of the wines. Opaque red, still, fading round the edge. Limited nose. Very little in the mouth. Some simple fruits. A few tannins left. Fine to drink but did not match the colour.
Very dark red indeed – the picture on the review of the evening as a whole doesn’t do the depth of colour justice. Huge amounts of youthful fruit remain, and I thought that this was too dominant given the age of the bottle. I wonder what this will be like in a few decades, once the fruit has integrated into the wine?
The darkest of the wines at this tasting, a red so dark as to approach blackness. Opaque. Black winegums on the nose, although a little muted. Surprisingly this is a bit closed on the palate. Some black fruit, dry tannins and some blackcurrant jelly which grows to be a big mouthful backed by good acidity. Dry edges dance around the aftertaste and a long finish. This is "interesting" but is far too peculiar to be "good". 86/100. Drunk 20-Oct-21. Decanted 11½ hours.
Top Ports in 2022: Quinta do Noval Nacional 1931. I have never drunk such a wonderful bottle of Port. I cried with joy.
2023: Fonseca 1966. There are not many better Ports.
