Need suggestions for extra special bottle

[Paul_B]

Hi all,

so what would be the one bottle to get if you had $1000 budget?
A few of us are thinking of pooling our money and enjoying something that we only currently dream of...or read about.
Maybe buying a bottle from a private individual might be more value per dollar versus buying something in a shop at this price level.

Anyway, I'm interested in your suggestions.

Thanks
Paul

[Andy Velebil]

If you've never had it, a 1948 Fonseca VP.

[Moses Botbol]

If you've never had it, a 1948 Fonseca VP.

Or 1948 Taylor.

A 1927, 35, or 45 "fill in the blank" would 3rd pick if 48 Taylor-Fonseca is not available.

Consider getting a few less expensive bottles like 70 Graham, 63 Fonseca, and 55 Taylor and should come out to about a 1K right? I'd rather go for the 3 than one, but then again I have had 48 Taylor (not the Fonseca)..

[Marc J.]

Maybe a 1945 Croft? You should still have some funds left over for another nice bottle. Perhaps a 1970 Niepoort as the second bottle?

[Peter W. Meek]

... should come out to about a 1K ...

I think the point is to taste a once-in-a-lifetime (or hopefully a first in a lifetime) bottle.

The downside of putting all your dollars in one bottle is that it may not be at its best. Spreading your $1k among several lets you hope that most will be special. I have to say, I'd go with the single bottle, hoping for the best, but being willing to accept the gamble.

[Eric Menchen]

Older bottles can be hit-or-miss, so if it were me, I'd split my money and get at least a second bottle, say 700-300.

[Paul_B]

Thanks all,

for the suggestions and also the warnings on putting all my bets on one bottle versus 2 or 3 btls. I share with my group and start searching for some of these.
The group was leaning towards VP but I suppose some ancient colheita could be considered too.

cheers
Paul

[Moses Botbol]

The group was leaning towards VP but I suppose some ancient colheita could be considered too.

cheers
Paul

Kopke has some old Colheitas easily available around Boston with a bottling date with in a of couple years. Reasonably price too.

[Eric Menchen]

And I think old colheitas are less likely to be a miss. A VP bottled in 1937 has had a lot of time to be mistreated, suffer from a bad cork, etc. A 1937 colheita bottled in the last ten years was at least drinkable when bottled and shouldn't have a bad cork yet.

[Roy Hersh]

Eric,

Which 1937 VP are you talking about?

If you don't mind young Ports, there's a 1994 Quinta do Noval Nacional which would exhibit what an incredibly big young Port would taste like, but I'd rather go with age and suggest a 1945 Warre or Sandeman and take the money left over and buy some 1963 VP to enjoy too.

[Glenn E.]

That's a really tough call for all the reasons already mentioned. If you go with a really old bottle of Vintage Port you run the risk of poor storage somewhere in its lifetime. There are younger VPs in that price range - Roy's suggest of a 1994 Nacional being one - but I get the feeling that's not really the experience you're looking for. After all, if you've had one amazingly big bruiser of a way-too-young vintage port you've pretty much had that experience. (Don't bother "correcting" me to say that the '94 Nacional goes beyond that... you know what I mean.)

So what I would recommend is that you put more money into the pot and go for something like a 1963 Nacional. That's a significant increase in expense - those can run $2500 - but I think a '63 Nacional is much closer to what you're looking for and more likely to have been stored properly. Top flight Vintage Ports from 1963 are in their prime right now which will allow the Nacional to stand out even more in comparison. Get a Fonseca and a Graham for comparison.

[Eric Menchen]

Which 1937 VP are you talking about?

I said bottled in 1937, so I was of course thinking of a 1935 VP, of which I've had one that was sublime There are two bottles of that up for auction at Zachy's this month. If they were stored as well as yours, I would jump on them. I still will probably bid on them. If someone else around here is interested, let's not drive the price up.

[Moses Botbol]

1957 Delaforce Colheita is worth throw into the suggestion bin if you are doing multi-bottles which I suggest. One bottle for even two people is hardly enough; especially if it is a slow evolver and your last glass is the best...

It's good to contrast the port with different vintages or what have you. I like to plan N or N+1 one if there's more than 3 people in any sort of port tasting, no matter the rarity of what is being served.

It's a twofold; drinking a fine vintage and just plain old drinking port! Not always is it a fine vintage, but certainly a fine time.

[Rob C.]

That's a really tough call for all the reasons already mentioned. If you go with a really old bottle of Vintage Port you run the risk of poor storage somewhere in its lifetime. There are younger VPs in that price range - Roy's suggest of a 1994 Nacional being one - but I get the feeling that's not really the experience you're looking for. After all, if you've had one amazingly big bruiser of a way-too-young vintage port you've pretty much had that experience. (Don't bother "correcting" me to say that the '94 Nacional goes beyond that... you know what I mean.)

So what I would recommend is that you put more money into the pot and go for something like a 1963 Nacional. That's a significant increase in expense - those can run $2500 - but I think a '63 Nacional is much closer to what you're looking for and more likely to have been stored properly. Top flight Vintage Ports from 1963 are in their prime right now which will allow the Nacional to stand out even more in comparison. Get a Fonseca and a Graham for comparison.

I agree with you (and Roy) re: the 1994 Nacional. And I agree with your reasoning re: provenance of a '63 Nacional, but personally - whilst accepting that the Nacional 63 is a great port and a real pleasure to drink due to its rarity, cache and obvious quality - I still found it slightly underwhelming compared to my experience of other top flight 63s (not to say it was worse, just i was left with a nagging feeling that it was not objectively worth anything like the huge premium it commands relative to other top ports). I even had Richard Mayson, who rated the same bottle 20/20, check my glass to see that we were tasting the same wine...and then poured a second serving from a different bottle into a new glass at the end of the tasting to double-check!

With $1000, i'd be tempted to get a cracking 45 and use the leftovers for one or two trusty bottles of 63/66/70 from Fonseca/Graham/Taylor (as others have mentioned). But the key will be provenance, so it could mean waiting for some time for the right bottle to turn up at the right price.

I don't know enough about 35s or 48s to comment on those.

My experience with 55s has been good, though personally I feel that 45 or 63/66/70 would offer better bang for buck (at least if the relative pricing of these vintages in Canada is similar to UK pricing).