For The Love Of Port

Taylor Vintage Port [1970]
*tasted blind knowing only that the Ports being served were from Fonseca or Taylor. between 7-8 hrs decant time.

Almost identical in colour to Port #1 there was elegance and complexity to this Port. A white pepper in the mid-palate had me immediately leading down the path to Taylor Fladgate. I stated after the first sip “if this is NOT a Taylor Fladgate, I will be shocked,” which raised a few eyebrows. Having sampled a great deal of Taylor Vintages a year ago with Roy, going back as far as 1963, I would have recognized the signature white/green pepper spiciness of Taylor.

The colour was just starting to include some bricking on the meniscus and the deep garnet red gave me the impression that this port was either the same age, or slightly fresher than Port #1. A well-maintained grip was present and alcohol and tannins seemed very well-integrated.

I guessed at this being either Taylor 1970 or 1977.

My score: 95 pts
(After 2 further hours, around midnight, the remainder of this Port was shared around the stragglers at the table and the white pepper notes had just about disappeared.)

This (these) was tasted blind on Feb 27, 2009 in a comparative tasting of 1970 Fonseca and 1970 Taylor – 3 different bottlings of each. The notes have been recorded with identification – but were made without knowledge of both the producer and bottler. For completeness the order of serving is also identified (labelled A through F). Each bottle was shared between 11 voting attendees. The notes are mine alone.
My conclusion overall. I preferred the Fonseca’s (as usual). However, the group had the Saccone & Speed bottling of Taylor easily top – but the 3 Fonseca’s took the next 3 spots. In my experience this is not unusual – the 70 Taylor has always seemed to me to have a Jekyll & Hyde character, with extreme variations between bottlings.


Taylor 1970 – Bottled (?) Saccone & Speed (UK) (Wine B)
NOTE: It is ‘unclear’ where this was actually bottled. The ‘genuine bottled Taylor’ (wine F; see below) was apparently “Bottled in Oporto and exclusively imported by Deinhard”. However this bottling DOESN’T say specifically where it was bottled – it says “Shipped for Saccone & Speed”. The label is slightly different than the ‘Bottled Oporto’ version, but uses the same font. The crest is also slightly different.

Mid-ruby colour – completely even through to edge.
On the nose somewhat subdued with a touch of spice at the end (cloves?).
Excellent ripe fruit, followed by soft tannins with the alcohol fully integrated. A long finish. As it sat in the glass the alcohol became a bit more obtrusive.
My #2 overall – I thought it was powerful enough to be Fonseca. But this was solidly the group #1 with 6 first-place votes.

Taylor 1970 – Bottled Gloag (UK- Scotland) (Wine E) (ullaged 1.5”)

I’ve had this before – and it was immediately apparent to me what this was, Much paler in colour – almost a tawny, with a bizarre olive rim (reminiscent of a sercial Madeira in appearance).
The aromatics ‘supported’ the Madeira theory, with oranges (blossom, not peel) being the dominant note.
On the palate no trace of Madeira! Simple, lacks complexity and a whiff of mothballs. Quite well balanced but just simple overall.
(And I’m still not sure why this wine has evolved the way it has – not oxidized particularly, despite the ullage, - my guess is some bacterial problem).
My #6. The group’s #6 – everybody placed this bottom.

Taylor 1970 – Bottled Oporto (Wine F)

Light ruby in colour – one of the lightest with a hint of browning on the rim. On the nose a little musty (leafy) but with honey aromas underneath.
On the palate sweet at first then acid took over with red fruits (as compared with the Fonseca’s which were mainly black fruits) and still tannin on the finish. With the still noticeable acid and tannin, woyul;d expect a good life still ahead, but the fruit may not hold on.
My #4. The group’s #5 – with nobody ranking this top.

The notes on the other 3 wines (70 Fonseca) are posted under that wine.

Alan,
Thanks for posting this. It is fun to see how they stacked up against themselves and each other.

the 70 Taylor has always seemed to me to have a Jekyll & Hyde character, with extreme variations between bottlings.

Funny you mentioned this as a few months ago I was speaking on the phone to another member and the subject of the 1970 Taylors came up. We talked about this very thing, as well as what it's life span would be and how it stacked up to its brother the Fonseca. The variability issue with some bottles being noticably hotter, some being simplier than others, and not being the powerhouse that the Fonseca was were all items that were discussed. I think storage issues has more to do with some variation than the wine itself and I often wonder if it wasn't the casks themselves that had some issues when transported that have led to what we now see. Granted it isn't a huge amount of variation, something someone probably wouldn't notice unless they've drunk a fair amount of from different cases and bottlers, but there none-the-less. It also isn't enough to deter me from continuing to buy bottles of this either, although I am very picky about the bottles history...as with any older wine. It still is a wonderful VP worth seeking out.

Hi Andy,
I bought this heavily - it was a birth year for a close relative so I stocked up on the 'bottled Oporto' within a few years of release (apparently I bought it in 1976 - an attendee at our tasting also bought it then). And I've found this variable within the same case - and mostly 'light' - as in sample F in my notes above.
I wonder if it was bottled 'by cask' - in which situation there might be significant variation - even without the transportation possibilities you speculate on.
But given the prices now - I'll still stick with Fonseca.