As we begin to see the pandemic receding in our rearview mirrors, I thought it would be good to revisit this article (which appeared in the FTLOP Newsletter) as a reminder that if there is a will, there is always a way... to drink Port with friends. - Roy Hersh.

Article and photos by Glenn (“Dr. Tawny”) Elliott © December 2020

As 2020 comes to a close, we are still dealing with a worldwide pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This has kept most of us away from friends for the majority of the year, as social distancing has been our primary means of keeping the pandemic under control until a vaccine can be developed and produced. Thankfully that time is now within reach and we all hope to be able to meet with friends, talk, laugh, and enjoy some Port together next year.

But that is still some months away, so for now we need to be creative in order to indulge our passion for Port. The Sammamish Port Club has only met in person once this year, and that was right before the pandemic-induced lockdowns began. We then gave Zoom a try and it was very successful, so as December approached, we made plans to hold our annual Holiday Party online also. This time, though, the tasting would be double blind!

The Planning

We scheduled the Holiday Party for the 2nd Saturday in December – the 8th – at 7:00 pm. Or at least that would be when the tasting would start. Our virtual tasting in May was a little bit easier to carry out because one person could do all of the decanting and distributing. For the Holiday Party though, everyone wanted to contribute. To do that, we would need a 2-stage process.

First, a sufficient number of the same 2-oz jars that we used in May were distributed to everyone in the club, so that each person could do their own decanting and pouring. The bottles were distributed during the week before the tasting, but the decanting and pouring all took place on Saturday morning. Each person determined when their Port needed to be opened and did so to ensure the best possible results.

Then the second step was for everyone to meet briefly in a parking lot, all wearing masks, in order to hand out the filled jars to each other. This was scheduled for 4:00 pm and took only 15 minutes, after which we all headed back home to have dinner before the tasting.

Stewart hosted the Zoom call, and we began gathering around 6:30 pm. Some had more appropriately themed setups than others!

Stewart’s setup for the Sammamish Port Club’s 2020 Holiday Party via Zoom
Photo credit: Stewart Todd

 

Glenn’s setup for the Sammamish Port Club 2020 Holiday Party via Zoom

 

To save you the eye strain, the 2 glasses on the left are Ramos Pinto branded glasses. The remaining 6 are branded with the IVDP logo. All are the official IVDP Port glasses designed by Portuguese architect Alvaro Siza. Most of the lodges in Vila Nova de Gaia sell these glasses branded with their logos.

The Tasting

The tasting was nearly double blind, meaning that no one knew what anyone else had contributed. We’d done no coordination, so we weren’t even sure that all the Ports were different! But based on color alone, it was clear that there were 2 Vintage Ports and 6 Tawny Ports. We ordered them by color under the assumption that a lighter-colored Vintage Port would be older than a darker one, and that a darker Tawny Port would be older than a lighter one.

As is our practice for mixed tastings, we tasted Vintage Port first from (presumed) oldest to youngest, then proceeded to Tawny Ports from (presumed) youngest to oldest. This order has been highly successful for us over the years, as it roughly orders the Ports by intensity and acidity.

As luck would have it, ordering by color kept both couples’ Ports together. This ended up being convenient because each pair of Ports was related, so they would be fun to taste side-by-side for the sake of comparison.

We tasted in pairs and revealed each pair once we had finished our notes, scores and discussion about the pair.

As is my practice for tastings when I want more detailed notes, I went through the entire lineup to do notes on the color, then back through again to do notes on the nose, and then did the tasting in flights. This takes longer (I did these 2 passes before we all joined the Zoom call) but it is worth it when I have the time available. I find that I get better color and notes on the aromatics, if I do them before I start drinking.

Tasting Notes

Flight #1 – Vintage Port

1970 Warre’s Vintage Port
Decanted for 3.5 hours prior to distribution
Color: Medium light garnet with some rusty orange and yellow near the rim. Clearly an old VP, but in another lineup its color might have fooled one into thinking it was a tawny. The amount of orange and rust near the rim was significant.
Nose: Soft and elegant. Light strawberry and some faint soft raspberry. Very much an “old VP” profile.
Palate: Tasty! The flavor profile was not as old as it looked and smelled, though it still showed some soft strawberry and red raspberry. Those fruits were complemented by some orange (some said Grand Marnier) and semi-tart cherry. The palate grew softer with time in glass, eventually feeling as old on the palate as it looked and smelled. Somewhat simple overall, but a very nice glass of Port.
Score: 91 points. I couldn’t come up with a guess for this, as it seemed like it could be anything from a 2nd or 3rd tier 1980 to a 1st tier 1960. I was surprised to learn this was a Warre’s, as I’m normally not that fond of their Vintage Ports due to alcohol heat. This bottle showed none of that and was very pleasant, though not particularly competitive for a 1970.

