ThePortForum.com

Posted: **16:20 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

When: TBA - perhaps spring '14, maybe on the back of the BFT

Where: TBA - but our usual haunt seems favourite

But on both counts make every effort to fit the diary of EDN

Attending:

EDN
THRA
DFM
RAYC
RAYC + 1
Dr Wolfgang (I think) aka AP +1
Flash UK?
CPR
Sushinorth
AP (non - dining)

Possible format:

- Blind pairs of the ten principal houses - Cockburn, Croft, Dow, Fonseca, Graham, Niepoort, Noval, Sandeman, Taylor & Warre.

- Back up bottles to be on hand to replace any that are obviously faulty - only Ni63 would give me a problem on that front.

- Each participant knows only that each pair is the same shipper.

- Each participant has to award a total of six points to each pair, and guess the shipper. If the guess is correct, their points are doubled.

Current draft of the placemats.

(Placemats added to this post by jdaw1, with the permission of the original poster.)

Posted: **16:26 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Yes please.

Note thread entitled 1960 versus 1963: which should be drunk first? which has triggered this scientific test.

Placemats will appear here.

Posted: **16:31 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Yes please.

CMAG also says "yes please".

Posted: **17:04 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

This looks like a great one.

I am better endowed with 60s (will send you a list) but have nice bottlings of Delaforce and Sandeman 63s if we choose to include those. I have the odd other 63 purchased as singles but they're not necessarily bottles i'd trust for an event like this.

Posted: **17:05 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Yes please. Thought you'd never ask.

Posted: **17:10 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

I have exactly zero bottles for this line-up so will have to adopt, please?

I would suggest this is an event where the fairest thing to do is split the cost evenly amongst attendees. I am happy to act as Treasurer if that would help?

Posted: **17:17 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

DRT wrote:I have exactly zero bottles for this line-up so will have to adopt, please?

Ditto. What I had I selfishly drank myself.

DRT wrote:I would suggest this is an event where the fairest thing to do is split the cost evenly amongst attendees. I am happy to act as Treasurer if that would help?

Happy with this.

Posted: **17:19 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Will the BFT be on St George's again, in likelihood? If so that's a Wednesday. And it's during the University's Easter holidays. Which would be good.

Posted: **17:49 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

TheBFT wrote:the b.f.t. 2014 on Thursday, 24th April

So Wednesday 23^rd April is a possibility for ’60 versus ’63.

Posted: **17:53 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

jdaw1 wrote:
TheBFT wrote:the b.f.t. 2014 on Thursday, 24th April

Excellent. Registration completed.

Posted: **18:07 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Yes, please.

Axel

Posted: **18:15 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Our objective here is a side-by-side comparison of the vintages. If we compare my Taylor 1963, seemingly in good condition, with somebody else’s Taylor 1960, seemingly in good condition, can we be sure that they have identical cellaring histories. Of course not. So we need bottles that have been stored in the same cellar for their whole lives.

That means that we must ask the shippers. In return, we could offer £€$Â¥å…ƒ, or alternatively could offer bottles they particularly desire.

Posted: **18:23 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

jdaw1 wrote:we must ask the shippers. In return, we could offer £€$Â¥å…ƒ, or alternatively could offer bottles they particularly desire.

That will not work. When we had the 1960 horizontal Graham were unable to supply us with a bottle as they have either none or library stock only. Other bottles in this line-up will be similarly difficult to liberate and some shippers (you know who I mean) just will not play.

In order to reach a useful conclusion the bottles should come from the best sources we can find where we would normally source our Port. Assessing the quality of what has sat in Oporto for 50-53 years is not useful to us.

Posted: **18:37 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

That will not work.

Agree - it will raise all sorts of difficulties, not to mention cost. Most of the bottles will have spent much of their life in conditions that are warmer than ideal.

Propose that we seek stock from cases or part cases that are in good order and proven, avoiding odd un-provenanced bottles.

Posted: **18:48 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

From good or tested provenance I have a decent selection of 1963s and about half the shipper's 1960 so I will let others volunteer their bottles before I volunteer mine.

The only one I don't have is Niepoort.

