Event: 2000 Vintage Port horizontal

Ronald Wortel · Post by **Ronald Wortel** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:13 pm

25 Vintage Ports from 2000, and a couple of others

Yesterday, I was happy to attend an offline of members of 'Wijnprikbord', the largest and most active wine forum in the Netherlands. 16 people attended this tasting, 25 VP's 2000, three VP's 2003, one 1994 and one 1985. I owe a big thank you to Mathieu and Tineke for hosting this event in a fabulous way. Also many thanks for the great cheeses, lovely beef and very tasty chocolate cake!

Mathieu really outdid himself in organizing this event. He managed to persuade the ICEP to sponsor the event with the official port glasses (that all the attendees could take home afterwards), and several producers generously supplied bottles of VP2000, and in some cases 2003.

All ports were tasted blind.

1. Martinez (kindly supplied by the producer)
Smells like sour sweets and cooked vegetables. Odd. Also some spices (sage, cloves). This is incredibly thin on the palate, and extremely acidic, combined with artificial sweetness. Not recommended. 78/79

2. Burmester
Fairly hot on the nose, but also some nice cherries. Somewhat closed, but showing some nice flavours of cherries and chocolate. Medium bodied, not really complex. Nice enough. 86

3. Churchill’s
Corked.

4. Gould Campbell (kindly supplied by the producer)
Lovely sweet and floral aromas and flavours of cherries, currant and other red fruit. Medium bodied, good tannin structure. Nice, solid port, drinks very well now. 91

5. Quarles Harris (kindly supplied by the producer)
Not giving much on the nose and palate; very much closed. It does show a very good structure and lots of tannins, also some flavours of sweet dark fruit. Great potential 92+

6. Quinta do Portal (kindly supplied by the producer/importer)
Also closed, but not as much as no. 5. Flavours of blackcurrant, gooseberry, chilli pepper and a good freshness. Tannins are solid, but not massive. 91+

7. Quinta do Noval Silval
Odd chemical nose (burnt rubber), very alcoholic. Not much fruit on the palate, but showing some bitter tobacco. Rather thin, and turning extremely hot towards the finish. It does have a solid structure though. In an odd phase? 83

8. Dalva
Spicy nose with a bubblegum sweetness. Extremely sweet, and lacking completely in structure. Not of VP quality. 77

9. Cockburn’s (kindly supplied by the producer)
The nose is very open and full of aromas; jammy fruit, caramel, but also good freshness. Full and fruity, packed with dark cherries, bitter chocolate, black pepper and herbs. Shows lots of character. 92

10. Croft
Already much more evolved in colour than most of the others. No fruit on the nose, only ‘old’ aromas: toffee, fudge, nuts. Watery and light on the palate, showing some fruit here. Not unpleasant, but nothing special. 84

11. Fonseca
Corked! A pity, because it had a massive structure. Mad Mad

12. Kopke
Closed and alcoholic nose. Later showing more frruit and a pleasant freshness. Light to medium bodied port, with red fruit and some pepper. Good flavours, but fairly one dimensional. 87

13. Quinta do Crasto
Not showing much on the nose except for some redcurrant and alcohol. Medium bodied, with redcurrant, strawberries and a light bitterness. Some bay leave on the medium length finish. Nice port. 88

14. Poças
This is one closed and tight port. All I can taste are tannins. I think it’ll be very good in the future, but impossible to judge now. Not rated, but showing great potential and certainly a big surprise.

15. Quinta de Roriz (kindly supplied by the producer)
This smells of cooked vegetables, and only that. The flavours are all very correct, with sweet red fruit, liquorice, bay leave, a touch of chocolateand some spicy chilli pepper, but somehow it fails to excite. Perhaps because it is lacking in freshness, 85

16. Ramos Pinto
Sweets an unripe fruit on the nose. An artificial sweetness on the palate, and lacking in both structure and concentration. The nice and spiciy finish saves the port, but only just. 80

17. Smith Woodhouse
Not giving much on the nose, but much more expressive on the palate. Fresh and full of cherries, although also rather hot. Straightforward, but good port. 87

18. Vista Allegre
Cherries, cherries and cherries on the nose, later accompanied by strawberries and redcurrant. This is the same on the palate, but a touch of fresh apple flavours makes it interesting. Good structure and concentration. 88

19. Graham
Very rustic nose, menure and epoisse. Sweet styled port, fat and well structured. Very solid tannins. I guessed this to be Graham and was right. 90

20. Quinta do Noval
Why does this smell like a rotting sewer? Odd. It does have the structure, as well as the tannins, but the flavours are overripe and rot. An off bottle? 78

21. Quinta do Vesuvio
Very much closed nose. All I can get out of it is some gunpowder. On the palate is is overwhelmingly green and bitter and shows very coarse tannins. But also good fruit and an impressive structure. Needs a lot of time, too difficult to score at the moment.

