Tawny Port - does 10 years actually indicate age?

[Jon D]

This probably looks like a very stupid question, but does age statement on tawny ports actually refer to the average age of the blend, or does it refer to "character"?

I attended a wine tasting last year where the presenter (who works for Oddbins in London) claimed that the age statement on tawny ports (ie. 10 years, 20 years, 40 years) was in reference to what the shippers and authorities believe a 10 year, 20 year, 40 year tawny should look, smell and taste like, and nothing to do with age itself. He provided an example that if a tawny had been aged for 10 years but appeared and tasted like what a 40 year ought to taste like (according to the authorities), they could be sold as 40 year tawny.

Can anyone shed some light on this?

[Glenn E.]

The presenter was correct. But in practice, they almost always average out older than indicated.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Eric Menchen]

What Glenn said. And if you want the authoritative documentation, you can find it on the IVDP web site. I don't know if this is the most current regulation, but here's one to get you started:
http://www.ivdp.pt/pt/docs/legislacao/213.pdf

[Andy Velebil]

The presenter was correct. But in practice, they almost always average out older than indicated.

+1.

There is, or was, a huge confusion over this for as long as I can remember. That is, until this Board got involved and started setting the record straight (or so I would like to think). Even in Oporto I've heard employees at the Lodges get it wrong.

It is based on what a 10/20/etc Colheita would taste like and not an actual age in the bottle. I don't know of any with an average age of less than what is stated on the label though, as most are slightly older than the listed average.

[Glenn E.]

Some are even significantly older than what's stated on the label. I don't recall the brand off the top of my head (Roy or Andy might), but one of the better 40-yr old Tawnies actually averages significantly over 50 years old. Romaneira and 56 sort of rings a bell, but I wouldn't swear to it.

The funny thing is that sometimes this system can cause problems the other way. One producer ages his 10-yr old tawnies in the smaller pipas from the very beginning, so they oxidize a little bit faster than the "normal" way of doing it in the larger balseiros and toneis. He has had samples of blends that were actually 10 years old rejected before as tasting too old to be a 10-yr old Tawny!

[Jon D]

Thanks all for your responses. Seems like a bit of a chicken and egg rule - how are the authorities to know what x years taste like if all the blends they taste are estimates of what x years are supposed to be?!

Good thing our jobs are not to think, but to drink.

[Tom Archer]

My understanding is that the average age of the blend components tends to be more than ten years for the 10yr, but less than forty years for the 40yr.

The 30yr and 40yr wines often contain small quantities of wine that is very much older, but the average age tends to fall short.

If I was asked to nominate one area of port classification for reform, this would be it:

- Why sell stock that is typically 12-15 years old as 10yr? Why not sell it as 12yr (and regulate that the average age must be no less than that)

- Few producers make a full range of age indication tawnies, which suggests there are too many categories; so maybe replace the 20yr and 30yr with 25yr, and again, require that the average age be no less.

- 40yr should mean no less than forty years old average.

- The last category, over 40yrs old, is a bit uninspiring for such venerable juice, so why not formally embrace the acronym VV (Vinho Velho - old wine) -for blends that have an average age of 50yrs or more.

[Andy Velebil]

My understanding is that the average age of the blend components tends to be more than ten years for the 10yr, but less than forty years for the 40yr.

The 30yr and 40yr wines often contain small quantities of wine that is very much older, but the average age tends to fall short.

If I was asked to nominate one area of port classification for reform, this would be it:

- Why sell stock that is typically 12-15 years old as 10yr? Why not sell it as 12yr (and regulate that the average age must be no less than that)

- Few producers make a full range of age indication tawnies, which suggests there are too many categories; so maybe replace the 20yr and 30yr with 25yr, and again, require that the average age be no less.

- 40yr should mean no less than forty years old average.

- The last category, over 40yrs old, is a bit uninspiring for such venerable juice, so why not formally embrace the acronym VV (Vinho Velho - old wine) -for blends that have an average age of 50yrs or more.

I agree with you on some points. I think this category should be revamped. When you look at the rules then look at how vastly different two competing similar products can be (such as 20 year old Sandeman and Ferreira) you have to scratch your head and wonder if both really are what an "average 20 year tawny" is like.

