Multi: 1985: Nacional, Noval, Warre, Dow, Calem, Royal Oporto …

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Saturday 17th March 2007: again chez mon père, a 1985 horizontal, consisting mostly of houses new to me (paperwork, more fancy-schmancy than that used the previous evening). Notes are even briefer: my enthusiasm for note-taking had clearly diminished. Present: JDAW MAW RAW APPW JRW RKA JFH MF SRG, and sort-of SVW.


• Noval Nacional 1985
Alas a bad bottle. This can be excellent (thread), but not this one. Plenty of liquorice, but the longer it sat in the glass the fouler it became. SRG’s worst port of the evening.

• Noval 1985
Supplied by the good offices of uncle tom following discussion in the thread entitled Wanted: 1985s. A fine bottle from this not-always excellent house-vintage pair, with flowers and mouth-filling length.

• Churchill’s 1985
Excepting an impressive sip of their 2003, this bottle from a low-cost case was my first go at Churchill’s. Dark dark red, a fine colour, nosing of cheese?, of fig? and (RAW) “cherries”. Very large, soft, long round berry fruit. Excellent mouth-feel. After much discussion MF correctly identified the fruit as lychee. An excellent port, of which — hurray! — I have another eleven bottles.

• Ramos Pinto 1985
Another maiden for me, also with the dark-red colour. A better nose than the Churchill’s, well-balanced fudge and cherries, and thick chocolate mouth-feel. Better nose than Churchill’s, marginally less excellent mouth-feel.

• Calem 1985
Smells of mint liqueur! Doesn’t smell of port at all. Tastes refreshingly minty, though later I wrote “annoyingly minty”. Maybe a VP for a summer afternoon?

• Royal Oporto 1985
More novelty: pinky, and pale for its age. Smelt of a chemistry lab, and tasted terrible. RAW: “thin, acid, sour, awful”, and he wasn’t wrong. My other bottle was moved to my step-mother’s cooking rack.

• Smith Woodhouse 1985
Red, slightly pink, smelling of leaves or (JFH) “grass”. Rather weak, but not short. Nicely described by RAW as “clean, well balanced, weak”.

• Warre 1985
Mid-red, with a smell of strawberry (not quite ripe strawberry perhaps). Great length, large, though still tight and need more time. I liked JFH’s word “thorough”.

• Dow 1985
Dark red, with a lot of alcohol then a lot of fruit. Imperfectly melded. A hint of mint (it is Dow), JFH suggesting “salty”.

• Sandeman 1985
Mid-red, long and full, though with a slightly sour ending that became more prominent with the passage of time.

• Andresen 1985
Alcoholic, and little else. Thin; sugar; quick; harmless.

• Messias 1985
Known throughout the evening as “Naughty Boy” (do you really have to ask? Messias = Messiah = “Now, you listen here! He’s not the Messiah. He’s a very naughty boy!”). My notes said only that the aroma was terrible, but that the taste wasn’t as bad as advertised (as the “worst port” in the thread entitled Messias 85).

• KWV 1985 (Ko-öperatiewe Wijnbouwers Vereniging of South Africa)
Rough. Rough. Someone said “the back end of sellotape”, presumably meaning the sticky side.

• Napa Valley Port Cellars 1985
As with my previous TN of this Californian, not liked.

Conclusions.
1. Fourteen is too many, especially on the third consecutive evening of port tastings.
2. Taylor (from the previous day), Churchill, Warre, Dow, Ramos Pinto and (surprisingly) Noval: yes.

[Tom Archer]

No Graham? No Fonseca?

Oh well, at least I don't see any references to the dreaded '85 VA - or was that the Calem mint liqueur in disguise?

I tackled a Calem some time ago and found it very impressive.

Overall, for a vintage that should now be in it's heyday, the '85's don't seem to be setting the world on fire - it must have impressed the shippers at the outset to get a general declaration just two years after the previous one, but since then it seems to have slowly fallen from grace..

Tom

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

No Graham? No Fonseca?

Fourteen was too many. I have Graham, Fonseca, Croft, Souza, Feist, and will use them another day.

Edit: and Martinez.

[Roy Hersh]

I may still have another domestic port from '85 but will have to check in the cellar. Had it for years but we may have cooked with it in our famous wild mushroom bread pudding with port reduction. If I come across it, I'll let you know.

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

… domestic

“domestic”? Is that, like, cooking port?

[Tom Archer]

I think he means US made - he should have put the word port in inverted commas

- however, 'cooking' is an appropriate description...

Tom

[dave leach]

not a ringing endorsement for the maligned 85 vintage. as one who owns many 85's, is this as good as it gets? i would hope the upper tier of fonseca, taylor and graham might save this vintages' reputation?
i sure hope so!

dave

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Taylor we liked on the previous evening; G and F not tested. But most of the lesser houses not showing well.

[Dave Johnson]

Compared to my experiences with Dow 85, your review is positively glowing.

[Jay Powers]

I hate to sound like a broken record, but......

The notes seem to imply that the Warres was found to be quite good, which is what I have found personally. If the Warres, and often touted Grahams and Fonseca, (and I personally like the Dow as well) are all pretty good, is the vintage a bad one?

Will the Warres last another 50 years? Maybe not, but it's nice for drinking now in my eye. The Fonseca and Grahams may well last till their 50th year or even beyond. Does it have the consistancy of the 1994 vintage? No, but few do.

