Port

[Marlene]

Hubby and I enjoy a port after a meal, particularly with a cheese plate. In fact, a cheese plate and port list is one of the first things we'll look for on a menu . Last night, we retrieved from our cellar, a 1987 Offley Port. We had not tasted this port before, and it was surprising rich. Very smooth, with a hint of berry.

Anyone else have a favourite port? We're quite willing to take suggestions on what to try next

[jackal10]

I've never had the privilege of trying it, but Parker raves about the 1997 Quinta do Noval Vintage Port, giving it a perfect 100 points (maturity 2007+) (WS 99)

The 1963 gets 99+ points, and there seem to be a few on offer on the web at around $200. I prefer them older, as it gives a chance for the spirit to mellow and marry with the wine, so this would be my choice.

If you can find the Nacional, it is made from pre-phylloxera vines. Wine Spectator rates it 100 as does Fonseca 77,

[davidbdesilva]

I absolutely love both vintage and tawny ports, both are among the best things in life. For a good vintage one should not think of even touching a Port with less than 10 years age and probably 15-20 years is ideal. I have a 1983 Smith & Woodhouse waiting to be opened at the right occassion. Some of the best ports I've had are the 1983 Grahams (around $80, I tend to like sweet, thick and viscous ports and this is Grahams style) and 20-40 year old Sandlemans, Taylor Fladgate and Grahams tawny ports. But I have been recently amazed at the quality of some of the Australian tawny's. I recently had one (forget the name!) that received a rarting of 95 and it was amazing. Thick, sweet, caramel, vanilla, I didn't want the bottle to end!

[Marlene]

I absolutely love both vintage and tawny ports, both are among the best things in life. For a good vintage one should not think of even touching a Port with less than 10 years age and probably 15-20 years is ideal. I have a 1983 Smith & Woodhouse waiting to be opened at the right occassion.  Some of the best ports I've had are the 1983 Grahams (around $80, I tend to like sweet, thick and viscous ports and this is Grahams style) and 20-40 year old Sandlemans, Taylor Fladgate and Grahams tawny ports. But I have been recently amazed at the quality of some of the Australian tawny's. I recently had one (forget the name!) that received a rarting of 95 and it was amazing. Thick, sweet, caramel, vanilla, I didn't want the bottle to end!

Just took a look in our cellar to see what we have left in the way of port. Must be time for another trip to Vintages

We have:

1995 Quinta do Crasto

1997 Ramos Pinto

1997 Quinta do Vesuvio

1997 Warre's

1992 Dow's Colheita

Taylor Fladgate 10 year

Taylor Fladgate 20 year

Based on what you said, I assume then that some of these are not quite ready yet?

[Robin Meredith]

I enthusiastically second David's endorsement of Graham. The first Port I ever really loved was a 1966 Graham, and I've had virtually no disappointments with either their standard vintage bottling or their single quinta Malvedos. There is a rich, exotic aspect to Graham's house style that I just find tremendously appealing.

I was sorely tempted by the 2000 vintage, but I just couldn't get past the fact that wines from some very good vintages in the '80's are still relatively available and priced below the current vintage. Of course, I didn't buy any of those wines, since I already have a fair amount of Port from that era in the cellar, so my logic is kind of faulty, but it's just one of those things.

Point being, you can find some decent older vintages at prices that look quite attractive relative to current levels - and Port is pretty sturdy stuff, so you don't have to be quite so concerned about storage conditions.

[davidbdesilva]

Marlene, while I do not claim to be an expert by any means, vintage port that is young (under say 10 years old) tends to be quite tannic and that predominates the taste of young port. I believe the English like to drink their port young, but the standard belief is that, for vintage port, give them 10-20 years to mature. Thus vintage port is something that, bought young, is an investment for the future. You also list Taylor 10 and 20 year olds, by this I take it that they are tawny and not vintage ports (tawny's list their time spent in barrel, vintages the year they were bottled). If this is the case they are ready to drink. Tawny port is ready to drink when it is bottled because it has been aged in oak and will not mature in the bottle. Vintage port does it's maturing in the bottle and thus looks different (purple as opposed to brownish). Hope this helps and I am impressed by your collection, enjoy!

