Did you like the question for the Port trade this month + SCION Discussion

[Roy Hersh]

I enjoyed reading the answers to this one. I hope you did too.

[Glenn E.]

I enjoyed it, even if a large number of the answers were the "safe" answer - the 1931 Noval Nacional. There were some gems in there, too, like Gustavo's desire to try a 1983 Nacional.

[Andy Velebil]

I enjoyed it, even if a large number of the answers were the "safe" answer - the 1931 Noval Nacional. There were some gems in there, too, like Gustavo's desire to try a 1983 Nacional.

I disagree, I don't think it was a "safe" answer at all. Many in the Trade don't get the chance to drink other producers older products all that often, as strange as that may sound. Let alone almost all serious Port drinkers have never tasted a '31 Noval Nacional. It's a Port that all of us would die to try one day. Let alone how many producers haven't even had some of their own companies older Ports. Simply because it was all sold or drank off a long time ago and the companies don't have any old stocks left for them to try.

As to Roy's question....It was fun to read what some of them are, such as '63 Ferreira and Noval Nacional, '77 Fonseca, and Oscar's '83. Some are pretty easy to get but it highlights what I mentioned earlier. A fun read for sure.

[Roy Hersh]

A diverse list of respondents and the first time ever that more than half of the emails sent out were returned with answers. Even if this is the only time, like Andy said, it was fun to read what they'd like to drink from one another's cellars.

[David Spriggs]

I loved it! It was fun to see how many people in the trade had the same dream Ports as myself! There were a lot of 1931 Noval Nacional... but that's not a surprise. I also would love to taste that!

[Glenn E.]

I enjoyed it, even if a large number of the answers were the "safe" answer - the 1931 Noval Nacional. There were some gems in there, too, like Gustavo's desire to try a 1983 Nacional.

I disagree, I don't think it was a "safe" answer at all... It's a Port that all of us would die to try one day.

That's exactly what I meant, though. It's on pretty much everyone's list, so it's not really saying anything interesting to choose it. No one would question that choice... ergo, it is the "safe" choice.

I thought it was interesting to see a couple of choices from 1977, which touches on your point. Just because they're in the Port trade doesn't mean they've had the chance to taste lots of old Port! Even Port as "young" as the 1977 vintage.

I'm going to have to come back to this thread before my next trip to Portugal. How cool would it be to be able to bring a bottle or two with me and help one of our hosts try a Port they've never tried before?

[Al B.]

I loved reading the answers - I think because a lot of the answers are the same as my choices. Anyone involved in the port business who didn't get time to answer, please do let Roy know what you would have said. We would love to hear your choice in the next newsletter - you never know, your choice might be the one that Glenn finds tucked away in his cellar.

...and I can't believe that Oscar is that young! He seems to have been in the port trade for so long.

[Eric Ifune]

I enjoyed the responses as well.
Lots of Nacional as mentioned, but also lots of Taylor's Scion. Also noted one response for Weise&Krohn's 1863. I'm assuming that's their Colheita.
Haven't had the Scion.
Roy, how much difference would you say are between the Scion and the 1863?

[Roy Hersh]

Eric,

You are putting me on the spot ... as I can only surmise from two times tasting the 1863 and a small 20 cc glass worth of the Scion. That being said, the Scion is an excellent wood-aged Tawny, while as you know, the 1863 was simply, perfection. From memory, there was a difference and it would go to the 1863 in terms of sheer complexity and even a more profound finish, in my humble opinion. I would love to have them side-by-side someday though to make an even better comparative assessment.

Likewise, it helped me a lot when I had the 1931 Noval regular bottling and the 1931 Nacional to have them together and paying extraordinarily close attention to every facet of both Ports.

[Tom Archer]

how much difference would you say are between the Scion and the 1863

If someone offered you the Graham '52 and the Scion blind, you'd probably guess that the Scion was the younger wine.

[Roy Hersh]

Eric/Tom,

One more thing I should add. Immediately after tasting the 1863, those within earshot heard me exclaim, (close paraphrasing here): 'If there was any real thought that the Scion had been "refreshed" by younger juice, tasting the 1896's and especially the 1863, I have ZERO DOUBT that Scion was the real deal.'