They should regulate it as a true minimum average age. And there should be the ability to call it 12, 18, 25 years, etc. such as Whiskey does. If that's how old the average age is then put that on the label.

I'm generally not a fan of 40 year old tawny's. There just isn't enough difference between most 30 and 40 year old blends. And most 40 year old tawny's tend to show less of that fresh acidity the 30 year's have. This would be a category I'd eliminate if one had to go.

[Tom Archer]

I'm generally not a fan of 40 year old tawny's. There just isn't enough difference between most 30 and 40 year old blends.

There seems to be the expectation that the 40yr style should be rather over-concentrated, whilst the 30yr style be more ethereal - it all seems a bit contrived.

Better that the IVDP stop trying to dictate style to the tasting rooms, and confine themselves to ensuring that the requisite age average is achieved. If 40 meant 40, but everything else was discretionary, we might see a greater degree of elegance in that category.

[Andy Velebil]

I'm generally not a fan of 40 year old tawny's. There just isn't enough difference between most 30 and 40 year old blends.

There seems to be the expectation that the 40yr style should be rather over-concentrated, whilst the 30yr style be more ethereal - it all seems a bit contrived.

Better that the IVDP stop trying to dictate style to the tasting rooms, and confine themselves to ensuring that the requisite age average is achieved. If 40 meant 40, but everything else was discretionary, we might see a greater degree of elegance in that category.

Or the odd part that Niepoort has had Tawny's rejected by the IVDP as they seemed older than what they were listed as. The biggest issue is there are so many different styles of tawny's, from more fruit driven to more oxidative to somewhere in-between the two, and no regulations which govern them. It's really an arbitrary assessment by the IVDP as to what they think it should be and not allowing the producer to make it in a style the producer wants. As soon as you have a style that is slightly out of the norm they say no we won't approve it. But on what basis I ask? When it comes to tawny's the IVDP process is contrived.

[Moses Botbol]

Or the odd part that Niepoort has had Tawny's rejected by the IVDP as they seemed older than what they were listed as. The biggest issue is there are so many different styles of tawny's, from more fruit driven to more oxidative to somewhere in-between the two, and no regulations which govern them. It's really an arbitrary assessment by the IVDP as to what they think it should be and not allowing the producer to make it in a style the producer wants. As soon as you have a style that is slightly out of the norm they say no we won't approve it. But on what basis I ask? When it comes to tawny's the IVDP process is contrived.

A better formula would be it is a minimum of X year tasting. If a 10 tastes like a 20, it's a pass, but it at least has to taste like a 10.

[Glenn E.]

My understanding is that the average age of the blend components tends to be more than ten years for the 10yr, but less than forty years for the 40yr.

That is not at all what I have heard. In fact I have been told that most 40-yr olds average 44-48 years of aging, and that one of the 40-yr olds is actually closer to 56 years old! (Unfortunately I can't remember for sure which one, but I think it is Romaneira's 40-yr old.)

My understanding is that almost every Tawny with an indication of age is, in fact, older (on average) than what is indicated. This is not required, but is in the producer's best interest as it gives their product an age advantage over competing products. With most tawnies, and sort of as a general rule of thumb, older is better.

And most 40 year old tawny's tend to show less of that fresh acidity the 30 year's have. This would be a category I'd eliminate if one had to go.

You and your acidity! Sheesh, you guys are as bad as Parker. If you want massive amounts of acidity, stick to Madeira! Don't ruin tawnies for the rest of us.

Tawnies are all about balance. In the best tawnies, nothing stands out from the rest, and that includes the acidity. For me, most Kopke tawnies are borderline too acidic. They're superb, but they're really pushing the balance. Sandeman's 20-yr old is the same way - it's practically Madeira-like with its bracing acidity.

If I had to pick one, I'd eliminate the 30-yr olds. (To be clear, I wouldn't eliminate any of them. But if forced to choose, I'd get rid of the 30s.) The difference between a 10 and a 20 is rather dramatic. The difference between a 20 and a 30 is much less dramatic, and the difference between a 30 and a 40 is also not that large. But the difference between a 20 and a 40 is very significant again. Ergo, get rid of the category that only provides small differences from its cousins.

