ThePortForum.com

Bought at the bargain price of £16.99 from Morrison's and really couldn't pass it up. The intention was to have it as a night-cap every once in a while rather than digging into one of the XOs, which are meant for polite company. Don't actually get any polite company so they are just gathering dust. Don't usually have Cognac as a night-cap so this is the first attempt and I don't think I've had a glass of this stuff for a very long time.

';]#'#']]]]]]]]]]]-

and that was a message from my cat, Maya, who took over the keyboard for a moment.

Served in a balloon glass, the colour looks like a decent cup of tea before the milk is put in, but holding up to the light it looks like Sauternes! Basically brown. Nose is unsurprisingly alcoholic with powerful stewed fruits, notably figs, close up there are oranges. In the mouth it is heavy with dark marmalade and raisins.

Generally quite nice but as the last few times that I've had Cognac it has been XO this seems slightly rough. I must bring my tastes back down a bit if a VSOP seems rough, it could start to get expensive.

KillerB wrote: Don't actually get any polite company so they are just gathering dust.

Probably not worth asking why you didn't give me any XO

DRT wrote:

KillerB wrote: Don't actually get any polite company so they are just gathering dust.

Probably not worth asking why you didn't give me any XO

I offered it to you - you wanted more Port

KillerB wrote:

DRT wrote:

KillerB wrote: Don't actually get any polite company so they are just gathering dust.

Probably not worth asking why you didn't give me any XO

I offered it to you - you wanted more Port

That seems reasonable. I never drink brandy unless I have had too much port. We were obviously being sensible in limiting ourselves to four bottles between two

DRT wrote:I never drink brandy unless I have had too much port.

This is surely a tautology?

JacobH wrote:

DRT wrote:I never drink brandy unless I have had too much port.

This is surely a tautology?

Hmm... not sure about that. I'm not sure that a truism can contain a condition that is impossible: "too much Port."

Glenn E. wrote:

JacobH wrote:

DRT wrote:I never drink brandy unless I have had too much port.

This is surely a tautology?

Hmm... not sure about that. I'm not sure that a truism can contain a condition that is impossible: "too much Port."

I appreciate that this is not a common example of a tautology but, as the impossible condition must, by its nature, be unnecessary, it is surely unnecessary for it to be included in the definition? That is not to reduce the possibility for causation. ‟I never drink brandy because I would only drink it if I have had too much port” seems legitimate.

I think it may have been deliberate. This would make it a joke. Talk amongst yourselves.

KillerB wrote:I think it may have been deliberate. This would make it a joke. Talk amongst yourselves.

I'm fairly certain that it was deliberate and is a joke. The joke continues, however, in a more Dow's-like manner.

JacobH wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

JacobH wrote:

DRT wrote:I never drink brandy unless I have had too much port.

This is surely a tautology?

Hmm... not sure about that. I'm not sure that a truism can contain a condition that is impossible: "too much Port."

I appreciate that this is not a common example of a tautology but, as the impossible condition must, by its nature, be unnecessary, it is surely unnecessary for it to be included in the definition? That is not to reduce the possibility for causation. ‟I never drink brandy because I would only drink it if I have had too much port” seems legitimate.

I believe I see your point. The statement is a tautology because a) there is only one possible condition under which it could be false, and b) that condition is clearly a fabrication. I still stumble with the format, though I believe it does fall under the category of rhetorical tautology - a statement constructed in such a way that the truth of the proposition is guaranteed or unfalsifiable.

Now my brain hurts. I need a glass of Port. (Another tautology.)

Glenn E. wrote:

KillerB wrote:I think it may have been deliberate. This would make it a joke. Talk amongst yourselves.

I'm fairly certain that it was deliberate and is a joke. The joke continues, however, in a more Dow's-like manner.

JacobH wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

JacobH wrote:

DRT wrote:I never drink brandy unless I have had too much port.

This is surely a tautology?

Hmm... not sure about that. I'm not sure that a truism can contain a condition that is impossible: "too much Port."

I appreciate that this is not a common example of a tautology but, as the impossible condition must, by its nature, be unnecessary, it is surely unnecessary for it to be included in the definition? That is not to reduce the possibility for causation. ‟I never drink brandy because I would only drink it if I have had too much port” seems legitimate.

I believe I see your point. The statement is a tautology because a) there is only one possible condition under which it could be false, and b) that condition is clearly a fabrication. I still stumble with the format, though I believe it does fall under the category of rhetorical tautology - a statement constructed in such a way that the truth of the proposition is guaranteed or unfalsifiable.

Now my brain hurts. I need a glass of Port. (Another tautology.)

No, I disagree. I think this was deliberate but was not a joke. Since port is fortified with brandy, Derek only drinks brandy when he drinks port. If he drinks too much port then that is equivalent to drinking brandy. Derek is Scottish and therefore does not make jokes. Or perhaps he never drinks brandy because he is Scottish and, because all Scots only drink whiskey, he only drinks whiskey. (Is there an "e" in whiskey?)

On the other hand, I have drunk no brandy other than that contained in the port I have been drinking and never drink whiskey. Because of this, all that I have written makes perfect sense to me at the moment.

AHB wrote:(Is there an "e" in whiskey?)

The Irish and we Americans make whiskey. Scots and Canadians make whisky. Irish whiskey is triple distilled. Scottish whisky is double distilled. The stuff we make over here is single distilled. (Who knows what those crazy Canucks do with their liquor.) It is perhaps not totally coincidence that the two whiskeys have similar flavors (though the American version is significantly rougher, a product of its single distillation) while whisky - especially Scotch - is easily identifiable as different even by a novice since the grains are typically roasted over an open heat and take on flavors from the smoke.

I believe it is technically incorrect to say that Port contains brandy. It contains aguardente, which is a neutral grape spirit similar to brandy but higher in alcoholic content.

AHB wrote:Derek is Scottish and therefore does not make jokes.

I think it takes an American to see the real humor in this statement.

Full disclosure: I am drinking a Kopke 40-yr old while I write this.

If a brand uses "XO" in their name, or the Cognac has a darkish cooper color, run away! XO is only 6 year minimum aging, and the big brands just meet it. The good brands have no use to label XO as everything they make is at least that...

Stick with Pierre Ferrand. The big names can't even compete in terms of value. It's just gross what a crappy product for the dollar the big names push compared to likes of PF or Tesseron for the same money.

If anyone comes to Boston, I have some 30 year agardente from Portugal which is pretty interesting stuff for the Cognac fan.

Just bought 2 bottles of Courvoisier XO Imperial for 90GBP at Birmingham airport.
For anyone who is interested, they have about 6 left.

alexd wrote:I think that Courvoisier is very good.
If you want to choose the best cognac go at broken link - shame

Two things:

1. Your link was broken anyway;

2. Your account has been inactivated, if you want it reactivated so that you can post something decent then contact me. Your account will be deleted within 24 hours otherwise;

3. I sent you a link to the rules, you should have read them;

4. Sod it - I've deleted your account anyway;

5. I've had a bit of a Spanish Inquisition moment.

admin wrote:Two things:

Just so that you that it was noticed.