What's with 1995?

[Jay Hack]

I occasionally cruise auctions for Port lots and there are a few lots - 1995 Fonseca Guimaraens, 1995 Taylor Quinta de Vargellas, 1995 Quinta do Noval - that are currently available at prices that look very reasonable. I know nothing about them, and frankly could use help on the simple issue of what the vineyard designations mean. In the only reference I could find, Steve Tanzer rated the Taylor 94 pts, and he's not know for being generous with his points. Can anyone shed some light on these?

[Moses Botbol]

I picked up a half case of '95 Dow and tried one before its 20 year cellaring and I thought it had some potential. Everybody talked up the 94's so much that anything slightly less than that was overlooked. At the time time I tried the 95 Dow, I had a 95 Warre's LBV, and the Dow was clear winner to all that had both...

I know comparing an LBV and Vintage is not the best, but they both came in around the same price... I bought some 95 Taylors too, but did not try them.

I think if you are planning on aging them, go for it. As for drinking now, they do taste more intense than the LBV's of the same year, so I assume it is actually better juice in the Vintages...

[Steve Culhane]

I think 95's are a fantastic value. If not for 94, I think there would have been a lot more declared. Those I've had:

Taylor Vargellas - 94 pts
Smith Woodhouse Madalena - 92
Quinta do Noval - 92
Vesuvio - 92
Graham Malvedos - 90
Dow Bomfin - 88

Steve

[Marc J.]

The 95's are a great choice for medium-term drinking. The current prices are reasonable and the wines are of very high quality. Since the fantasic 94's were already in barrel there was NO chance of a general declaration in 95 -otherwise I think you would of seen quite a few additional shippers declare.

[Al B.]

I agree with the general view that is being given here - the 1995 Vintage Ports look as though they are becoming one of the overlooked vintages that will represent good value for money. In my experience, they are generally not as good as their counterparts from 1994, but since 1994 is so good then they are probably being unfairly overlooked. I have a fair representation of 1995's in my cellar (approximately 5% of the ports) for 15-20 year aging and the best will probably age happily for longer than that.

Below is a list of the 1995 ports that I have seen shipped (and points where I have actually tasted the wines):

Quinta da Agua Alta (Churchill)
Quinta do Bomfim (Dow) (89)
Champalimaud
Quinta do Crasto Traditional LBV (87)
Quinta da Eira Velha (Taylor)
Fonseca Guimaraens (91-92)
Malvedos (Grahams)
Offley Boa Vista
Quinta do Noval
Quinta da Passadouro (Niepoort)
Petre (Niepoort second label) (88)
Quarles Harris (87)
Ramos Pinto
Quinta da Roeda (Croft)
Quinta da Val da Figueira
Quinta de Vargellas (Taylor) (88-92)
Quinta do Vesuvio (89)
Warre Traditional LBV

Alex

[Roy Hersh]

the 1995 Vintage Ports look as though they are becoming one of the overlooked vintages that will represent good value for money.

Actually, I agree with everything written in posts above. But considering the quality and that a few select 1995s are as good if not better than their 1994 counterparts, (Ferreira and Martinez's Eira Velha for example) my take has been for years that the 1995 vintage was, is and will continue to be an extraordinary value. It was quite inexpensive (except the Quinta de Vargellas Vinha Velha) from the release and has not gained much in terms of price increases over the years.

Dig and grab what you can from this vintage that should be consumed while you continue to allow the 1994s to cellar and reach maturity.

[Todd Pettinger]

I have seen the Malvedos 95 and I believe 96 side by side in a local store. Radically different prices, that actually threw me off from the purchase of the bottle of 95.

Is this wine drinking well right now? (for those that have tried it) and would you recommend one over the other? I guess I would also wonder what an optimal window would be for something like this, an off-vintage, 2nd label? 10 years? 15 yrs? 20? Or would it be closer to a true declared VP, where 30 years is the generally-accepted medium for when the corks should start?