They should regulate it as a true minimum average age. And there should be the ability to call it 12, 18, 25 years, etc. such as Whiskey does. If that's how old the average age is then put that on the label.

My understanding is that Port is currently grandfathered in the US, because US law requires that the contents of an age-labeled bottle be entirely that age or older. In other words if your "10 Year Old Tawny" blend has some 8-yr old, some 12-yr old, and some 20-yr old in it, US law requires that it be labeled 8 years old.

If my understanding is correct, Port would not be able to change its labeling in the US to true "average age" because that does not conform to current US law.

[Glenn E.]

A better formula would be it is a minimum of X year tasting. If a 10 tastes like a 20, it's a pass, but it at least has to taste like a 10.

I see the merit of this, but I think it could cause problems. I think it would be confusing for the public if Brand X 10-yr Old and Brand Y 40-yr Old taste similar.

But a slight modification might work - if a 10 tastes like a 15 or an 18, it passes. If a 10 tastes like a 20, it gets approved as a 20 not as a 10.

[Moses Botbol]

A better formula would be it is a minimum of X year tasting. If a 10 tastes like a 20, it's a pass, but it at least has to taste like a 10.

I see the merit of this, but I think it could cause problems. I think it would be confusing for the public if Brand X 10-yr Old and Brand Y 40-yr Old taste similar.

If Brand Y wants to short their profit margins selling a 10 year port that tastes likes a 40 year port, let them. I'll be buying plenty of it.

[Gary Richardson]

- Why sell stock that is typically 12-15 years old as 10yr? Why not sell it as 12yr (and regulate that the average age must be no less than that)

I am curious...what do you mean by "average age?" If a 10 year is a blend of 3 different years, is each year weighted at 1/3? Or, if the oldest component was 30 years but was 10 percent of the final product, does it only add 3 years to the weighted average age? I would think we would want a weighted average age to be the rule. Otherwise, a drop of 40 year juice would significantly skew the average age calculation.

-- Gary

[Glenn E.]

- Why sell stock that is typically 12-15 years old as 10yr? Why not sell it as 12yr (and regulate that the average age must be no less than that)

I am curious...what do you mean by "average age?" If a 10 year is a blend of 3 different years, is each year weighted at 1/3? Or, if the oldest component was 30 years but was 10 percent of the final product, does it only add 3 years to the weighted average age? I would think we would want a weighted average age to be the rule. Otherwise, a drop of 40 year juice would significantly skew the average age calculation.

Unless I have misconstrued a conversation, which is entirely possible, I don't believe that the way you define the average matters. From what I've been told, US law requires that an age-labeled alcoholic product be labeled with the minimum age of its contents. So no matter how much 30-yr old product is in the bottle, if the youngest product in the bottle is 10 years old then that is what must appear on the label.

Port must currently be operating under some sort of grandfathering clause, because right now it doesn't meet what I understand the law to require.

[Eric Menchen]

A better formula would be it is a minimum of X year tasting. If a 10 tastes like a 20, it's a pass, but it at least has to taste like a 10.

With most tawnies, and sort of as a general rule of thumb, older is better.

But what if I like 10 year old tawny, and not 20? What does "at least has to taste like" mean when different aspects become more and less prominent with age?

[Andy Velebil]

- Why sell stock that is typically 12-15 years old as 10yr? Why not sell it as 12yr (and regulate that the average age must be no less than that)

I am curious...what do you mean by "average age?" If a 10 year is a blend of 3 different years, is each year weighted at 1/3? Or, if the oldest component was 30 years but was 10 percent of the final product, does it only add 3 years to the weighted average age? I would think we would want a weighted average age to be the rule. Otherwise, a drop of 40 year juice would significantly skew the average age calculation.