The freshness and crisp acidity in both was actually quite similar in their bright appeal and yes, youth as Tom mentioned. I don't believe that I would have mistakenly guessed the Graham's 1952 was older though! But blind guessing is fraught with mistakes, from beginners to MW's ... I've seen plenty of gaffes.

[Tom D.]

Hey Roy, sorry to hijack this thread, but since tasting it I've been saving my pennies in hopes of buying a bottle or two of the Scion at some point.

I'm wondering, since you've tasted the Scion also, and obviously have much more experience with old tawnies...

Now that's it's in bottle, how long would you expect an UNOPENED bottle of Scion to live and show at this level? Long enough to lay down for my grandson 20-50 years from now?

Also, how long would you guess an OPENED bottle of Scion could show at a very high level? Days? Weeks? Months?

Thanks!

[Tom Archer]

'If there was any real thought that the Scion had been "refreshed" by younger juice, tasting the 1896's and especially the 1863, I have ZERO DOUBT that Scion was the real deal.'

Roy,

How does a wine that has spent a century and a half in wood in the Douro not have a massive concentration of sugars, and the tell-tale green meniscus, unless it has been refreshed over the years?

Scion is a great wine, but it bothers me that the TFP's caveats about it's true age are being ignored when merchants present it for sale.

[Andy Velebil]

'If there was any doubt about the Scion being "refreshed" by younger juice, tasting the 1896's and especially the 1863, I have ZERO DOUBT that Scion was the real deal.'

Roy,

How does a wine that has spent a century and a half in wood in the Douro not have a massive concentration of sugars, and the tell-tale green meniscus, unless it has been refreshed over the years?

Scion is a great wine, but it bothers me that the TFP's caveats about it's true age are being ignored when merchants present it for sale.

I agree with Tom. There is no way that it wasn't topped up/refreshed with a younger wine. Not that that is a bad thing in any way as Scion is a fabulous Port regardless. And I really don't care if it was, as all tawny's have to be topped up with something after many years in barrel. But as Tom mentioned if this was left to its own devices after so long it would be a thick sweet drink by now. Case in point....

I've had the good fortune to get a lesson in this when a producer gave me a well-over 100 year old tawny, still in barrel, that was only known to have been topped up with a younger wine three times in about the past about 80 years (Prior to that it was unknown what, if any at all, was done to it). It was a dark and thick, very sweet, syrupy drink lacking in acidity and really bordered on being a PX sherry in consistency. It was a lesson that proved a point

[Roy Hersh]

Topping off with wine from the same vintage, (the difference between that and "refreshing" with younger wood-aged tawny) could certainly account for that. I don't think that anyone associated with the casks that were found and used for Scion can speak to the fact that it was topped off at some point(s) along the way. They may have records, (the people that housed the casks) of how they were treated; but we the consumer don't know because those dynamics have been less than transparent. Not secretive, just not 100% fully disclosed. In the case of Krohn's beauties and many older casks in Madeira, one can see how prominent the acidity becomes when these ancient barrels continue to evaporate. Nonetheless, it struck me immediately when tasting these 3 cask samples that Scion is all that it is cracked up to be and I for one, can believe the original TFP claim, having tasted these wines again.

As to how long they will last in bottle, I say for a decade for sure, possibly two. However, I have no reason to believe that Scion will improve in the bottle, just hold on and show slightly different, (richer and possibly sweeter) in the future. These are not made with the idea of being kept in bottle for decades.

How long to hold once open? If kept recorked and refrigerated, at the same quality level ... maybe 2-4 weeks. I would not try to open and keep it much beyond that without transfering to a significantly smaller vessel that will limit further oxidation. If put in an air-tight 375 and drink the rest ... the shelf life could be extended further, due to the intensity of the acidity. However, I would not try a Madeira-like shelf life test on such rare juice.

[Tom D.]

What are the caveats you mention? As explained to me, TFP only comparatively recently came into possession of this, and records prior to that are sketchy.

