For The Love Of Port

After all the fun at our offline the previous night, it was time for Roy and I to get down to some serious FTLOP business. In true business like fashion Roy cracked this open to make the work a little easier

Decanted about 9 hours. The color was about as dark as you could get without being squid ink. Very young scents of plums, mocha, and some faint eucalyptis tree leafs. The palate was punishing at first. Huge tannins and acidity that started out so mouth puckering it was hard to drink. That slowly changed as it sat in decanter and the tannins finally turned very chalky, making it much easier to drink at this young stage of its life. After the huge tannins came this instant full bodied explosion of blueberries, chocolate, cocoa powder, and an incredibly long finish. This is one of those VP's that will probably out live me. While I would not recommend openning these for another 10+ years, unless you have plenty to spare, if you do then be sure to decant it at least 24-36 hours in advance. 98+ points
03/08/08

Thanks for the note.
I won't be touching mine for awhile based on it.

This note is extracted from a Blind Tasting on 29 May 2009 of 6 wines. The tasting compared Taylor, Fonseca Warre’s 1994 and 1997 vintages. All came from the same cellar and were decanted about 2 hours before the tasting. The tasting notes are mine, but there was also a group ranking (9 tasters).
No specific notes on colour, as all were similar – deep ruby (although the 94’s were slightly deeper in colour than the 97’s).

1994 Taylor (poured as wine B)
Corked! Wet leaf on nose. No structure, alcohol separate.
Everybody’s ranking 6th.

A total shame on being corked Alan...this is a beauty for sure

So, I guess the '94 Taylor is the real deal! Good to hear; not that I own any... :help:

I managed to snag two magnums, one of which was a real steal ($200), and I plan to let them lie in my wine fridge for a couple of decades!

As I recall we had this at the 2009 Port Gala, too, didn't we? Sadly without looking up my note I do not remember how it showed.

Yes, we did have it (I brought it) - but I couldn't find my notes when I posted above. However, have now found them (although I don't seem to have recorded much):

Tasted Jan, 2009 in Seattle
Black colour (the light was much brighter for the above note, where I recorded dark ruby).
On the nose, rich ripe plums (but no nuances).
Fierce tannins on the palate with very high acid.
I gave it a relatively low score for 'drinking now' - still very closed and unyielding.
[Aside on 94's - the two standouts from 94 in Seattle for me were Vesuvio and Fonseca].

Yes, I remember that one from the FTLOP Gala. I could appreciate it, but it was a monster, and not something I would open yet for drinking. I'd save it for many years. My wife liked it then. Our standouts from 1994 were the Vesuvio and Smith Woodhouse. I've since bought some of the Vesuvio. That reminds me that I should still be on the lookout for more of the Smith Woodhouse. I bought a bottle or two from TCWC, but that's all they had.

Like cask samples, the 1994 Taylor VP can be almost painfully powerful at this stage (a mere 15 years old). I can certainly respect those that may not appreciate this tannic beast at this point. It takes a ton of decanting and a very open mind to "get" what this VP is all about and I don't blame anyone that would rather wait another 10-15 years to re-examine this massive and extraordinary VP.

I also can see why James Suckling gave this 100 points early on. I was at 97-99 when I first had it back in 1997 as a cask sample. I've had it seven or eight times in the past 18 months and it is tight and tough to assess unless it gets lots of air. I will never forget Andy's first few sips the first time he had this when I brought one to his home a couple of years ago. Priceless. I don't remember his exact words, but paraphrasing: "holy ____ , this is a monster." I told him it would be even better the 2nd day (and probably a 3rd and 4th too) and left more than half the bottle for him to evaluate. I don't think he was disappointed.

This is one of very few Ports where i'd suggest a full 24 hours of decanting ... if someone wanted to drink one bottle today.

Yes, this was a monster for sure. And yes, it was far more drinkable on day 2, that's for sure. As Alan mentioned it still very tannic and acidic and I agree with Roy that even with 15 years of age it's about as close as you can come to drinking a current cask sample even now. It was very tough to drink on day 1, and probably why we only managed 1/2 the bottle. I did finish this on day 2 as by then it was finally mellowing out, if only a little bit. It was too good to stop drinking, so none saw the light of a third day. This is one that every die-hard Port lover should have in their cellar.

Eric Menchen wrote: Our standouts from 1994 were the Vesuvio and Smith Woodhouse. I've since bought some of the Vesuvio. That reminds me that I should still be on the lookout for more of the Smith Woodhouse. I bought a bottle or two from TCWC, but that's all they had.

Agreed on the Smith Woodhouse, It is a fantastic value for mid term drinking and I have about a case or so of it just for that purpose. I'll probably start slowly diving into them sometime in the next couple of years.