[Marlene]

Marlene, while I do not claim to be an expert by any means, vintage port that is young (under say 10 years old) tends to be quite tannic and that predominates the taste of young port. I believe the English like to drink their port young, but the standard belief is that, for vintage port, give them 10-20 years to mature. Thus vintage port is something that, bought young, is an investment for the future. You also list Taylor 10 and 20 year olds, by this I take it that they are tawny and not vintage ports (tawny's list their time spent in barrel, vintages the year they were bottled). If this is the case they are ready to drink. Tawny port is ready to drink when it is bottled because it has been aged in oak and will not mature in the bottle. Vintage port does it's maturing in the bottle and thus looks different (purple as opposed to brownish). Hope this helps and I am impressed by your collection, enjoy!

Yes that helps, thanks. And yes, the Fladgates are Tawny's

[Nevan]

So, on the issue of port, since, as has been pointed out, young ports tend to be very tannic, what qualities should I look for in young ports that will tell me they have better potential (besides the Parker/Tanzer/Spectator points)?

I suppose by definition the declaration of a vintage port year kind of eliminates some degree of vintage variation risk, but even though a declared vintage should be "good" by definition, each producer will have better and worse wine. When tasting the young ones, what should I be looking for?

I love port, but have never had that much of it in my cellar--mostly an issue of affording what I like best. Many years ago I found a display of 1970 Dow's at a long gone Liquor Barn in Palo Alto, CA for $17.00 a bottle. Even then a great bargain. I gathered together what loose cash I had and purchased the one remaining case . . . which I am still enjoying. By far the best port I ever had was 1994 Grahams . . . drunk way to young, I know, but it was a gift that needed to be sampled with the giver.

I'm about ready to sink some more cash into good port, and the recommendations on this string have been great. But not having enough recent tasing experience am looking for the wisdom of others in helping me understand what I should be detecting when tasting . . .

-Nevan

[Robin Meredith]

I think evaluating vintage port is kind of tricky, even for some tasters with a great deal of experience in other categories. I attended a tasting a few years ago that surveyed the 1983 vintage, and more than one person present commented on how "close" the wines were - meaning that they were surprisingly consistent in quality and difficult to differentiate. I was just thinking about this earlier this morning as I reviewed Tanzer's recent coverage of the 2000 vintage - the range of scores was quite small compared to what you might expect to see in other areas.

One thing that did differentiate some of the wines in that tasting was the relative forcefulness of the fortified spirits - some wines demonstrated a noticeable alcoholic burn, while others integrated the spirits into the overall structure of the wine more effectively. This is something I've come to look for over time - I tend to prefer "winey" ports where the presence of the fortified spirits is largely submerged.

While I have sampled a few disappointing ports, and a few that I was quite enthusiastic about (see the comments on Graham above), the vast majority of the bottles I've tried were just very good - no more, no less, and for some reason they don't seem to leave the kind of indelible taste memories I sometimes take away from other wines.

However, most of my tasting experience has been focused on the old standard port houses, and there do seem to be some newer names emerging that I am completely unaware of. Bottom line - if you stick with some of the more established houses (include some second and third tier producers such as Niepport, Gould Campbell, and Churchill), your probability of success is pretty high.

Edited April 23, 2003 by Robin Meredith (log)

[mogsob]

I am loyal to the house of Fonseca. My first choice for vintage port and their 40 year old is simply amazing.

[Nevan]

I think evaluating vintage port is kind of tricky, even for some tasters with a great deal of experience in other categories.  I attended a tasting a few years ago that surveyed the 1983 vintage, and more than one person present commented on how "close" the wines were - meaning that they were surprisingly consistent in quality and difficult to differentiate.  I was just thinking about this earlier this morning as I reviewed Tanzer's recent coverage of the 2000 vintage - the range of scores was quite small compared to what you might expect to see in other areas.

Thank you, Robin! Your comments are helpful, and makes me feel a bit better about a nagging sense I've had in the past that I wasn't quite "getting" everything in the few comparatibe port tastings I've had. I appreciate the recommendations!

-Nevan

[Jaymes]

Hubby and I enjoy a port after a meal, particularly with a cheese plate.

