For The Love Of Port

http://www.decanter.com/vintageguides/

Are there already cognitions about the quality?

5* for 2005 would be better than 2003 (4*). At prowein (a hughe trade show in Germany) last March, an employee from Fonseca told me, that 2005 at the Douro would be a good but not at all a classic vintage.

Cheers
Michael

Interesting as the 2005 are still in barrel and, at best, maybe they have had some early barrel samples. I think it is premature for them to make that statement at this point in time.

This echoes what Croft told me (rather casually) back in March.

However, Roy's friends would be buzzing by now if a blockbuster was on the cards for next spring; so unless Roy is keeping a big secret from us, I'm slightly doubtful.

Although the harvest seems to have proceeded very well last year, and there was some rain immediately prior, the drought last summer was extreme, and there must have been a lot of raisined grapes and low yields.

Too much of a good thing is not always wonderful. There are some echoes of '78 and '87 as far as the weather goes, and neither of those years got a general declaration - although as years go, both are arguably better than average.

Note that Decanter have the 2002 listed as a 'Drink now' - not advice I'd take...

Also note the news piece about Pierre Rovani (of 'ceiling wax' fame) - looks like Parker has sacked Roy's nemesis...

- Dirk will be pleased..

Tom

I have a new nephew, born this year. 2006 is set to be terrible: a case of 2005 or 2003 for the lad?

jdaw1 wrote: 2006 is set to be terrible:

Why do you think 2006 is going to be so terrible?

Congrats on your new nephew :)

2006 may very well be a terrific harvest. Certain starts must align for that to happen, but it is not unlikely that it could. The yields in some areas might be lower than usual, but due to the cool and wet weather (after some drought years) it seems that besides the miserable June 14th hail storm, the season has been quite good this year and harvest could produce a large quantity overall. We'll know within a month or so.

2005 from sources at just about every major producer I have spoken with, have been lackluster about the wines from this harvest. I have not read the decanter article yet though. A year ago, I was told that 2005 looked favorable. Then in June of this year, key players were downplaying '05 and a number of them "off the record" felt that 2004 was ultimately better and that neither measured up to 2003. This was far more than just one or two significant companies.

uncle tom wrote: Also note the news piece about Pierre Rovani (of 'ceiling wax' fame) - looks like Parker has sacked Roy's nemesis...
- Dirk will be pleased..

Tom, my first idea: Rovani must go because of the appalling valutations for Niepoort Vintage Ports .

Ahh, now I will gain wealth!


Michael

2006 terrible? Because I read a report, on this bulletin board, of hail. However subsequent research downplays that, so maybe not.

Julian.

Histories of great vintages frequently include the word 'despite'.

Almost anything can go wrong up to the end of July without fatally compromising the vintage, although events like the hailstorm do reduce the chances of a fine year.

Tom

In which case my nephew will have to await developments. There's no hurry: he won't be drinking it for a while (neither he nor it being ready).