Jay

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

I agree with Jay. It isn’t a 5-star vintage that well be fondly remember many decades hence, à la 1927. For the good houses it’s a four-star vintage that will provide entirely satisfactory port for much of the centre of my life — from now (aged 38) until post-retirement.

[Andy Velebil]

Jay is right, '85 was a decent year. For the most part, most 85's are not blockbusters, but are very good mid-term agers that are drinking well at the moment. Sometimes people write off a vintage because the "Major" labels don't produce spectacular wines. However, that does not mean every producer made a bad wine.

[Todd Pettinger]

I have a bottle of '85 Warres, it was in fact, my first bottle of VP ever purchased. I am still a Vintage Port virgin but intend to change that very quickly.

Here is a question for all who have drank at least one glass of VP and therefore have more experience with it than I - should I save the '85 for a few more years (as it sounds like it will be fully mature in another few years? or should I consume it now?

Please note that I am young and within a tight budget. Purchases of VP is not something that the wife approves of on a regular basis. One day I'll bring her thinking around, but for now, the odd VP that I can get my hands on and AFFORD is few and far between.

As a note, I have sourced out three bottles at a local establishment of a '77 - can't remember the house - I was thinking of buying at least two of these, as '77 was the first generally-declared Vintage after my birth year of '76. They come with a very steep price tag though (for me - $144 Cdn is steep!) and I am wondering if one of these would make a decent b-day present to myself with the 2nd stored for a few more years, perhaps until my 40th rolls around?

Thanks for any and all advice!

Todd

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Warre 1985 is a lovely drink now. You are not wasting it, nor drinking prematurely. Drink and enjoy.

I reckon it will be slightly better in ½ a decade. If you have something else to drink now, drink that — you should be consuming your 1970s and 1963s. But if you haven’t, drink the 1985s and love them.

[Alan C.]

Tom,

I'm no expert, and I wont be giving advise on any of your questions bar one.
If you haven't got a special occasion coming up in the next few months...In the next few days, pick a quiet evening, when you've got a few hours to yourself...AND OPEN THAT BOTTLE!!!!
So you cant have Vintage Port that often. Join the Club. But to have not tasted it, when all indications suggest your going to love it , well make a neat pile of all your clothes...and dive head first into that Warres!
I'll let you other guys mop up on the technical points.

Alan

[Al B.]

I don't think there's anything I can add - the Warre '85 will be lovely right now, really enjoyable.

My advice on the '77s - find out what they are and then ask us again. We'll be able to give you more specific thoughts when we know what it is.

Alex

PS - welcome to the fold of all things port. But be warned that you are only a few steps away from the obsession that is gluing your port corks back together when they fall apart as you remove them from the bottle. Especially that cork from the first ever VP bottle that you open ....

[Todd Pettinger]

I posted the '77 stuff in a different topic - they ended up being '77 Smith Wooodhouse and of questionable storage/provenance. I am hoping to find out more info on the storage details later tonight after work is done. The manager of the store is apparently going to be in, so I'll have a chance to find out just where/how they have been stored and how long they have beem standing upright on the bloody shelf

Glueing corks back together huh? I'll have to search on that topic as I'm sure I'll run into it... and it would suck if it was on my very first bottle of VP. :)

Ah well, it can't be entirely easy, now can it??

And I think I know what you mean of the "obsession." I have found myself reading through posts and nodding more and more often as Alan C, Andy V and yourself (among others) make posts on the different things. And of course I find myself jealous of the fact that I am the VP virgin still

We'll rectify THAT quick enough though!

[Jay Powers]

The Warres 85 is very nice right now. Will it be better in 5 years? Maybe, but to be honest I don't know. Will it be better in 20 years? I'm pretty sure it will not.

So enjoy it now! It's a pretty nice and also pretty cheap introduction to a fairly mature vintage port. For maturity and taste to value, it's hard to beat!

Jay

[Luc Gauthier]

I have a bottle of '85 Warres, it was in fact, my first bottle of VP ever purchased. I am still a Vintage Port virgin but intend to change that very quickly.

Here is a question for all who have drank at least one glass of VP and therefore have more experience with it than I - should I save the '85 for a few more years (as it sounds like it will be fully mature in another few years? or should I consume it now?

Please note that I am young and within a tight budget. Purchases of VP is not something that the wife approves of on a regular basis. One day I'll bring her thinking around, but for now, the odd VP that I can get my hands on and AFFORD is few and far between.

As a note, I have sourced out three bottles at a local establishment of a '77 - can't remember the house - I was thinking of buying at least two of these, as '77 was the first generally-declared Vintage after my birth year of '76. They come with a very steep price tag though (for me - $144 Cdn is steep!) and I am wondering if one of these would make a decent b-day present to myself with the 2nd stored for a few more years, perhaps until my 40th rolls around?

Thanks for any and all advice!

Todd

Todd , what are you planning to eat with your port ?
May I suggest the following : Blue cheese , pigeon breasts wrapped in bacon and last but not least peanut butter . . .
My better half doesn't get my kean interest in the wonderful world of Port . It's a delicate balancing act between Port and our two children ( daughter 5 yr and son 3yr ) .

[Tom Archer]

Y' know, you really need some counselling over this peanut butter fetish..

..really, it's HORRID :x ..

..honest!!

Tom