What is the Ideal Minimum age to Open a VP?

[Richard Henderson]

This topic has been discussed before but I notice some "newbies" and others posting TN's on 2003's 2000's and 1997's.

-And when I say minimum age, I mean the port not the one opening and drinking it!
The folks who taught me about port said that vp's need 15 to 20 years minimum which puts the 92 and 94 along with the 85 and 83 to be the closest vintages to being ready. The 2003 at 4.5 years seems just impossibly young to enjoy.

What say ye, Roy et al?

[Alan C.]

Leave it alone through it's childhood and it's teenage years.

[Richard Henderson]

It does seem 21 or older is a good policy!

[Frederick Blais]

WHat I've learned in all the years of tasting... between 20 and 30 it is a great time.

But IMHO as long as you are ready to enjoy and understand the bottle you open at any stage of its life, it is a good time to open a bottle of Port.

Also consider that the greatest moments drinking Port is to be surprised by what you don't expect to find and is getting revealed to you.

That 95 Vargellas VV was probably the best Port of 2007 for me for so much I discovered into it that amazed me even though it could be considered too young. All this will be all gone in 2-5 years assurely and I'll discover something else in the next bottle.

My 2cents of collective port wisdom

[Al B.]

Personally, I am happy to open a port at any age. I love that unsubtle fruit blast you get from the latest vintage to ship. I love the delicate elegance you get from a bottle that is 100+ years old.

The only age I will avoid opening a bottle of port is when I know it to be going through a closed phase. To generalise, the 2000 vintage is a bit like this for me right now.

And just because I can work it out easily from my tasting notes database, the average age of the port I drank last year was 39 years. Last year was exceptional though, normally the average works out to be about 20 years from harvest.

Alex

[Erik Wiechers]

The best Port wine i ever drunk till now is the 2004 Quinta do Javali. Mind you, i'm still a rookie with drinking Port. So age does not matter to me at this stage. I will drink 1 bottle every 2 years to monitor the improvement with this particular port. So august 2009 i will open the next bottle.
My point is, you should have tried a 1963 Quinta do Noval Nacional in 1965 or 1966 and from then on monitor it every 2-3 years and witness its progression. Only then you would know the difference between a young VP and a oldie.

[Alan C.]

The best Port wine i ever drunk till now is the 2004 Quinta do Javali. Mind you, i'm still a rookie with drinking Port. So age does not matter to me at this stage. I will drink 1 bottle every 2 years to monitor the improvement with this particular port. So august 2009 i will open the next bottle.
My point is, you should have tried a 1963 Quinta do Noval Nacional in 1965 or 1966 and from then on monitor it every 2-3 years and witness its progression. Only then you would know the difference between a young VP and a oldie.

When you have this vast knowledge of how a great Port developed, through it's various stages, and everyone else has done the same, there's sadly a significantly reduced amount of bottles to drink in their prime. I wish there were more 48's and 55's for us to try out now.
That's one of the reasons I visit Forums like this one. Roy can be my tester. Or you, or anyone else who's opinion I grow to respect.
Then we (the majority) can let them lose the 'fruit explosion' years, where IMO you might as well drink blackcurrant cordial. We can ignore them through their troublesome teens. But we can also rejoice when they have reached maturity, enjoy the subtleties and fragrances, when they have fully intergrated, and have equisite after tastes. Which was always the intention. Sadly, the businessmen of Port, have, for a while now, been trying to encourage 'young' drinking to make a 'fast buck' (Pun intended), for example, see the Sandeman Vau.

I personally, would hope the stock is still there in significant numbers, to be able to rejoice, plus to leave a bit for those that follow.

[Moses Botbol]

I like to keep a 20 year buffer on VP's. Crusted, and LBV's are fine younger. Not that VP is not good under 20 years, but why open it early if you don't have to? Tawny is what I drink in a pinch.

[Andy Velebil]

This is always a fun topic and I love reading everyone's views. I do hope some more people chime in with their thoughts. No one is wrong here, as we all have our own preference.

Alex and I are spot on with each other here. I enjoy VP's at any age, except those years where they tend to be shut down, around 7 - 14 years after harvest. Of course that is only a generic age range depending on the specific VP, but a good guidline for me.

When young I love the massive tannins and acidity, monster fruit, and heavy viscosity. But the more older VP's I have the more I love that delicate floralness, elegance, and secondary nuances they have. And the nose on those old VP's, I could smell a glass for hours.

[Robert O.]