Can't seem to help myself. Am compelled to post here this story about how I discovered there was no Santa Claus.

My father was quite the gourmand. And when I was about six years-old, after chatting with some of my little friends, I realized that at their houses on Christmas Eve they always left out a plate of cookies and glass of milk.

While at OUR house, we left out a plate of cheese and a vintage port.

I remember being quite puzzled about this. So puzzled, in fact, that I asked my daddy why that was.

After thinking it over for a minute, he said, "Well, Santa gets sick of all that sweet stuff."

But the more I thought about it, the more I slowly began to suspect that there was more to it than that.

WAAAAAAAY more.

[davidbdesilva]

Great story. Reminds me of a tradition we have started in our house with our three kids. While helping my child with a winter school project we rediscovered the tale of La Befana, an Italian old woman/witch who visits children on the eve of Epiphany and leaves fruit and nuts in their stockings. Well, much to my pleasure, I discovered that for La Befana one leaves out a plate of broccoli rape with sausages and a glass of red wine. Needless to say I have kept this tradition up over the years and the children are always pleased that both are gone in the morning!

[guajolote]

While at OUR house, we left out a plate of cheese and a vintage port.

I remember being quite puzzled about this.  So puzzled, in fact, that I asked my daddy why that was.

After thinking it over for a minute, he said, "Well, Santa gets sick of all that sweet stuff."

I had my daughter leave out prosciutto, gorgonzola, a baguette, and port for Santa this year. I hope she turns out like you, Jaymes.

My favorite port is 1977 Warres. Save those 1990s for at least 10 more years Marlene.

[Chef/Writer Spencer]

Anyone try EOS Port-Zin blend yet? Man, that stuff rocks.

[estufarian]

Last night, we retrieved from our cellar, a 1987 Offley Port.

Marlene,

Your mention of 'Vintages' confirms your Ontario status. And the good news is that the 87 Offley is (possibly) still available. In fact it's available twice!

To explain, Offley produced both a vintage port and a 'colheita' port in 87. The 'vintage' is what most people assumed in their responses. Bottled in 90 and aged in bottle. However the 'colheita' was aged in oak barrels and bottled more recently.

As a member of a secret society, whose name can only be whispered - and only then when Port is open (shh - if nobody is around it's the Baron de Forrester Memorial Society - and he was a principal in Offley Forrester) we try every Offley port - and recently compared the two. Surprisingly, we all preferred the Colheita and your tasting note is more similar to my notes on that. It was released in Sept 2002 at $26.85, product code 990630. And a bargain at that price.

The vintage port had more Indian spices; cloves and cumin. Different strokes etc - but worth a try. It can be identified as it is called 'Offley Boa Vista' 1987. It cost $39.80 with product code 975102.

Call the LCBO Infoline to see if the colheita is still available anywhere near you.

And coming out later this year in Vintages is the Vintage 2000 Offley (around $60). I've tasted it and it's well worth laying down.

[Marlene]

Last night, we retrieved from our cellar, a 1987 Offley Port.

Marlene,

Your mention of 'Vintages' confirms your Ontario status. And the good news is that the 87 Offley is (possibly) still available. In fact it's available twice!

To explain, Offley produced both a vintage port and a 'colheita' port in 87. The 'vintage' is what most people assumed in their responses. Bottled in 90 and aged in bottle. However the 'colheita' was aged in oak barrels and bottled more recently.

As a member of a secret society, whose name can only be whispered - and only then when Port is open (shh - if nobody is around it's the Baron de Forrester Memorial Society - and he was a principal in Offley Forrester) we try every Offley port - and recently compared the two. Surprisingly, we all preferred the Colheita and your tasting note is more similar to my notes on that. It was released in Sept 2002 at $26.85, product code 990630. And a bargain at that price.

The vintage port had more Indian spices; cloves and cumin. Different strokes etc - but worth a try. It can be identified as it is called 'Offley Boa Vista' 1987. It cost $39.80 with product code 975102.

Call the LCBO Infoline to see if the colheita is still available anywhere near you.

And coming out later this year in Vintages is the Vintage 2000 Offley (around $60). I've tasted it and it's well worth laying down.