Posted: **19:48 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Please put me in +1

Posted: **19:52 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Sorry yes, +1 also for me.

Posted: **20:37 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

The ultra rapid sign up on this event prompts me to volunteer three likely regular attendees as ? players, to give them time to check their emails..

Posted: **21:11 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Yes please, I would like to be in if there is still space.

Posted: **21:18 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

uncle tom wrote:Blind pairs of the ten principal houses ! Noval !

Can we assume you mean the standard Noval bottlings only? I see no value in collectively spending £5,000 to include the Nacionals for the purposes of this evaluation.

Posted: **21:51 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Several of the major-shipper 1963s are possible for me. Taylor I have several, one of which will surely have a good fill. The others need checking. But none of the 1960s.

Posted: **22:39 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

Hi,

I would be interested; so please put me down. Since I see that quite a few places have been taken please let me know if I can take part or not.

regards

WS1

Posted: **22:43 Sun 03 Nov 2013**

WS1 wrote:Since I see that quite a few places have been taken please let me know if I can take part or not.

Tom has already saved you a seat

Posted: **05:38 Mon 04 Nov 2013**

DRT wrote:
WS1 wrote:Since I see that quite a few places have been taken please let me know if I can take part or not.
Tom has already saved you a seat

Thank you and Tom!

Posted: **06:25 Mon 04 Nov 2013**

Hi,

after having read through the thread I think we should reflect what we can achieve with this tasting and what we cannot. I know uncle Tom see's this as the "crunch match" of his birthday vintage vs the applauded year of the last century by journalists in which clearly after having tasted so many of both vintages he has a point.
But I do not think we can prove 60s are now generally better than 63s by applying some statistics. I also feel that the "English bottled" vs "Oporto bottled" problem adds to it. On top based on our already rich experience I feel that we need to give some ports special treatment in order for them to show best for this tasting; e.g. Sandeman does not need a lot of decanting time and should not be opened well in advance. Though the biggest of all problems is the what I call the so called "bt problem". To describe of what I mean is when you buy a case of old claret, port or anything you usually end up with 3 -4 fantastic bottles, 4-5 very good to excellent bts, 1-2 good to Ok bts and 1-2 not showing so well or duff bts.
Hence whatever we do we cannot necessarily ensure to start with an even playing field of the ports for the tasting. I agree that we should try to pair only similar provenance bts but I cannot see us being able eradicating all the bts/provenance problems for this comparison tasting since we just have not enough proper bts at hand to do so.
One other thing I would like to insist on for this tasting; the bts are brought to the venue not on the day but well in advance and were standing at least up for a week. Also no recently purchased ports which were shipped via courier; only nicely rested bts please!
Furthermore I would like to suggest all bts are opened 3 hours in advance and then decanted shortly before putting them into the glasses. This method brought up by F. Audouze after having gone through palats of trying old wines is also preferred by EDN, RAYC and me and has proven to have a high hit rate for old bts showing well with regards to preparation.
With regards to wines contributing the Calem pair comes to my mind since I believe I am the only one having the pair. Both are of very good provenance.

regards
WS1

Posted: **06:45 Mon 04 Nov 2013**

Wolfgang,

I like some of these I ideas but will leave Tom to respond as he is organising this.

On the subject of the Audouze method, before deciding whether or not to do this for this tasting perhaps we should do an experiment to prove/disprove the theory? We could pick a reliable mature vintage (1970?), select a few reliable shippers (Fonseca, Graham, Taylor, Warre, Dow?), take two bottles of each from the same source and then decant one set using Audouze and one by "normal" method and compare them side by side. Interested?

If so this can be split into a separate thread and performed in advance of the 60v63 tasting.

Derek

Posted: **08:14 Mon 04 Nov 2013**

Can we assume you mean the standard Noval bottlings only?

Yes.

PW & WS - ? marks removed.

Posted: **14:09 Mon 04 Nov 2013**

Yes please.

Posted: **18:49 Mon 04 Nov 2013**

uncle tom wrote: BMHR?

Yes please! Limited opportunity to contribute bottle-wise though.