I have a feeling I am one of the newbies you are referring to, Richard. I understand that when I open a 2003 or 1997 that it is too young to be at its best, but because I am learning port I find that I don't want to just take other people's word for what is good, what is going to be great, etc. While I respect the opinions here immensely, I eventually want to be one of the people that has his own informed opinion and this means tasting port at every stage. So I purposely buy enough bottles so that I can sacrifice one now and again to see how things are evolving. This is half the fun for me.

I don't consume any ports on a regular basis that are less than 20 years old.

[Andy Velebil]

Robert,

You are spot on with your reply I still enjoy drinking things I havn't tried yet, even if I know they are not a "great" Port or from a "great" year. Part of the fun is trying things young and old, good and poor and forming your own opinions about those wines.

One example that comes to mind is a 1983 Croft LBV (filtered) I've had not too long ago. While good, it was not great. But what a great experience to try something not ment to be aged for a quarter century and something you rarely see in the market place. That's what this is all about...trying a ton of things and having fun along the way.

[Tom Archer]

At the present time, just about every VP from the '83 vintage, and just about every VP prior to that, are now fully mature - the odd exception proving the rule!

The '85's are looking more promising than they did a few years back, but a little patience will probably be rewarded. Of the lesser years in the eighties, all are valid targets for the corkscrew.

Of the nineties, the SQ's from '90 are fair game, the '91's are unruly teenagers that will probably show much better in the future, while the '92's are not showing at all well now.. - time will tell..! '93, as is well known, was a disastrous vintage!

The '94's are very forward and approachable, but almost certainly have more to offer, while '95 - one of the best 'undeclared' years of the last century - are wines that need much more time. The '96's are more forward though - was this the best trio of years since records began??

The '97's should not be disturbed, whilst a small exploratory mission to gauge the '98's is probably justified this year.

- Younger wines should be left in peace!

Tom

[Alex K.]

I do like to try a Port in its brutal youth sometimes. I am reminded of the Fonseca 2003 that the Rootses opened a couple of years ago: it was fresh, vibrant, powerful and tannic as stewed tea but I really enjoyed it. Meanwhile, attempts at Fonseca 2000 have appeared fruitless - literally: harsh and unyielding.

Normally, I go for the 20 year rule as well, but as I have half a case of Vargellas 1998, I may be tempted by one when its tenth birthday arrives later this year.

[Derek T.]

As anyone who knows me will testify I will drink any port you put in front of me. That's only because I like to be fair to all of them

When it comes to opening a bottle at home I would think of anything younger than a 1991 as being too young, unless it was an SQVP or second label that had been produced for early consumption.

I wonder if it is just a coincidence that in the UK you are legally considered to be entering adulthood at the age of 16 and that also seems to be the age that VP is considered to have grown up enough to drink.

Derek

[Richard Henderson]

Alex,

I have recently opened a couple of half bottles of Fonseca Gui. 1998 and they were very approachable.
That may raise another question in that 375's age faster than 750's and magnums even slower, but how much slower?

[Andy Velebil]

Richard,

Good question and I don't think there is a definitive answer on exactly how much faster or slower they mature in different size bottles. I can only speak from recent experince of having the 1980 Smith Woodhouse both from 750ml and 375ml. The 750 was still showing some young fruit and not yet fully matured, while the 375 was just a little past peek.

Since the 2000 Vintage, I have been buying a few 375's of the top VP's so I can try them about 10-15 years out. That should give me a decent gauge on how they are coming along. As the smaller format will age faster. At least that is my un-scientific approach!

[Roy Hersh]

I have a feeling I am one of the newbies you are referring to, Richard. I understand that when I open a 2003 or 1997 that it is too young to be at its best, but because I am learning port I find that I don't want to just take other people's word for what is good, what is going to be great, etc. While I respect the opinions here immensely, I eventually want to be one of the people that has his own informed opinion and this means tasting port at every stage. So I purposely buy enough bottles so that I can sacrifice one now and again to see how things are evolving. This is half the fun for me.

Robert,

A brilliant reply and I agree with everything you said. Your stock just went up!

[Roy Hersh]

Tom,

Have you tried the 1980 Graham, Dow or Fonseca lately? My recent TNs on these have all been not only very positive, but imo, they've shown VERY young still and "mature" does not describe any of these.

[Tom Archer]

Roy,

I've not tried the G80 - absent from my cellar, and high on my 'wants' list.

F80 I've had in the last year, and did not feel I was robbing it of it's innocence (was not hugely impressed, either..)

My one and only encounter with D80 was at an offline in London last year, when it stole the show - very impressive. A buxom wench of a wine - young, but not immature!

Tom

[Roy Hersh]

Tom,

I hope you can score a well stored 1980 Graham's. It really rocks and has me questioning if it is not even better than the Dow which has always been my favorite of the vintage.