An article on 2000 VPs

[Roy Hersh]

A good friend sent me a copy of this today ... although it is old news, it makes for a good read:

2000 Vintage Ports
EWS Blind Tasting - January 27, 2004

The 2000 vintage is a major one for port, an opinion shared by virtually every wine critic and vintage chart. At EWS, we offer at least one vintage port tasting annually and were quite anxious to put the highly touted 2000s to test before a tough New York audience. An impending snowstorm kept several registrants away, but those hardy souls who braved the elements were well rewarded with 12 vintage ports to warm the soul on a cold January night.

We’ve conducted blind tastings of every important port vintage since the 1955s. Many important changes have taken place for vintage ports from the old days to the present. For one thing, the modern version is more "user friendly" in its youth than it used it be. And speaking of days of yesteryear, there used to be a common pecking order: Quinta do Noval "Nacional" was in a class by itself (not included in this tasting), followed by Fonseca, Taylor, Graham, and Dow in that order. Rarely did any other port make it into our top three. Correspondingly, the price gap was much wider then between the top ports and the rest of the pack.

The biggest change today has been the emergence of the lesser-known port houses who have upgraded quality to the point where their vintage ports can now compete toe to toe with the big boys. Also, the price gap between the big names and the smaller houses has diminished considerably. So, it should not come as a shock to anyone that the familiar medallists watched on the sideline as a new set of winners took home the gold, silver, and bronze. But there were no "losers" here, as every port (save a corked bottle of Taylor) was very good to excellent. Our scores reflect this narrow range. However, one port stood out as being "a cut above," and that turned out to be Cockburn, much to our surprise. Ah, the beauty of a blind tasting!

It must also be said editorially that we strongly believe that ideally, every wine should be drunk during its window of peak drinking years. For vintage port, despite changes that have made them more enjoyable at a younger age, we still recommend waiting 15 - 20 years for maximum enjoyment. Furthermore, since our tasting was an exercise in infanticide, our ratings should be taken with a grain of stilton, as these ports will change dramatically with the passage of time. The scores only represent the way the 2000 ports were drinking on January 27, 2004 on a cold winter’s night in New York.

The following are consensus tasting notes, written to share commentary and convey the overall impression the group had for the wine. All ports were purchased from retail sources. They were double decanted about 1 1/2 hours before the tasting began and were poured from numbered bags (1 - 13). The table lists the wine according to the results of these numerical rankings. Participants were asked to vote (by number) for their three favorite ports, allowing for ties. We awarded three points for every first place vote. two for every second place vote, and one point for every third. Price listed represents approximate retail.

# Wine (27 voters) 1st
Place 2nd
Place 3rd
Place Total
Points
1 Cockburn 7 6 3 36
8 Niepoort 4 4 2 22
10 Gould Campbell 4 1 6 20
12 Quinta do Vesuvio 4 4 0 20
5 Fonseca 3 2 0 13
7 Croft 0 5 3 13
11 Quinta do Noval 1 1 5 10
3 Warre 1 2 2 9
9 Graham 2 0 3 9
6 Taylor 1 1 1 6
4 Dow 0 2 1 5
2 Churchill 0 1 2 4


1) Cockburn - $60 - 36 points (seven 1st, six 2nd, three 3 rd) - 95 rating Saturated color. Sweet blackberry, licorice nose is open, expansive, and enticing. Sweet and nutty on entry; balanced, complex with lushness and roundness that is most attractive. Not the biggest or fattest of the evening, this port was nevertheless chewy, concentrated, and dense. Shows lots of brandy, but not to excess. Finish was dry and very long. Altogether superb. An out-of-bottle experience for Cockburn; gets our vote for the greatest port ever made by this house.

2) Churchill - $70 - 4 points (one 2nd, two 3 rd) - 89 rating Saturated. Tight nose at first, but it opens to reveal sweet fruit. Sweet and jammy with blueberry notes on the palate and plenty of tannins. Not as concentrated as port #1, but nicely balanced with good grip. There’s a long finish. This port well made, though a bit restrained, lighter, and more subtle than the competition. Clearly needs time to evolve.

3) Warre - $60 - 9 points (one 1st, two 2nd, two 3 rd) - 91 rating Very deeply colored. Restrained nose doesn’t reveal more than subtle black fruits with hints of mint and violets. Much more interesting on the palate with sweet ripe blackberry fruit at the core. There’s a lot more going on here including moderate weight, firm tannins, good acidity, and noticeable alcohol. Above all else, there’s very good richness and everything is in balance. Not a show-stopper tonight, but still an impressive performance for Warre.