1983 Ramos Pinto Vintage Port
Decanted for 4 hours prior to distribution
Color: Medium to medium dark magenta and garnet. Not quite opaque in the center, but close. There was a lot of purple left in the color tone, but not enough to make you think it was a very young Port.
Nose: Dusty stone fruit compote – black cherry, plum, and some faint prune. Everything smelled very rich and purple, but it was not a strong in-your-face nose.
Palate: Clearly more youthful than the first Port, with subtle layers of the same stone fruits from the nose. This was an easy drinker, but it also had a slight edge to it that was almost (but not quite) bitter. There was a very nice note of chocolate on the finish. Excellent balance.
Score: 93 points. I guessed this might be a 1977 Gould Campbell. When it was revealed, I paged back through my notebook as I’d tasted this Port just 2 months earlier… and gave it the same score at that time. That instance was also blind. This is one of my favorite Ports from 1983 and it’s the deeper stone fruits on the nose and palate that make it appealing for me. I’ve given it higher scores in the past, so if these 2 recent bottles are indicative, it is possible that it’s time to start drinking them up.

Flight #2 – a pair of related Tawny Ports

When I did my color and nose passes, these two Ports seemed almost identical. So close that I was almost ready to say that they were in fact, the same; perhaps even from a magnum, but there was just enough of a richer note to the second one’s nose that I concluded that they must just be closely related.

1980 Porto Rocha Colheita (bottled 2002)

Color: Medium light tawny/caramel that yellows at the rim. There was also an orange-ish note in the fade to the rim, but no greening that I could see.
Nose: Something vaguely chemical or medicinal that smelled like a light or thin turpentine. The dominant fruit was grapefruit, though there were also underlying hints of lemon and lime. In this one (of the pair), the lime was a sharper/edgier note like key lime. After some time in glass, there was a faint hint of Play Doh.
Palate: Smooth and pleasant entry, followed by a note of sweet lime and then light caramel that was on its way toward butterscotch, but wasn’t quite there yet. Good acidity, but I didn’t feel like there was enough sugar to keep the acidity in balance. Close but not quite enough. The finish started out bare, then developed a very nice tart apple note that held on for a good length.
Score: 91 points. A little more sugar to balance the acidity would have raised it a point. The nose also held it back a bit as while the turpentine note faded, it never entirely went away for me.

1980 Kopke Colheita (bottled 2003)

Color: Medium light tawny/caramel that yellows at the rim. There was also an orange-ish note in the fade to the rim, but no greening that I could see. Yes, this color note is identical to the previous one. Visually I could not tell them apart in any way.
Nose: As above, something vaguely chemical or medicinal that smelled like a light or thin turpentine. Again, the dominant fruit was grapefruit with underlying hints of lemon and lime, but in this case it was just your garden variety grocery store lime. This glass had a dusty note that helped distinguish it from its flight-mate, as well as a faint note of caramel that provided needed depth and complexity. After some time in glass, there was also a faint hint of Play Doh in this Port.
Palate: Powerful, big acidity but with sugars to match and keep the acidity in balance. Some dried, tart pineapple as a citrus note. That made it faintly tropical, which reminded me of Andresen’s Tawny Ports. There was a somewhat deeper flavored caramel note here, but it was still fairly faint. The finish had an aftertaste of mandarin orange, or perhaps just the skin.
Score: 94 points. A rockin’ good tawny Port. This seemed to me to be on the brighter side of the Portuguese tawny style (more fruit driven, fewer nuts and wood notes) but I couldn’t conjure up a guess for the producer.
When she revealed the producers, Lisa told us that she hadn’t even realized that the bottling dates for these 2 bottles were only a year apart until she checked the bottles at the table. There was no hint of fade or decline due to bottle age in either bottle despite being bottled 18 and 17 years ago respectively, as the acidity in both was bright and tart.

Flight #3 – another pair of related Tawny Ports

Vista Alegre 40 Year Old White Port (bottled 2017)

Color: Medium to medium light tawny that yellows near the rim. Possibly some faint greening as well, which indicated to me that there was some old Port in this glass.
Nose: Light vinagrinho, vanilla, and some faint caramel. White cake icing.
Palate: Lightly tangy and lively with a dryish finish. Bright citrus that wasn’t identifiable to me. Good acidity that was just barely in balance.
Score: 93 points. This Port didn’t seem like a White Port in any way, and in fact no one at the tasting even mentioned that it might be a white. In retrospect perhaps the color could have been an indication? But it was a very slightly deeper tawny color than either of the 1980 Colheitas, so really even the color didn’t imply that it might be a white Port.