I'm no expert when it comes to tastings. I'm just looking at the bottle and it says Offley Porto, Boa Vista Vintage Port 1987 bottled in 1990. So obviously my tasting buds are way off. Although I still stand by the "very rich" note. To note though, my husband disagreed with me and was more in line with your tasting notes on it. I shall have to try it again later today (it's a tad early right now ) and concentrate this time.

I will check with Vintages to see if the colheita is available. I'd like t try it, and I will certainly pick up the 2000 Offley when it comes out.

[estufarian]

Didn't mean to impugn your tasting ability in any way.

Your original note mentioned smooth (in particular) and the Colheita had a distinct vanilla creamy component that I would describe as 'smooth'. It was also rich and showed fruit, especially in the finish, although more nuts, coffee and toffee in the mid-palate.

I used the Indian spice contrast for comparison purposes, as that was the major difference I identified. But this is only a hint of spice, not anything approaching a 'curry wine'. I also found the alcohol more apparent in the Boa Vista.

Unfortunately, my bottles were both emptied, so I'll have to reacquire the Colheita - I still have some of the Boa Vista (unopened). Both were excellent prices.

You might also want to try one (some?) of the Late Bottled Vintage (LBV) ports available (these are bottled 4-6 years after the harvest). At around $15-20 (depending on the brand) they are a good alternative and cheaper!

And my 'hint of the month'. In the May Vintages release is a Madeira (5 yr old from Broadbent). It's around $26 and is a superb wine. Sweet - comparable to a port, but a much longer shelf life when opened. Will last for months (ports start to decline after weeks, possibly days if older wines). Trust me and crack a bottle early. If you like it go back for more. In a tasting last year I ranked this almost on a par with wines (both port and madeira) costing over $100 (one over $200). Here's the notes I made when I tasted it

Reserve 5 yr old Madeira, Broadbent

Medium orange/tawny colour with a definite green rim (usually a sign of good madeira). Tangerine peel on the nose. Taste starts with marmalade, some evidence of soft tannins but wrapped in vanilla. A voluptuous wine with a very long finish. At $21 Cdn (the estimated landed cost at the time) this wine is a bargain. This proves conclusively that tinta negra mole is an underrated grape when well made. If this wine had the magic words bual or malmsey on it, it would cost far more.

[Marlene]

Didn't mean to impugn your tasting ability in any way.

Your original note mentioned smooth (in particular) and the Colheita had a distinct vanilla creamy component that I would describe as 'smooth'. It was also rich and showed fruit, especially in the finish, although more nuts, coffee and toffee in the mid-palate.

I used the Indian spice contrast for comparison purposes, as that was the major difference I identified. But this is only a hint of spice, not anything approaching a 'curry wine'. I also found the alcohol more apparent in the Boa Vista.

Unfortunately, my bottles were both emptied, so I'll have to reacquire the Colheita - I still have some of the Boa Vista (unopened). Both were excellent prices.

You might also want to try one (some?) of the Late Bottled Vintage (LBV) ports available (these are bottled 4-6 years after the harvest). At around $15-20 (depending on the brand) they are a good alternative and cheaper!

And my 'hint of the month'. In the May Vintages release is a Madeira (5 yr old from Broadbent). It's around $26 and is a superb wine. Sweet - comparable to a port, but a much longer shelf life when opened. Will last for months (ports start to decline after weeks, possibly days if older wines). Trust me and crack a bottle early. If you like it go back for more. In a tasting last year I ranked this almost on a par with wines (both port and madeira) costing over $100 (one over $200). Here's the notes I made when I tasted it

Reserve 5 yr old Madeira, Broadbent

Medium orange/tawny colour with a definite green rim (usually a sign of good madeira). Tangerine peel on the nose. Taste starts with marmalade, some evidence of soft tannins but wrapped in vanilla. A voluptuous wine with a very long finish. At $21 Cdn (the estimated landed cost at the time) this wine is a bargain. This proves conclusively that tinta negra mole is an underrated grape when well made. If this wine had the magic words bual or malmsey on it, it would cost far more.

Don't worry about impugning my tasting ability. I am but a rank amateur yet Thanks for your suggestions and notes. I'll be off to my closest Vintages now