What about Graham-VP

John Vachon · Post by **John Vachon** » Mon May 16, 2016 1:33 pm

I have been a Taylor and Fonseca fan for 40 years to the max.

But what about Grahams.

The first big trade was 2 1/2 cases of 1963 Grahams for 1 case of 1966 Lafite(a very so-so wine).

One of my best trades.

Tonite 4 days after opening-a glass of 1963 Grahams-great.

I may be too centered on F & T.

Eric Menchen · Post by **Eric Menchen** » Mon May 16, 2016 3:47 pm

I think Graham is a great label. I enjoy their VPs and open them for friends that really enjoy them. But in blind tastings I often score them lower than other people in the room. I think their house style just doesn't suit my taste as well as some other labels out there.

Post by **Andy Velebil** » Mon May 16, 2016 3:52 pm

Uh yeah! There is some epic VP out there that doesn't start with an "F" or a "T" in their name. And by epic, I mean every bit as good or better. Time to branch out and try some new things

Bradley Bogdan · Post by **Bradley Bogdan** » Mon May 16, 2016 8:23 pm

I'll admit that score wise, they're probably more stable across major vintages of the last 40 years than Taylor or Fonseca in my book, but the highs never seem quite as high. For instance, Taylor in the 80's I've found to be very underwhelming, but Graham's pretty consistent (though '80 in general seemed to have been tough for a declared vintage). That doesn't negate the fact that '94 Taylor is usually impressive in most every way. Conversely, Fonseca in '83 is fairly pedestrian, by their standards, and in '85 is almost certainly the wine of the vintage, and perhaps the decade.

I only point out that your favorites score higher in some years to highlight the fact that in others they do not, IMHO. Graham's is probably the house Id have you try first if you wanted with the best and were bored of Fonseca and Taylor in a given year.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalkz. U

Post by **Glenn E.** » Mon May 16, 2016 8:44 pm

Graham is my favorite producer for VP. I like their (allegedly) sweeter style. I like how their Ports age. I have a vertical that spans 1945-2011.

But Brad is also right - across the years, Graham is more consistent than either Fonseca or Taylor. There's no "lost decade" for Graham - their 1980, 1983, and 1985 VPs (as well as 1986 and 1987 Malvedos) are all superb, with the G85 being on the short list for wine of the decade next to the F85 and Vargellas '87. (The F85 and TV87 are the only notable Ports from Taylor or Fonseca in the decade, at least for me. It's not that their other VPs are bad... they're just not up to their usual standard.)

I've also found that in blind tastings, while I don't always have the Graham first, it's always top 3. That's not true for Fonseca or Taylor for me. Even 1994, where Taylor and Fonseca are supposed to truly dominate, when I've had them blind I've had the Graham in 2nd every time. Sure, the Taylor and Fonseca have alternated for 1st, but when not 1st they've been as low as mid-pack.

So... I think Graham is the best producer. Yes, it's also my favorite so I'm probably biased, but they're the most consistent, and while they lack a 100-pointer to set on a pedestal they also lack anything rated in the 80s which Taylor and Fonseca have both turned out on occasion (at least in my experience). I'm happy to take 93-98 over 88-100.

Christian Gollnick · Post by **Christian Gollnick** » Tue May 17, 2016 8:48 am

Glenn, I couldn't agree more with you. Graham's is really a guarantee for a very nice Port. If I could only have VPs of one company for the rest of my life - I think I would chose Graham's. As you say, sometimes Taylor's gets it absolutely right - but not always. My problem is that many VPs from Taylor's have become so very expensive over the last years that I just can't justify to myself to buy them... Instead of buying a case of Taylor's I rather buy a case of Graham's plus a few bottles of Smith Woodhouse or Gould Campbell...

Phil W · Post by **Phil W** » Tue May 17, 2016 10:43 am

Spot on Glenn, regarding comparative quality and consistency, and I find similar in marking also.

Where I differ is that I might choose the 88-100 over the 93-98; I wouldn't give up my best Fonseca and Warre, even if I have to drink some poorer years as well.

Tom Archer · Post by **Tom Archer** » Tue May 17, 2016 8:10 pm

Graham are just about unique in that there isn't a single vintage in the last century that they've declared and have subsequently been embarassed by, although '75 comes a little close.

Taylor and Fonseca have a good track record also, but have been badly outgunned a few times, notably '80, '83 & '07

But as Andy says, broaden your horizons - there are many more brands to discover..

Post by **Andy Velebil** » Tue May 17, 2016 10:45 pm

Tom Archer wrote:Graham are just about unique in that there isn't a single vintage in the last century that they've declared and have subsequently been embarassed by, although '75 comes a little close.

