Andy Velebil wrote:Mahmoud Ali wrote:Richard Beeken wrote:Can't believe no has rushed to mention the glorious 1976 Guimaraens - beautiful, intense and drinking very, very well at the moment.
I have been away from home (and the forum) for quite sometime. Now, reading this post, my thoughts were the same as Richard's, disbelief that no one had mentioned the '76 Fonseca Guimaraens. I have tasted the '76 Guimaraens on a couple of occasions, once head to head with the '77 Fonseca at a tasting in Edmonton where I can honestly say that the Guimaraens appeared to be the younger, darker, and more youthful of the two. The representative who was pouring and said that the '77 Fonseca was the better of the two and would outlast the '76 Guimaraens appeared to me a weak and contrived argument, I was not convinced.
Cheers.......................Mahmoud.
Color of Port can be very deceptive. Just because the 1976 Guimaraens is darker doesn't make it better. If you understand why it's so dark, compared to any other VP out there, you soon realize something isn't quite right with it. Lets just say there is something else in it to give it that weird dark color and a strange (for VP) nose and taste.
That's a fair point Andy but I meant more than just the colour. Apart from the appearance, the '76 Guimaraens also tasted younger and more youthful than the '77 Fonseca. It has been a long time since I had the '76 but in the two occasions I've had it there appeared nothing wrong with it and neither was it sweet, a PX sherry quality was not something I detected.
What alarms me though is the supposition in several posts that the 1976 Guimaraens is adulterated. I went ot the Fonseca web site and this is what they had to say about the Guimaraens:
“
In certain years when there is no classic Fonseca Vintage Port, a Guimaraens Vintage Port may be made instead.
When Guimaraens Vintage Ports were first released in the 1930's they were made in the same years as the classic Fonseca Vintage Ports but blended from slightly less powerful components, much like the second wines of the Bordeaux châteaux.
Today Guimaraens Vintage Ports are made in years when the wines are more supple and early maturing and Fonseca in vintages producing bigger, more long lasting Ports.
Guimaraens Vintage Ports nevertheless share the origins, heritage and complex fruity style of the classic Fonseca vintages and are drawn from the produce of the same three estates. They differ only in that they are more approachable, ready to drink earlier and more accessibly priced.”
It seems clear that the Guimaraens started out as a second port made from the same components as the Fonseca. Later the Guimaraens came to be made when in years when Fonseca was not declared, again from the same estates as the Fonseca. This suggests that in both instances the Guimaraens is a selection made from the component ports that could be considered to go into a Fonseca were the quality sufficient for a declaration, either as a second wine or instead of a Fonseca declaratrion. To say that there is adulterated port in a Guimaraens is to suggest that there may be adulterated port in the Fonseca ports as well.
In the case of the 1976 Guimaraen, there was no Fonseca declaration that year so it would be safe to assume that the Guimaraens was made from the very best fruit of the vintage from their own estates. Also, I cannot see any reason why Fonseca would want to buy any additional port from other sources, especially in an undeclared vintage. Surely their own vineyards would provide a sufficient amount of quality port for the Guimaraens.
Here is my issue, if the ’76 Guimaraens is adulterated then whats to say the ’77 Fonseca isn’t adulterated, or any other vintage for that matter, whether Fonseca or Guimaraens. As an aside, If anything it is the ’75 Fonseca that should have been “adulterated.”
It seems to me that the late release of the 2001 Nacional can be instructive. In a separate post Roy provided a link to Christian Seely’s blog and there he said of the reason for the late release of the Nacional:
“
Quinta do Noval Nacional Vintage is always a powerful concentrated wine, but in its youth the 2001 was extremely backward and quite closed up, dense and very tannic. Since we had just declared and released the 2000 Nacional Vintage, we decided to lay down the 250 cases of Nacional Vintage 2001 that were produced and keep them back for release at a later date.
All great Vintage Port wines retain their youthfulness for a long time, but with Quinta do Noval Nacional Vintage this characteristic is exaggerated, so we have waited some years before releasing the 2001, which is still immensely youthful structured and powerful, but is now just beginning to reveal its enormous future potential.”
My point is that if a single vineyard in the undeclared 2001, in this case the Nacional, can produce a backward, structured, dense, and powerful port, then why couldn’t the same have taken place with the components that went into the Guimaraens in 1976. Just as the ’01 Nacional appears to be an outlier so too is the ’76 Guimaraens. Just my opinion.
Cheers ........................... Mahmoud.