22. Niepoort
Doesn’t give much on the nose. Flavours of creamy chocolate, coffee, strawberries and other sweet red fruits. Medium to full bodied. Good, but I doubt if it makes it on the very long term. 89

23. Taylor’s
Smoky, tarry nose. Very compact, yet extremely powerful port. This has so much, but shows so little at the moment. Powerful, robust, a very big boy. 93+

24. Warre’s (kindly supplied by the producer)
Not as powerful as no. 23, but certainly very good. Open, sweet fruit and well integrated tannins. 91+

25. Dow’s
A very nice nose with liquorice, bay leave and fresh fruit. Not alcoholic at all. This is full and round, with velvetty fruit, lots of power and tannins, but well masked by its sweetness and fruit. I was surprised to learn this was Dow, because it is rather sweet.

Other ports:

A. Taylor’s LBV 2000
The opener of the afternoon. I’m never much a fan of Taylor LBV’s, but this was pretty good. Good flavours of cherry and chocolate. Medium bodied and not extremely complex, but nice alltogether. 84

B. Warre’s 1994 VP
Still very fruity on the nose, although a touch of leather is giving away some age. Lovely flavours, this doesn’t win on concentration, but on subtlety and distinctness. Very nice. 92

C. Fonseca 1985 VP
Refined glass of port, already many older notes (tobacco, leather) but still good fruit and very lively. Full, spicy and interesting. Silky soft, long finish. Did seem older than the ‘85’s I previously tasted. 94

D. Martinez 2003 VP (kindly supplied by the producer)
VA is predominant on the nose and palate. I didn’t like it.

E. Dalva 2003 VP (kindly supplied by the producer)
Not overly concentrated, and not very complex. But nice flavours of red fruit. An average VP.

F. Quinta do Noval 2003 VP (kindly supplied by the producer)
No tasting notes, but a lovely young VP. Good concentration, dark flavours and a nice match with chocolate cake.

Steven Kooij · Post by **Steven Kooij** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:57 pm

Wow, you managed to get your notes up quickly Ronnie! My thoughts:

The ones I rated highest of the '00s were the Gould Campbell, Cockburn and Warre. Pocas is the VP to buy - this is available for about 20 Euros (ex. VAT) over here: an unbelievable QPR!

I enjoyed the Silval a lot more than Ronnie did, and think the Noval was an indeed an off-bottle. But then again, Ronnie and I disagreed on the quality of several Ports: really the first time that this has ever happened! It is (IMHO) also a sign of how hard it is to properly recognise the quality of so many young Ports in just one tasting!

The best VP of the tasting for me was the Fonseca '85 - even if it seemed to be a bit more mature than what I'm used to with this Port, it was amazing again: I gave it 96 points. Thanks Monique, for bringing this!

Perhaps I should add that these VPs were all decanted about 36 hours before serving - and I think that was a good idea: only two or three in the line-up were really closed. Oh, and all Ports were tasted single blind, and scores were given before the wines were revealed at the end of the tasting.

The best Ports, based on the average scores of all those participating (rated on a 20-point scale):

Taylor's 18,5
Dow 18,4
Warre 18,3
Niepoort 18,1
Pocas 17,9
Quinta do Vesuvio 17,6
Quinta do Crasto 17,4
Graham 17,1
Quarles Harris 17,1
Smith Woodhouse17,1
Croft 17,0
Cockburn 16,9
Kopke 16,8
Vista Allegre 16,4
Quinta de Roriz 16,4
Gould Cambell 16,4
Quinta do Portal 15,9
Dalva 15,2
Quinta do Noval 15,1
Silval 14,7
Ramos Pinto 14,7
Burmester 14,2
Martinez 14,1

Finally, a big THANK YOU to Mathieu and Tineke for hosting this tasting, to ICEP for providing the stemware (the official IVDP-glass), and the many producers who were kind enough to send bottles of '00 and / or '03!

Mike Kerr · Post by **Mike Kerr** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:06 pm

36 hours for decanting for a tasting like this seems excessive, doesn't it?

Mike.

Ronald Wortel · Post by **Ronald Wortel** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:09 pm

Not at all. If ports from e.g. 1977 gain from at least 12 hours of air, you can imagine that these babies can use all the air they can get. But, these ports did not spend 36 hours in a decanter. They were decanted, and almost directly poured back into the bottle.

Steven Kooij · Post by **Steven Kooij** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:11 pm

I don't think so, Mike. We had just one afternoon to taste the wines - following their development over several days was not an option. To spend an afternoon tasting shut-down Ports wasn't to appealing either.