Todd

[Roy Hersh]

Todd,

Good questions. It is hard to generalize the SQVP & 2nd label windows for drinkability. The vintage and producer (of course) are the two key factors but even from the same producer, different vintages normally possess structural components which are not the same. Even more different are the various producers within the same vintage. Their fruit is grown and picked differently ... not to mention the winemaking and makeup of grapes that goes into the blend.

Now to offer a generalization

With just about any Vintage Port these days, (speaking of SQVP & 2nd labels here) you can rest assured that 20 years is no problem. That does not mean you have to wait that long, just that they will still drink well at 20. Depending on the structure (acid/tannins) and the way the wine was crushed and vinified etc., can change this dramatically. But I have never seen ANY vintage Port from a reputable producer that could not survive until 20. Some can go as long as many Vintage Ports and 2003 Quinta do Portal's Plus, is such a VP just to name one 2nd label that can go the distance.

[Todd Pettinger]

Thanks Roy,
I didn't think that crushing methods would really play that much of a difference in the end result of the wine, but I as I read more about it, it becomes apparent that the different methods (usually undertaken at different temperatures) can produce these changes in fermentation period, amount of acidity, etc. Perhaps even the amount of tannin that actually is able to get integrated into the port is affected by the method of crushing, before it is thrown into the pipes for its short nap.

[Jay Powers]

The 1995 Quinta do Crasto is a very nice port and although it will mature more and get better, it is also a nice port to drink currently. And as suggested above for the other 95's, a real bargin.

Jay

[Roy Hersh]

Perhaps even the amount of tannin that actually is able to get integrated into the port is affected by the method of crushing, before it is thrown into the pipes for its short nap.

Todd,

Actually this is one of the key dynamics of the crushing process and it has the ability to totally change the drinking window of a VP. Some utilize this as a means to create a wine that is meant to be approachable earlier, and that is why they've intentionally created a 2nd label. Examples of this are Niepoort's Secundum VP, Sandeman's Vau Vintage Port and Quinta do Portal Plus. All were "designed" to drink earlier, while their "classic" VPs are meant to go the long haul in the cellar. They normally produce both in the same generally declared vintage year. This further muddles what we've been talking about the difference between the generally declared vs. regular SQVP/2nd label declarations, but I am really not trying to confuse you ... but add to what you've already picked up.

More to the point, the tannin structure of the Port (and to a lesser degree the acidity) is the spinal column which allows the Port to stand tall and improve with age. Yes there are other factors that come into play, but without the tannins ... it just ain't happening. So tannins become a huge factor to the viticultural and oenological sides of the grape cluster.

Tannins are normally a very natural structural component of red wines (AND some whites ... but let's stick to Port ). For others who are reading and may not know this: tannins are derived from the grape cluster's stems, the skins of the grapes and their seeds (aka "pips"). Here is where the crushing method comes into play!

A savvy Portmaker knows that by "manipulating" the tannins, he can make a Port drink earlier or later. Heck, there are even very expensive powered tannins that can be added (I am not sure as to how legal this is though from an IVDP standpoint) but this is a very seldom used practice.

So by de-stemming a cluster of grapes or reducing the amount of skin contact, or using gentler crushing methods which tend to break up the pips less (rather than a vigorous method which in turn will add tannins to the whole) you then have real control over the tannins and can soften the wine to whatever level you seek.

Then again, mother nature has a lot of say in that matter. The skin to juice ratio of a grape varies depending on the growing season. The more heat and sunlight the more concentrated the grapes become with thicker skins. This density translates into richer and riper tannins, which ultimately can be controled by the aforementioned methods when being brought to the winery after picking.

To show how very minor vineyard practice tweaks can modify this (for the winemaker's benefity) ... just think of the difference it makes to a grape cluster in terms of nutrients when the surrounding shade bearing leaves are plucked late in the growing season to provide some last minute sun exposure. Also by removing some clusters from the vine (called "green harvesting") provides more nourishment to the remaining clusters. The physiological ripening can be totally changed in just these small ways (and there are many other) but I am now getting way too far ahead of myself, as this is a truly fascinating topic that I rarely get to discuss.