Vista Alegre 40 Year Old Tawny Port (bottled 2017)

Color: Medium tawny that yellowed near the rim. There was some definite greening near the rim as well, which made me think that this Port was even older than the previous one.
Nose: Sweet vinagrinho-like note. Something similar to a well-aged rum. This had a big nose that was much heavier and deeper than any of the previous tawnies. Lots of dried fruits with just a touch of vanilla and caramel, so it seemed like a very Portuguese style nose to me.
Palate: Big, rich, and somewhat tart. Huge acidity, but enough sugar to balance it out. Lots of wood notes like cedar and mahogany, which seemed incongruous based on the nose but tasted fantastic. Some of the vinagrinho and/or rum note on the nose could be tasted as well.
Score: 95 points. Easily my favorite of the flight, and it turned out to be my Port of the night as well. A fine showing for an often underrated producer that in fact makes one of the better lineups of Tawnies with an indication of age.

Flight #4 – 2 final unrelated Tawny Ports

1987 Kopke Colheita (bottled 2013)
This was actually 2 x 375ml bottles. 6 of us tasted the 1st bottle while Lisa and Amy tasted the 2nd. Since Vic had a glass of the 1st bottle and Lisa a glass of the 2nd, they each tasted both and said that they couldn’t tell a difference.
Color: Medium tawny that yellowed near the rim. There was a very faint red tint in the glass that went beyond just highlights. Faintly cloudy compared to the other tawnies in this lineup. Some sediment. This Port was actually slightly lighter in color than the previous, but we swapped them in the order so that the paired Ports could be together in flight #3.
Nose: Dominated by an odd note that didn’t quite seem like bottle stink but probably was. The nose in general was flat and stanky, but not so bad that it was off-putting. I kept going back to it trying to find something else, but there just wasn’t much there.
Palate: There was an odd harsh note on the palate as well that resembled chlorine. The palate wasn’t very well balanced, but tasted fine. It just wasn’t great and seemed somewhat disjointed without actually being off in any definable way. Both sugar and acidity seemed to be somewhat lacking, so while that particular balance was okay it was just kind of weak overall. There were normal tawny fruits – dried apricots, etc. – and also some caramel, but the overall impression was mostly lackluster.
Score: 89 points, which may have been generous. My score was similar to everyone else’s, though, so perhaps my notes were harsher than the actual experience with the Port. One of my guiding principles when scoring is how eager would I be to finish the glass, and would I want another? In this case I was happy to finish my glass so it clearly tasted fine, but I probably wouldn’t have asked for another (at some theoretical party) unless there was nothing else to drink. But I think it would have been worthy of another glass if there were no other options.

1964 Poças Colheita (bottled 2008)

Color: Medium to medium dark tawny with some brown notes and a distinct greenish-yellow rim. This was visually the oldest tawny in the tasting because of the brown tint and greening rim.
Nose: A sweet pine or evergreen note (blue spruce?) was followed by a lighter citrus note and some faint cedar backed by some other indistinct aromatic woods. Very aromatic and almost spicy. Some lemon, but you had to look for it.
Palate: Tart on entry with great acidity. Lower sugar than any of the previous Tawnies, but not in a way that seemed like a deliberately drier style of Port. It was fruity, but mostly citrus fruits so a more tart fruity profile. The wood notes from the nose reached the palate as well, particularly mahogany. Since this was the bottle that I opened I had a glass with dinner – steak – and it paired well because it cut through the steak’s fat very nicely.
Score: 92 points. If you like a drier, tarter profile to your Tawny Ports, you might like this Port more than I did. This bottle seemed to be in great shape and presented well, it just wasn’t my style.

Photo credit: Sandra Everingham

Conclusion

While not as much fun as a normal in-person tasting, doing tastings this way has proven to be a reasonably good substitute during the pandemic. A little bit of planning and pre-tasting effort allows us to continue sharing our Ports with each other and gives us all some very welcome social interaction.

For those interested, the distribution jars used are ULINE S-20558M 2 oz. wide-mouth glass jars with metal lids. The lids are advertised as being airtight, but at the very least they’ve proven to be spill-proof for Port. 2 oz (60 ml) of Port is pretty close to a normal tasting pour and allows for an easy 12 portions from a standard 750 ml bottle. We only needed 8 portions, so we each had some leftovers after the tasting.