Perhaps to clarify: the bottles were decanted, poured back into the bottle and then stoppered before tasting them: they did NOT spend 36 hours in a decanter.

Steven Kooij · Post by **Steven Kooij** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:12 pm

Ronnie was faster than me... 8)

Mike Kerr · Post by **Mike Kerr** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:26 pm

Ah, ok, I misunderstood!

Thanks for the clarification!

Mike.

xxxMonique Heinemans · Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:45 pm

As I'm not such a great taster as Steven, Ronnie and lady Roots are,
my tastingnotes are probably less representative.
But, I did love to attend this tasting, and for who wants to know,
my winners of this day were, rated at a 20 point scale:

Taylor's 19 (HUGE wine! A mouth full!)
Warre 18,5 (somewhat softer, already very tastfull)
Dow 18,5 (Huge wine, lots of dark fruit)
Pocas 18 (Didn't give it away, but very promissing)
Cockburn 18 (Lots of tanins, but also fresh)
Niepoort 17 (Lovely fruit, tanins)
Churchills 16,5 (Lots of tanins, to keep)
Vesuvio 16 (Very concentrated, ripe fruit)

The Fonseca seemed to be corked. To be honest: I didn't taste it, and with me some others . I rated the Fonseca pretty high, for me it was a winner.

The others got 16 points or less. But the overall quality was very high.
I think this is a very promissing year.

Lovely tasting!

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 1:01 am

Ronnie, Steven and Monique,

All I can say is thank you. I waited a few days watching this thread and hoping that there would be lots more commentary by others who did not attend. I'm quite surprised that with Ports from a recent vintage, that has received lots of praise, that there was not more interest in discussing your great thread!?!?!?!?

Sounds like a fantastic tasting and I appreciate you explaining the decanting regimen which helps to put things in perspective.

I think you probably had 3 corked bottles as the Noval most likely was corked too, which would bring the total to just about 10% which is a shame. I had a similar outcome at a local Port tasting with even less bottles recently. Frustrating but thankfully, none were from my cellar. I certainly have opened some from my cellar too though. I hate when that happens. :twisted:

The only 2 surprises in reading the posts above were the results of the Vesuvio and Niepoort. I have had each between 6 and 10 times and find these two wines, stunning. Maybe it is just me ... or how they've begun to shut down/evolve. I guess I should have been there with the "contrarian vote."

I would also like to commend you three individuals. People here may not realize it when reading your posts, but I assume that English is not your primary language (like some others on this Forum too). Coming from The Netherlands, your ability to communicate your thoughts in very descriptive English writing is quite impressive. Anyway who is pretty fluent in another language should realize the difficulty in describing subtle nuances as in wine TNs. I applaud your efforts and hope others also appreciate your achievements.

I studied French for many years and at my sharpest, could never write as well.

On a side bar, Monique: I have also put the Fonseca at the top of the 2000 vintage, (sometime prefrering the Niepoort when tasted side-by-side).

Steven Kooij · Post by **Steven Kooij** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:41 am

Thanks for your kind words, Roy! Your compliment on our use of the English language is much appreciated.

I must admit that I was a bit disappointed by how both the Niepoort and the Vesuvio showed this day. I've tasted the Vesuvio only once before (on release), and liked it a lot more. I've had the pleasure of drinking the Niepoort a couple of times (both from 750 as well as from 375), and this was the first time it did no show its usual extravagance.
The Noval was odd...I doubt it was corked, but it was definitely off: it is in my personal top-5 of the 2000 Vintage. A shame, but I'm glad I've got some bottles in the cellar!

Ronald Wortel · Post by **Ronald Wortel** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:38 am

Thanks for the compliments Roy. I suspect that the Niepoort is closing down at the moment. I've tasted it a couple of times before, and always liked it a lot. This was my first taste of the Vesuvio 2000, but I definitely feel like it was closed. That's why I refrained from scoring that particular port. I was very much disappointed that the Fonseca was corked. In good shape, it is my favorite of the vintage.

Jan-Tore Egge · Post by **Jan-Tore Egge** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:07 pm

I must confess I'm a bit surprised at some of the scores, though people may of course have different preferences. The possibility of corked wines apart, are some 2000's starting to close down? (I haven't tasted many recently.)

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:25 am

My next newsletter will have you understand why at times you don't see me post for a few days. There are more tasting notes than I care to count in this next issue (a good amount in the last as well) with a few from 2000, none of which were close ... although that was from Oct. There is a mini vertical of 2001, 1980 and 2003s too.

I don't normally see VPs shut down 3 years after release but I guess it might be possible. I find that they usually can begin at six years after and frequently at eight ... but those are just my impressions and your mileage may vary.