Tannins are a most integral part of the Vintage Port plan and their importance in terms of longevity of our favorite drink should be understood. I hope this helps provide a most basic look behind the scenes of a grape and its tannins. Although the extraction of color (anthrocyanins) is very important in Port production, it does not come close imo, to the greater good that tannins present in the life of any VP. Certainly "color" can be modified in many ways too, but that is another long story.

Thank you for continuing to ask great questions, sharing this type of information is why I set up the FORUM to begin with.

[Michael M.]

Todd,

Good questions. It is hard to generalize the SQVP & 2nd label windows for drinkability.

Roy (and others), so, what would you say about Fonseca Guimaraens 1995 (R. Mayson:"pick of the vintage")? Is this a good one, worthy to cellar for a decade or two?

Thanks.

Cheers
Michael

[Todd Pettinger]

but I am now getting way too far ahead of myself, as this is a truly fascinating topic that I rarely get to discuss.

…

Certainly "color" can be modified in many ways too, but that is another long story.

Roy, I am glad you took the time to go into detail on these things. I do appreciate the time which you dedicate to education of the masses (or at least me) - i truly am learning a great deal - including the fact that I have a lot to learn before buying a vineyard and pretending to be a winemaker!

I hope this helps provide a most basic look behind the scenes of a grape and its tannins.

Much more than basic (at least to me) and if this type of explanation is simply "basic" to you, then I am scared to find out what kind of knowledge you can TRULY transfer once we eventually meet and sit down with a couple of glasses (bottles) of Port. You could likely talk my ear off (and I'd be a fascinated audience, believe me… this kind of thing really piques my interest

Todd

[Al B.]

Roy (and others), so, what would you say about Fonseca Guimaraens 1995 (R. Mayson:"pick of the vintage")? Is this a good one, worthy to cellar for a decade or two?

Michael,

If I could find some of these at a reasonable price, I would certainly buy them for 10-20 year aging. I have had this wine on a couple of occasions recently and have really enjoyed it, rating it at 91 and 92 points.

Alex

[Michael M.]

Alex,

thank you for your kind reply. Sounds good. I already have some bottles of Fonseca Guimaraens 1995. But I did not taste this port so far. I should do that occasionally and buy perhaps some more.

I did not find much on this board but your very interesting TN from 25.05.06 Is this such a rare one?:o :?

Fonseca Guimaranes 1995 is available here for 35 EUR or so. Seems to be a fair price for a 12 years old Fonseca Guimaraens Vintage Port. 2004 came for more than 40 EUR if I remember correctly.

Cheers,
Michael

[Jay Hack]

. . . Fonseca Guimaranes 1995 is available here for 35 EUR or so. Seems to be a fair price . . .

If 35 Euros is a fair price, then I guess I blew it when I only won the Taylor at auction and let the Fonseca go to someone else who upped my first bid. I could have gotten the Fonseca for less than $35 per bottle for 6 bottles.

[Michael M.]

. . . Fonseca Guimaranes 1995 is available here for 35 EUR or so. Seems to be a fair price . . .

If 35 Euros is a fair price, then I guess I blew it when I only won the Taylor at auction and let the Fonseca go to someone else who upped my first bid. I could have gotten the Fonseca for less than $35 per bottle for 6 bottles.

Just my 2Cents: A Vintage Port, 12years old, from a first- class- port-house, with probably a nice future, according to Mr. Richard Mayson "pick of the vintage", from a solid and maybe even unterrated vintage. Perhaps this could be an interesting combination for 35 EUR or less.

Cheers
Michael

[Marc J.]

I recently purchased a number of bottles of the '95 Fonseca at $40.00 a bottle, so I'd say that 40 euros a bottle was a fair price.