Posted: **06:32 Tue 05 Nov 2013**

DRT wrote:Wolfgang,

I like some of these I ideas but will leave Tom to respond as he is organising this.

On the subject of the Audouze method, before deciding whether or not to do this for this tasting perhaps we should do an experiment to prove/disprove the theory? We could pick a reliable mature vintage (1970?), select a few reliable shippers (Fonseca, Graham, Taylor, Warre, Dow?), take two bottles of each from the same source and then decant one set using Audouze and one by "normal" method and compare them side by side. Interested?

If so this can be split into a separate thread and performed in advance of the 60v63 tasting.

Derek

Hi Derek,

sure why not; please help me putting it into a separate ththread. But I must say it is not only about opening the bottle 3 hours in advance. It is also not to travel the bt shortly before opening it. These preparation measures really help to get most of a bt of wine/port. You may remember when I brought a range of half bts to the Steak exchange at Liverpoolstreet. Those were prepared that way. I am sure the Noval 91 and various Malvedos (90, 92 and 95) from half bt would have not showed up as nice from half bt without this preparation.

regards

WS1

Posted: **09:30 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

jdaw1 wrote:
TheBFT wrote:the b.f.t. 2014 on Thursday, 24th April
So Wednesday 23^rd April is a possibility for ’60 versus ’63.

I’m sorry folks, but I completely forgot this when arranging the ’91-’92 with Sophia Bergqvist of Quinta de la Rosa.

My fault. I’m sorry about forgetting the date of the ’60-’63.

Can this happen on a different date? Perhaps early May. (And also see matching post in the thread about the ’91-’92 double horizontal.)

Posted: **11:01 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

Had Dirk already been invited and accepted? If so, the prior arrangement should probably stand. if not, could we do it the week / two weeks before or after?

Posted: **11:06 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

RAYC wrote:Had Dirk already been invited and accepted? If so, the prior arrangement should probably stand. if not, could we do it the week / two weeks before or after?

I asked Dirk if he could make that date for the 91-92 and he couldn't.

Posted: **11:08 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:Had Dirk already been invited and accepted? If so, the prior arrangement should probably stand. if not, could we do it the week / two weeks before or after?
I asked Dirk if he could make that date for the 91-92 and he couldn't.

Is that because he thinks he is at the ’60-’63?

RAYC wrote:Had Dirk already been invited and accepted? If so, the prior arrangement should probably stand. if not, could we do it the week / two weeks before or after?

Agreed.

Posted: **11:09 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:Had Dirk already been invited and accepted? If so, the prior arrangement should probably stand. if not, could we do it the week / two weeks before or after?
I asked Dirk if he could make that date for the 91-92 and he couldn't.
Is that because he thinks he is at the ’60-’63?

I presume he would ask whether there were a clash if he received two separate invitations from TPF. Has someone on this thread already asked Dirk?

Posted: **11:24 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

djewesbury wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:Had Dirk already been invited and accepted? If so, the prior arrangement should probably stand. if not, could we do it the week / two weeks before or after?
I asked Dirk if he could make that date for the 91-92 and he couldn't.
Is that because he thinks he is at the ’60-’63?
I presume he would ask whether there were a clash if he received two separate invitations from TPF. Has someone on this thread already asked Dirk?

It's not unknown for us to have events on successive nights. I had read the 60v63 as being "on the back of the BFT", i.e. the evening following (rather than the Wed 24th suggested later in the thread), so thought the 60/63 was targetted for the 24th, and therefore also declined the 91-92 on the 23rd as two nights away would likely be unfeasible that week. Also Dirk might have declined the night of the 23rd if he is preparing that evening for the BFT the following day, perhaps?

If we do move the 60/63 then in the couple of weeks after would work for me, before less likely (due to school holidays and other engagements at end of March), though that is only my personal situation.

Posted: **11:33 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

I have emailed EDN to clarify.

Posted: **11:40 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

PhilW wrote:It's not unknown for us to have events on successive nights. I had read the 60v63 as being "on the back of the BFT", i.e. the evening following (rather than the Wed 24th suggested later in the thread)

I learnt my lesson last year. Post-BFT I’ll be fit for, at most, two pints of ale, and then going home. My palate will not be sensitive enough for a worthwhile Port tasting. Sorry chaps. YMMV. Mine won’t.