Taylor and Fonseca have a good track record also, but have been badly outgunned a few times, notably '80, '83 & '07

But as Andy says, broaden your horizons - there are many more brands to discover..

Graham's 1977????

Tom Archer · Post by **Tom Archer** » Wed May 18, 2016 1:24 am

Graham's 1977????

When it's a good bottle, a very nice wine; but there are, admittedly, far too many corked or otherwise faulty bottles around..

Post by **Glenn E.** » Wed May 18, 2016 8:02 am

Andy Velebil wrote:
Tom Archer wrote:Graham are just about unique in that there isn't a single vintage in the last century that they've declared and have subsequently been embarassed by, although '75 comes a little close.

Taylor and Fonseca have a good track record also, but have been badly outgunned a few times, notably '80, '83 & '07

But as Andy says, broaden your horizons - there are many more brands to discover..
Graham's 1977????

I must be really lucky, because I've never experienced problems with 1977 Graham. It has been consistently excellent for me, so much so that it makes me think the "hive mind" has come to a conclusion that does not actually exist.

Is it different than a typical Graham? Yes. But that isn't a problem.

Moses Botbol · Post by **Moses Botbol** » Wed May 18, 2016 10:17 am

Tom Archer wrote:
Graham's 1977????
When it's a good bottle, a very nice wine; but there are, admittedly, far too many corked or otherwise faulty bottles around..

My 77 Grahams are great! Took a while, but I am not trading them. I have a case of '75 in magnums, but never tried one.

I'd say Grahams is the most consistent big name port. I can't think of one sh** vintage from them. I really don't have a preference between the big names either, but feel the Symington ports offer a little more value.

Thomas V · Post by **Thomas V** » Wed May 18, 2016 1:35 pm

This thread has come at a magnificent time.

On Friday I will attend a Graham vertical tasting. The line up is:

2011
2003
2000
1997
1994
1983
1977
1970

Also a 1963 will be present and opened if the attendees are willing to pay the extra amount, which is roughly half the price of the agreed line up. Expensive drops.

The only thing I am sad about is that there isn't a 1985. After my unlucky experience with one just last month it would be great to sample a specimen that was showing nicely. Ohh well some other time.

Will return with my thoughts.

Mike Meehan · Post by **Mike Meehan** » Wed May 18, 2016 2:12 pm

Tom Archer wrote:
Graham's 1977????
When it's a good bottle, a very nice wine; but there are, admittedly, far too many corked or otherwise faulty bottles around..

This has certainly been my experience. When I open one of my bottles, it is flawed. The only G77s I have enjoyed are bottles others have opened.

Post by **Glenn E.** » Wed May 18, 2016 2:22 pm

Mike Meehan wrote:This has certainly been my experience. When I open one of my bottles, it is flawed. The only G77s I have enjoyed are bottles others have opened.

Note to self: don't drink G77 with Mike if he's supplying.

John Vachon · Post by **John Vachon** » Sat May 21, 2016 12:41 pm

Disagree with Andy and many of you on Taylor (lost 10 years-the 80's)-I think Taylor 80,83, and 85 were very good wines.

John Vachon · Post by **John Vachon** » Mon May 23, 2016 2:08 pm

Had a 77 G tonite(77 G is the most varable VP ever) but good tonite-lucky.

John Vachon · Post by **John Vachon** » Mon May 23, 2016 3:29 pm

Had 50 times most 90% good but better at $7.25 future price.

Post by **Glenn E.** » Mon May 23, 2016 8:40 pm

John Vachon wrote:Disagree with Andy and many of you on Taylor (lost 10 years-the 80's)-I think Taylor 80,83, and 85 were very good wines.

Actually, that's basically the point. They're very good wines. Taylors are usually excellent or outstanding. For Taylor to put out merely "very good" Port for 3 vintages in a row there's something weird going on.

Fonseca only dropped 2 because as we all know F85 is fabulous, but F80 and F83 are even less impressive than their Taylor cousins.

Just my 2 cents, of course.

Post by **Andy Velebil** » Tue May 24, 2016 12:08 pm

Glenn E. wrote:
John Vachon wrote:Disagree with Andy and many of you on Taylor (lost 10 years-the 80's)-I think Taylor 80,83, and 85 were very good wines.
Actually, that's basically the point. They're very good wines. Taylors are usually excellent or outstanding. For Taylor to put out merely "very good" Port for 3 vintages in a row there's something weird going on.

Fonseca only dropped 2 because as we all know F85 is fabulous, but F80 and F83 are even less impressive than their Taylor cousins.

Just my 2 cents, of course.

+1 with Glenn's comments.

For The Love Of Port