Page 1 of 1
2007 Illinois Frontenac Port
Posted: 21:14 Thu 12 Nov 2009
by benread
I was kindly given a 0.375ml bottle of this last night by a friend who has just returned from USA. Has anyone here tried it? I am told it is perfectly drinkable now and does not actually need decanting. Any comments welcome!
Re: 2007 Illinois Frontenac Port
Posted: 00:01 Fri 13 Nov 2009
by Glenn E.
benread wrote:2007 Illinois ... Port
it is perfectly drinkable
<robot voice> Error! Error! Does not compute! </robot voice>
Re: 2007 Illinois Frontenac Port
Posted: 06:09 Fri 13 Nov 2009
by benread
Is that a reference to the naming as "port" or based on experience? I did post this in "Other Wines" and only quoted what is on the label!
Re: 2007 Illinois Frontenac Port
Posted: 20:38 Fri 13 Nov 2009
by Glenn E.
benread wrote:Is that a reference to the naming as "port" or based on experience? I did post this in "Other Wines" and only quoted what is on the label!
I've never had that particular port, but I've had numerous US-made ports and the ones that can be called "perfectly drinkable" are quite rare. Add to it the fact that Illinois isn't exactly a hotbed of wine production and I'd be very wary of that bottle.
Given my experience with Texas, California, and Washington ports though I would say that he is probably correct that it does not need decanting. Most of the ports I've tried have been somewhat thicker (heading toward syrupy) dessert wines. Ficklin's efforts out of California using actual Portuguese grape varieties being a notable exception. Some Washington ports are the correct consistency, but tend to be very rough when compared to a real Port. Much like the difference between Irish Whiskey and American Bourbon.
But you never know... the first time I had a Ficklin I was expecting a dessert wine and was quite surprised that it actually tasted like Port.