For The Love Of Port

Eric S wrote:Eric, Andy, and Roy: Thanks for the feedback on the condition of the bottle. I suppose the color of the Selo does cause some concern, but this is offset to some degree given the high fill level of the bottle.

The celo looks more like age than it does leaking. There's some corrosion behind the celo, but I think you'll be ok. Wines can be finicky, but I have had Dow ’63 maybe 10 times and most of them have been incredible; really good at a minimum.

As important as having a fine bottle, is the decanting and serving of port; there’s a thread right there. I would not want muck that part up especially when you have a dream bottle like ’63 Dow.

Moses Botbol wrote:As important as having a fine bottle, is the decanting and serving of port; there’s a thread right there. I would not want muck that part up especially when you have a dream bottle like ’63 Dow.

Fortunately, I've come across a number of threads right here that provide some great insights to help me get it right

Eric,

If you would like to see many old bottles of Vintage Port, go to the FTLOP homepage and find the PORTraits Gallery on the left side of the page and click VIEW NOW. You can then go to Bottles & Labels and should find the largest grouping of bottle photos of old Vintage Ports anywhere. : )

Thanks, Roy! That collection of images was very helpful! (not to mention impressive! ) Not one discolored Selo in the bunch. I suppose I should be more choosy. I've seen a number of bottles (online) marked as "signs of seepage" or "signs of past seepage." From your experience, are these signs failry uniform in nature (stained Selo, stained label, etc) or is there a wider variety of problems to look for/avoid?

Thanks,
Eric

Here is what the delivery man brought with him today! One for now, one for next decade, and one for much later on:



Here is an image of the top of the 1963 Dow that I had inquired about:



The wax capsule was broken in transit and the Selo came off. Looking at the cork, you can tell that it leaked at some point in the past. The one thing that I'm a little disappointed with is the person I talked with indicated the fill level of this bottle was to the middle of the neck. The actual level of fill is to the base of the neck, right where it meets the top of the shoulder. I'm more concerned by the disparity in description than I am with the actual fill level of the bottle (yes, its the same bottle, the numbers on the Selo match). What's a nice way to point this out to the "Senior Wine Consultant" that helped me?

The fill level on the 1977 is just at the bottom of the Selo and the Taylor is filled exactly to the middle of the bulge in the neck.

Now my collection stands at a whopping 4 bottles. Years ago I was in Delft and found a great little shop where I picked up a 1977 Gould Campbell and a 1958 Mackenzie. I didn't know much at the time other than old ruby ports were very nice I opened the 1958 Mackenziea few years ago to share with friends of ours on our 10th wedding anniversary. It was delightful!

Thanks,
Eric

Considering how serious the screw up in the fill level description was, which makes a big difference, I'd return it and find a bottle in better condition. There is no excuse for saying high neck fill then shipping a bottle with a top shoulder/base neck fill.

The curious side of me decided to keep this bottle of 63 Dow to open and share with friends for New Year's Eve rather than return it due to the difference in reported vs actual ullage (I did bring a back up bottle, though, in the event that this one was dead).

We opened it about 5:30p and strained it into a ship's decanter to let it sit until the kids were in bed. We tried a bit right away. The color is not as dark as I was expecting, certainly not as dark as the 2003 Taylor LBV I had opened the week before. The predominant flavors were alcohol and fruit, in that order - not much to my liking at first. Figuring it needed to sit for another few hours, we sampled it again at 7:30p. At this point, it was beginning to show some promise with a decreased alcohol flavor and increased fruit flavors. A distinct dark cherry flavor was definitely evolving with an interesting finish that was showing some complexity. I was definitely encouraged by this, so we came back about 9:30 (now 4 hours after opening/decanting) and things were really getting good at this point. The alcohol flavor had largely disappeared and was replaced by a nice medly of fruit flavors, still strong on cherry in the finish. The aroma was opening up nicely as well, so we switched over to larger glasses. With other tasty treats along the way, we kept pouring from the decanter until about 1:00a or so when it eventually ran dry... My impression was that by 11:00p (nearly 6 hours after opening) it was at its best. It was much smoother and had developed a more complex fruit/cherry flavor and had the longest finish. Despite my misgivings about the bottle condition, it turned out to be a wonderful experience!

The bad part is now my collection of VP is down to 4 bottles. In planning a path forward, I think I'll focus mostly on younger vintages purchased several bottles at a time, with an occasional older bottle for enjoying sooner rather than later... The trick is that there are relatively few places where I can make in-person purchases (I live in PA, so the state runs the liquor stores and restricts shipments from other states), so I'm stuck with a small handful of stores in Northern NJ and southeast NY state.

Eric

Eric,

Glad to see you got to experience how an older VP can change for the better over time in a decanter. It's a shame so many people don't decant these older VP's long enough to experience their true potential....and glad your bottle turned out well!