4) Dow - $65 - 5 points (two 2nd, one 3rd) - 89 rating Saturated. Sweet, hi-toned, licorice-scented nose. Follows through on the palate with the sweetness dominating; some even used the word "candied." But there’s also really good viscosity here as this modest weight port certainly has good grip and the ingredients for a bright future. Ironically, Dow is known for its dryer style, but you’d never know it by this port!

5) Fonseca - $80 - 13 points (three 1st, two 2nd) - 92 rating Saturated. Subtle nose forces you to pay attention; dry and nutty. There’s a lot going on underneath, just not obvious. Attractive on the palate; big and voluptuous, showing plenty of tannin, especially in the long finish. Quite complex. This port is a little out of balance right now as aggressive brandy kicks in to give the port some heat. Clearly needs many years to round out; we didn’t consume it during an optimal drinking period.

6) Taylor - $85 - 6 points (one 1st, one 2nd, one 3rd) - 92 rating Saturated. Open, attractive, complex cassis aromas; penetrating but not overpowering. Fairly weighty on the palate; youthfully complex with lots of grip. Really good acidity, too. Long finish builds in the mouth. Needs many years before reaching maturity. One bottle was corked. Point total presumably would have been doubled if we had two good bottles. Notes based on the good bottle. Knowing that this was Taylor (after all ports were de-bagged) led us to believe that we simply drank it at an awkward time.

7) Croft - $70 - 13 points (five 2nd, three 3rd) - 92 rating Very deep color. Rich nose features ripe fruit that was quite lovely. Very nicely balanced on the palate with lush fruit and plenty of grip. Well structured with moderate tannins. Not too sweet, not too dry. Slightly out of balance in favor of alcohol. Finish was longer than most. A majority of participants really liked this port, even if they didn’t vote it among their top three. Very strong effort for Croft.

8) Niepoort - $75 - 22 points (four 1st, four 2nd, two 3rd) - 93 rating Saturated. Sweet, nutty nose is complex and interesting; creating a favorable first impression. Youthful and voluptuous on the palate with nice black cherry fruit, really good concentration and plenty of tannin. There’s a silky texture and good acidity to make most tasters smile. The wine quality here is exceptional. Long finish. This was a definite crowd-pleaser now, yet has all the ingredients to develop beautifully. First rate all the way.

9) Graham - $80 - 9 points (two 1st, three 3rd) - 91 rating Saturated. Subtle nose is one of the shyest of the tasting; doesn’t reveal much. Sweet on entry with a lot of weight. Good structure, depth, and mouth feel; plenty of underlying fruit. Finishes a bit short. A few tasters really liked this one, but most thought it was backward and unyielding. Knowing that this was Graham, we’d be inclined to cellar it with our fingers crossed. But this particular showing for 2000 Graham, while very good, was not up to the accolades and big numbers it has earned in the wine press.

10) Gould Campbell - $50 - 20 points (four 1st, one 2nd, six 3rd) - 93 rating Saturated. Open, expressive nose; full and rich with compelling scents of blackberries and spices. Follows through nicely on the palate. Sweet, nutty character with lots of complexity. Fairly weighty, but not a heavyweight. Seems perfectly balanced; good acidity carries it through a long, long finish. The wine quality that went into this port was outstanding. Terrific port, most noteworthy for its structure and length. Not surprising, as Gould Campbell has a history of performing very well at EWS tastings.

11) Quinta do Noval - $95 - 10 points (one 1st, one 2nd, five 3rd) - 91 rating Saturated. Rich, fruit-filled nose is attractive, though slightly muted. Big, huge, mammoth on the palate; super-concentrated and a real powerhouse! The sweet, luscious fruit is ripe with black berries and the acids are plentiful. As big as this port is, it is also well-balanced. Long finish. This one’s a baby now but has a bright future and higher score down the road. Excellent showing for Noval; looks like the demons of mediocrity that have plagued this port are finally exorcised.

12) Quinta do Vesuvio - $70 - 20 points (four 1st, four 2nd) - 93 rating Saturated. Expressive, rich, ripe blackberry nose is very enticing. But there’s also some heat, or high alcohol to keep us from getting too excited. Really first rate on the palate: firm and complex with lots of grip and well-integrated tannins. Youthful. Once again, the wine quality in this port is outstanding. Long finish. One of the more backward ports of the tasting, most people were quite optimistic that this one has a very bright future.

[Andy Velebil]

A good article. After reading their TN's I can see how they scored/ranked them the way they did. (the article stated they scored them as to how they drank that day, not projected in the future) With a few exceptions, it was the lesser houses that were showing better at the time of the tasting. I would not expect the Taylors, Fonseca, etc. to show as a great drinker now, especially after such a short deacant time. What did surprise me was Niepoort. In my limited experience, most people who have not had a lot of young VP score this badly. It is normally such a big brooding tannic beast, that is all over the place and disjointed, that people tend to score it poorly when young.