For The Love Of Port

THIS IS A SMALL OFFERING BY A FINE VENDOR IN CHICAGO

They are closed for business until tomorrow, so you'll have to wait for Wed. a.m. Central time.

THE CHICAGO WINE COMPANY - 630-594-2972

ASK FOR SIMON AND MENTION .. FOR THE LOVE OF PORT, SO WE'LL GET THE LOVE AGAIN IN THE FUTURE WHEN HE HAS SOMETHING GREAT TO OFFER.

Vintage Port - Supplier Inventory Clearance


We know the beginning of July isn't typically the best time of year for a Port email but we can't control when our suppliers want to offer us a couple of deals. Today we are pleased to offer two vintages of Gould Campbell Port. First, we have their 1997, a spectacular vintage for Port, as well as their 1980 which is showing some very nice characteristics of age and drinking well now. We expect these to move fast so we urge you to do the same if you are interested.

1997 Gould Campbell, Vintage Port (750ml)

Wine Spectator - 91 Points

$ 29.50 per Bottle (750ml)

Delivery: In Stock

"91 out of 100...Rich aromas of plum and fresh stem, with a leafy undertone. Intense strawberry. Full, lightly sweet, chewy and solid. This has grip. Juicy. Lots going on. Youthful and structured. Beautiful. '77/'85/'97 blind Port retrospective. Best after 2008. 1,100 cases imported." - WS



1980 Gould Campbell, Vintage Port (750ml)

Wine Spectator - 86 Points
Wine Advocate - 85 Points

$ 39.50 per Bottle (750ml)

Delivery: In Stock

"86 out of 100...Balanced, with lots of potential for aging. Deep ruby, with a cassis and tomato nose, full-bodied, with full tannins and rich, velvety, sweet cassis flavors on the finish." - WS

"85 out of 100...My experience with this house is limited. One rarely sees this brand stateside. The 1980 is rich, full-bodied, well-colored, and complex." - WA





GOOD LUCK TO YOU GUYS!!!!

Just curious to see if folks bought in to these wines. I think the prices are great and hopefully the scores did not deter you because I think these are more solid then given credit for.

For example, read WA (Parker's) actual words of the 1980 and then PLEASE tell me how that sentence translates to 85 points? Simple, his score came after Sucklings and he did not want to be that far off.

Which, if true, is yet more evidence that taste tests by professionals should be done blind.

Remove any possible "mystique" of the shipper. Remove any possible influence from previous reviews. It's the only way to get a truely and fully honest evaluation.

But at any rate, isn't a rating of 85 supposed to be pretty darn good? Unless my memory is off, isn't 90+ is supposed to be superior/excellent and 95+ supposed to be truely epic? Lacking anything further, "rich, full-bodied, well-colored, and complex" sounds like a very solid, very good Port to me. But not anything particularly special. To get much higher than 85 I'd expect to see a more elaborate description than that. /shrug

You can be sure that there was more to the review than that. Maybe I am wrong. I don't read Parker and Parker hasn't rated Port since 2000 VPs and won't ever again. He also does not believe that labels influence him. He just about never tastes blind.

In my tasting groups or whenever I have rated wines for a cask sample vintage evaluation, I do blind tasting. When I am taking a note while at a tasting or in Portugal, often times that is not possible. So you are best to drink and make up your own mind as a consumer. Then if you want to see who your palate aligns with ... buy a few wines a critic has rated and see if you agree with their assessments or not. Then you know if that person can be trusted to reco wines for you that you have not had or ... have yet to be released. I always encourage people to read as many sources as they can find when investing their coin in wines from a new vintage. Lots of opinions out there ... everyone has one. Mine suits my palate just fine. However, I certainly don't think that everyone is looking for the same characteristics I love in Port. It is all relevant.

Roy Hersh wrote:He also does not believe that labels influence him. He just about never tastes blind.

The French didn't believe that labels influenced them, either, until the Judgement of Paris in 1976 when several California wines were tasted blind against French wines and won. Until then they had always lost in head-to-head tastings which were not done blind.

So... sorry Mr. Parker, but I don't believe you. Even if it is only subconscious, you are affected by prior knowledge of the label/wine.

I do agree with you, though, Roy in that the best way to "rate" a critic is to taste the wines yourself and find a critic who agrees with you. Because after all, it's not the rating of a wine that matters but whether or not you like it!

Although Parker rated generally declared VP for many years, he had never been to Gaia or the Douro from what I've been told. I am not 100% sure this is accurate, but was told by owners of two well-known Port companies.