'If there was any real thought that the Scion had been "refreshed" by younger juice, tasting the 1896's and especially the 1863, I have ZERO DOUBT that Scion was the real deal.'

Roy,

How does a wine that has spent a century and a half in wood in the Douro not have a massive concentration of sugars, and the tell-tale green meniscus, unless it has been refreshed over the years?

Scion is a great wine, but it bothers me that the TFP's caveats about it's true age are being ignored when merchants present it for sale.

[Rob C.]

There's also some fairly challenging maths to contend with - even assuming ultra-low evaporation rates, how many pipes would have been required at the outset in order to leave 2 casks of pure vintage-1855 wine in 2009? I remember seeing a back of the envelope calculation that made the mind boggle!

But i had half thought that refreshing was just an accepted feature of very old tawnies generally (and one of the reasons why it is so hard for producers to be able to say for sure exactly what the average age of eg: a 40 yr tawny really is...)

Out of interest, does anyone know whether this was approved by IVDP as a "colheita"? i haven't seen any mention of it as such in the TFP official literature.

[Roy Hersh]

I disagree with Andy's point. While the acidity WILL tend to intensify when the wine concentrates down IF not topped off or refreshed. However, there's a big difference between topping off and refreshing. So while it may have been topped off with wine from the same vintage, it is also possible that it may have never been refreshed with younger wine. Again, we may never find out the whole truth and in fact, it may not be known by ANYONE.

While Andy may have had an older barrel sample over 100 years old, I've had many a barrel sample of Port & Madeira of that age and much older, and we can agree to disagree. There is NO proof that refreshing was done. I can only assume that at some point, topping off did take place. We won't know the facts because they're either not known or not going to be disclosed. That being said, why would a company with the reputation of The Fladgate Partnership risk their centuries old reputation on one wine's fortune? The quantity of 1400 bottles wouldn't make enough impact anyway.

In nearly every case that I have enjoyed ancient cask samples of Port (and/or Madeira), the thing that stood out for me was the intensity of the acidity. It is a fact that when evaporation takes place without the proper topping off, or less than noble "refreshing" with younger juice ... the acidity becomes MORE pronounced, not less. The three Krohn Colheitas are a perfect example, as these barrels have never moved, have always been owned by the company ... although they were possibly purchased during Krohn's early founding days from another producer ... but > the fact remains, they have ONLY been topped off with the juice of the same vintage. That much IS known and documented and was clearly addressed in great detail.

You may continue to question the Scion for years to come, but again, after tasting the Krohn Ports, the similarities to Scion immediately came to mind. I have no dog in this race and am not "defending" The Fladgate Partnership or their reputation, I just don't want it to be besmirched based on NOTHING beyond mere speculation based on personal agendas or off-the-mark hypotheses. Just relaying my own empirical evidence, having tasted many oldies from cask and bottles pulled directly from cask with groups and privately. I would be the first in line to ask the question if there was any evidence to the contrary.

[Roy Hersh]

Tom wrote:

How does a wine that has spent a century and a half in wood in the Douro not have a massive concentration of sugars, and the tell-tale green meniscus, unless it has been refreshed over the years?

Simple, Tom. Instead of using a younger wine to refresh the barrel, an identical Port from another cask can be used to top it off. That would make all the difference in the world.

As for the Krohn, we KNOW for sure that is exactly what was done. The owner was very clear about that and even responded to questions what was done with wine when only 1/4 barrel was left over from topping off others.

As for the Scion, again, it is highly likely that the quinta owner at which these casks were discovered, was unaware of how they had been handled over the past century and a half. We'll have to wait to see if more information is forthcoming.

[Rob C.]

Found the old calculations - going with topping off rather than refreshing:

Assuming 1% evaporation per year, approximately 5,000 litres of wine in 1855 would result in the 1050 litres bottled in 2010 (1,400 bottles)

Assuming 2% evaporation, approximately 24,000 litres would be needed

Assuming 2.5% evaporation, approximately 53,000 litres would be needed

Above 2.5% evaporation per year, the numbers just get silly!