For The Love Of Port

2000 Cockburn Qta Do Canais VP
1985 Warre VP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Glenn E. wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:I think I'm going to open something that qualifies for BOTH of the proposed themes... probably a 1977 Graham. Need to check supply, though... not sure what I have available! LOL

1977 Graham it is! Decanted at 10:30. The quality control sample shows no sign of VA (an oft-mentioned complaint about this Port), but it does need some air. Ripe strawberry and red raspberry on the nose along with a bit of alcohol. There's an abundance of soft, ripe fruit on the palate, but at the moment it also has a tightness about it that should loosen up in the decanter. I also note a slight harshness in the mid and late palate which will hopefully integrate. Very lush mouth feel at this point.

Link to my TN on the 1977 Graham.

I take it you prefer the 1985 over the 1977? And perhaps even the 1983?

Bradley Bogdan wrote:2000 Cockburn Qta Do Canais VP
1985 Warre VP

Will you edit your post and add in the links to the 2 TN's?

The Warre's 1985 was one of the first mature VPs I ever tried. It is very enjoyable and I actually tasted it this past February. Still very good.

Thomas V wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

Glenn E. wrote: 1977 Graham it is! Decanted at 10:30. The quality control sample shows no sign of VA (an oft-mentioned complaint about this Port), but it does need some air. Ripe strawberry and red raspberry on the nose along with a bit of alcohol. There's an abundance of soft, ripe fruit on the palate, but at the moment it also has a tightness about it that should loosen up in the decanter. I also note a slight harshness in the mid and late palate which will hopefully integrate. Very lush mouth feel at this point.

Link to my TN on the 1977 Graham.

I take it you prefer the 1985 over the 1977? And perhaps even the 1983?

Generally speaking, yes. Bottle variation can upset the order on any given day, but in general I'd order them 1985 > 1983 > 1977.

The 1983 is a sneaky little devil... 7-8 years ago it was clearly inferior to the 1985, but my last couple of experiences with it have left me wondering if it might keep improving and eventually prove superior to the 1985. It's not there yet, but it does just keep getting better and better...

Thomas V wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

Glenn E. wrote: 1977 Graham it is! Decanted at 10:30. The quality control sample shows no sign of VA (an oft-mentioned complaint about this Port), but it does need some air. Ripe strawberry and red raspberry on the nose along with a bit of alcohol. There's an abundance of soft, ripe fruit on the palate, but at the moment it also has a tightness about it that should loosen up in the decanter. I also note a slight harshness in the mid and late palate which will hopefully integrate. Very lush mouth feel at this point.

Link to my TN on the 1977 Graham.

I take it you prefer the 1985 over the 1977? And perhaps even the 1983?

Bradley Bogdan wrote:2000 Cockburn Qta Do Canais VP
1985 Warre VP

Will you edit your post and add in the links to the 2 TN's?

The Warre's 1985 was one of the first mature VPs I ever tried. It is very enjoyable and I actually tasted it this past February. Still very good.

To be honest, I post from my phone 99% of the time and don't know how to do it there. I'll try to hop on a computer and do it though. They're in the TN section at the moment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1995 Smith Woodhouse Madelena Vintage Port

Decanted 6 hours. Still a very dark ruby, but not as dark as most regular Smith Woodhouse VP's. Just starting to show secondary tertiary notes of cedar and menthol, this still possesses dark plums, moderate tannins, and lots of mocha. Not to mention plenty of acidity to keep it well balanced and without any overt sweetness. The menthol which shows itself at the moment is typical at this age and will subside and integrate with age. I really enjoyed the long tannic and lush finish of this Vintage Port. While this may not be a "100 year" Port, it shows very good balance and has the stuffing to age for a good 20 or more years without issue. I am glad I have a small stash of this aging for the long term as it will be fun to pop these a couple decades from now and show people what, probably by then, long lost house was capable of.

In reality Madelena is rarer than Noval's Nacional, as it's only been commercially bottled a small handful of times since the 1980's, and even then in even tinier amounts. This vintage being perhaps the largest bottling of it. Sadly, given the Symington's current lack of desire to continue this brand we may never see any future bottlings of this.

93 Points

So on 4/16 I opened a 1994 Warres VP, for which I still need to write a note from memory.
On 4/18 I opened a 1983 Graham's VP, note is here: http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 12&t=40352
Of the two, the winner is the Warres. Tonight I'm thinking about a 1983 Smith Woodhouse.

So I opened the 1983 Smith Woodhouse VP. It was a poor bottle that improved with time. Tasting note:
http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 12&t=40361

And I found this in my "Drafts" e-mail folder, 1997 Smith Woodhouse that I opened earlier this month:
http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 12&t=40362

(If I don't want to physically write notes on a wine, I sometimes put notes in my phone. gmail probably isn't the ideal tool, but it is easy to use, auto-saves, and then I can get the text from any device or send it.)

I brought a 1991 Quinta do Vezúvio VP to a tasting this past Saturday. I will add my notes, that very brief during the next few days.

It was delicious, though the tannins were more resolved that I anticipated.

To match up with the theme I decided to be brave and open one of my remaining bottles of Dow 1977.

Up to now, I have a failure rate with Dow 1977 being tainted by TCA running at about 50% (my experience with GC77 is worse) and this is one of the ports I won't buy on the secondary market as I just get disappointed too often. However, I do have a few bottles in storage and decided to pull a six-pack out for this virtual tasting.

I'm delighted to report that the bottle I opened and nervously shared with a few port novices last week showed really well, probably better than any previous bottle of D77 that I've tried. If the other 5 bottles are the same as this one then I'm in for a real treat over the next few months.

No trace of TCA reveals a beautifully mature port. Burnt ochre in colour, 30% opaque, with a delicious nose of mace and warm raisins with 2 hours in the glass. When a sample taken on the evening was tasted the following day the nose had moved to less spice and more sweet redcurrant cordial. Smooth on the palate, slightly thicker in texture than water but so full of intense flavour and powerful acidity. Dry, slightly bitter with quince and grapefruit oil. Very complex and almost overwhelming in power. A huge aftertaste, a little fiery but incredibly long lasting and huge in volume - I swallowed a sip and had time to wash up after dinner before the finish faded. Such a fabulous port, it is devastating that it is so badly affected by TCA. 95/100. Drunk 26-Apr-17.

Al B. wrote:I'm delighted to report that the bottle I opened and nervously shared with a few port novices last week showed really well, probably better than any previous bottle of D77 that I've tried. ...

Thanks for participating! I'm glad this worked out for the best for you. It makes me wish I had some '77 Dow.

I have been hoping to get to this and last night was my chance--opened a 1991 Smith Woodhouse VP. Below is my link to the TN. Loved these bottles although one had serious issues; bottle variations. I do love the Smith Woodhouse brand--just love their usual flavor profile in their VP, LBV and Madelena.

http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 12&t=40377

My note on the 1991 Quinta do Vezúvio VP

http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 12&t=40388