For The Love Of Port

2003 Croft Porto Vintage - Portugal, Douro, Porto (2/2/2014)
V tasty. No longer opaque and showing secondary notes, making me wonder how it may have been stored until I purchased my 2 bottles. Nice spice/acidity in the mouth that keep the sweetness and fruit from being overwhelming. The tannins are still there but under control. This bottle feels like it will drink wonderfully in 5-15 years time.
Edit: I decanted it for sediment on Friday night and took the note above on Sunday afternoon. However, by Monday night, the wine had transformed into a much more wonderful experience. The alcohol now fully integrated, the tannins far into the background and the berried fruit taking center stage (not sure what happened to the secondary notes...). Great pleasure drinking it now, will consider opening the other bottle i have soon w a long decant when looking for a luscious young VP experience. Upping it 2 points to 94.
(94 pts.)

I really have loved this VP the times I've had it. Easily the best Croft since the 1991, which IMO this will be even better.

Yep, the best of the modern day Crofts. I think 2011 is also very good but don't know if it will surpass the 2003, which is possibly my favorite vintage of Croft ... back to 1945.

Roy Hersh wrote:Yep, the best of the modern day Crofts. I think 2011 is also very good but don't know if it will surpass the 2003, which is possibly my favorite vintage of Croft ... back to 1945.

I liked the 2011 but I still prefered the 2003 at this point. Will see if that changes over the next year or two when the 2011 starts settling in more.

Andy Velebil wrote:I really have loved this VP the times I've had it. Easily the best Croft since the 1991, which IMO this will be even better.

If it's best since the 1991 vintage, why not say since 1970 since every vintage in between are not that great?

Moses Botbol wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:I really have loved this VP the times I've had it. Easily the best Croft since the 1991, which IMO this will be even better.

If it's best since the 1991 vintage, why not say since 1970 since every vintage in between are not that great?

"Best since 1991" ==> 1991 > 2003 > everything else since 1991

"Best since 1970" ==> 1970 > 2003 > everything else since 1970 including 1991

I think Andy's saying that the 1991 is better than the 2003 right now, but that that might change in the future.

I'm not saying 1991 is better than, or at least equal to, the 2003 at this stage. The 1991 is now coming up on 23 years old, the 2003 is just more than 1/2 that age. I never had the 1991 when young so I can't compare at this point. While the 1991 was by far the best since 1970, 2003 was awesome when young. If it continues on the path it showed early on, I feel the 2003 will be better off than where the 1991 is at this point in its evolution. Then again, I could be wrong...time will tell I guess.