-- Gary

Gary,
Most aged tawny's have only a very small amount of older stuff. Some 30 and 40 year olds can have a tiny bit from as far back as the late 1800's. It doesn't take much of these really old tawny's to impart a big influence on the overall blend. So yes, having something that old can skew the overall age at a lot. But there is still a large amount of other stuff in the appropriate age range as well so.

depending on the producer and what style they are looking for plays a key role before they even blend a tawny with an indication of age (TWIA). There was a good amount of information that Oscar Quevedo gave (I'll have to search for it) where he talks about what they use to top up each tawny barrel with and how they age it to get the style they want. All producers do it their way to fit their style. That has a huge bearing on how their TWIA turns out. So while one company wants more of a "Portuguese style" tawny, another is looking for a more "non-Portuguese" style. As a matter of fact one producer tops up their tawny barrels with Port stored in demi-johns. That is what gives their tawny's such a distinct profile. It's also this same reason they have had, at times, issues getting approval on some of their tawny's.

So again, we go back to the main issue. What really is the IVDP looking for since there can be a wide difference in tawny's of the same age? IMO, it's more of a fly by the seat of your pants than anything else. As how can you really have a set "profile" for a tawny when such varying styles are approved?

[Andy Velebil]

And most 40 year old tawny's tend to show less of that fresh acidity the 30 year's have. This would be a category I'd eliminate if one had to go.

You and your acidity! Sheesh, you guys are as bad as Parker. If you want massive amounts of acidity, stick to Madeira! Don't ruin tawnies for the rest of us.

Tawnies are all about balance. In the best tawnies, nothing stands out from the rest, and that includes the acidity. For me, most Kopke tawnies are borderline too acidic. They're superb, but they're really pushing the balance. Sandeman's 20-yr old is the same way - it's practically Madeira-like with its bracing acidity.

If I had to pick one, I'd eliminate the 30-yr olds. (To be clear, I wouldn't eliminate any of them. But if forced to choose, I'd get rid of the 30s.) The difference between a 10 and a 20 is rather dramatic. The difference between a 20 and a 30 is much less dramatic, and the difference between a 30 and a 40 is also not that large. But the difference between a 20 and a 40 is very significant again. Ergo, get rid of the category that only provides small differences from its cousins.

I disagree. There is a nice incremental step up between most 10, 20, and 30's. There is far less of a step between most 30 and 40's. What makes a good tawny, IMO, is that freshness and balance. What often starts getting lost in 40 year olds is that freshness (i.e. balanced acidity). Often 40 year olds start getting a little cloying as they tend to not have that freshness the 10/20/30's have. Of course some producers manage to keep them fresh. But we're talking overall here...

IMO, generally speaking most 30 year old tawny's with an indication of age are the pinnacle of this category given the taste and price.

[Glenn E.]

I disagree. There is a nice incremental step up between most 10, 20, and 30's. There is far less of a step between most 30 and 40's. What makes a good tawny, IMO, is that freshness and balance. What often starts getting lost in 40 year olds is that freshness (i.e. balanced acidity). Often 40 year olds start getting a little cloying as they tend to not have that freshness the 10/20/30's have. Of course some producers manage to keep them fresh. But we're talking overall here...

IMO, generally speaking most 30 year old tawny's with an indication of age are the pinnacle of this category given the taste and price.

Well then we'll just have to agree to disagree. You clearly just don't know a good Tawny when you see one.

I can have a difficult time telling a 30-yr old apart from a good 20-yr old, but that's really never a problem with a 40-yr old. 40s are where you finally get those really great torrefaction notes, and are where the richness, power, and depth of a great aged tawny finally shows up. I don't know what 40-yr olds you've been drinking, but I can only recall one that I'd call "cloying" and that was a (relatively) low end 40 from a producer not known for making great tawnies. Maybe I should make broad judgements about VP based on Cruz Ruby?

To be honest, the only 30 I've had that stands out at all to me was Niepoort's, and that was more due to the Niepoort factor than any great age difference from a 20. Niepoort tawnies seem to always be memorable regardless of age. I do want to spend some time with a Ramos Pinto 30 some day, as I've only ever tried it once and it was as part of a much broader tasting so I only got a snapshot of its potential.

The problem here is that you're trying to equate "freshness" with balanced acidity, but you and Roy (among others here) are acid freaks. "Fresh" to you means "borderline too acidic" to me, not balance. Though I grant that it does make parsing your TNs much easier. At the levels of acidity that you guys like, I can sort of recognize that I'm probably tasting a pretty good tawny, but I can't enjoy it because it's just too searingly bright. I need to have it dialed back from 11 to around maybe 8 or so.