Posted: **11:52 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

jdaw1 wrote:
PhilW wrote:It's not unknown for us to have events on successive nights. I had read the 60v63 as being "on the back of the BFT", i.e. the evening following (rather than the Wed 24th suggested later in the thread)
I learnt my lesson last year. Post-BFT I’ll be fit for, at most, two pints of ale, and then going home. My palate will not be sensitive enough for a worthwhile Port tasting. Sorry chaps. YMMV. Mine won’t.

I agree that the night before makes more sense, whichever theme we are doing (though we should ensure any already invited guests are not inconvenienced by any changes where possible).

Posted: **14:14 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

djewesbury wrote:I have emailed EDN to clarify.

Or just ask Tom....!

Posted: **14:17 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote:I have emailed EDN to clarify.
Or just ask Tom....!

An answer might be just as quick from either. Please do ask Tom, indeed.

Posted: **17:09 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

Dirk Niepoort, in an email, wrote:it looks to me that 23 april is just fine for me !
what is the audouze method?? i would rather taste the 60 / 63 side by side. clearly.

Posted: **19:02 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote:I have emailed EDN to clarify.
Or just ask Tom....!
An answer might be just as quick from either. Please do ask Tom, indeed.

Tom confirmed that he had not yet invited Dirk to this (or even mentioned it to him) before your email...hence the suggestion to check with him first!

Should we be finding space for Sophia at this tasting if there is a pre-existing invite outstanding to her?

Posted: **19:12 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote:I have emailed EDN to clarify.
Or just ask Tom....!
An answer might be just as quick from either. Please do ask Tom, indeed.
Tom confirmed that he had not yet invited Dirk to this (or even mentioned it to him) before your email...hence the suggestion to check with him first!

Hence posting my initial enquiry.

RAYC wrote:Should we be finding space for Sophia at this tasting if there is a pre-existing invite outstanding to her?

Julian's call.

Posted: **19:17 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

djewesbury wrote: Hence posting my initial enquiry.

? where

It seems to me that we now have a problem of our own making, with two IGs invited for two separate events on the same night!

Posted: **19:36 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote: Hence posting my initial enquiry.
? where

It seems to me that we now have a problem of our own making, with two IGs invited for two separate events on the same night!

Above. Scroll up.

Julian is already in touch with Sophia and will reschedule with her. The 91/92 event doesn't have to happen on that date. Also, Sophia may well be interested in attending other events, as she said in Belfast. I don't see that we have a problem.

Posted: **20:02 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote: Hence posting my initial enquiry.
? where

It seems to me that we now have a problem of our own making, with two IGs invited for two separate events on the same night!
Above. Scroll up.

The bit where you gave Tom 24 minutes to respond on the forum before emailing?!

Posted: **20:09 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
RAYC wrote:
djewesbury wrote: Hence posting my initial enquiry.
? where

It seems to me that we now have a problem of our own making, with two IGs invited for two separate events on the same night!
Above. Scroll up.

The bit where you gave Tom 24 minutes to respond on the forum before emailing?!

Do we have a problem? Someone has - in principle - signalled their availability, nothing more, on a particular date, and someone else has signalled their flexibility around that date, and yet another person is in communication with that person.

Posted: **20:57 Sun 08 Dec 2013**

RAYC wrote:Tom confirmed that he had not yet invited Dirk to this (or even mentioned it to him) before your email...hence the suggestion to check with him first!

That would have affected which had priority. Except that now we have dug ourselves in deeper by pseudo-inviting EDN, and by my telling SB that we need to change date. No, not optimally handled.

Rob: starting from here rather than from where we were six hours ago what do you want done?

Posted: **20:26 Mon 09 Dec 2013**

Cant we move the two around as I believe that the 91 vs 92 tasting will not be as demanding as the 60-63 tasting. Most non-Uk/London-based guys will have a hard time to attend both. Lets have the 60-63 tasting on 23 and the 91-92 tasting on 24.

Axel

ThePortForum.com

60 vs 63

60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63

Re: 60 vs 63