For The Love Of Port

1st night: Hard to get around the acetic VA nose at first, but it begins to reveal more of a raisin, wooden cigar box, peppery thing on the nose which is very unique. The palate is deep and fine and with a 'tart cherry pits' profile. A hint of butterscoth on the finish. It's at a very drinkable stage for such a young port. I think JR is correct that this vintage is aging at a faster pace. 3rd night (held under vacuvin in the fridge): Oh my, this has gotten better. Initial acetic nose again, which blows off quickly. Still has the briary, peppery thing on the nose. The palate is very well integrated now and 'fleshy', with a long finish. A fine port, and it gets extra marks for its distinctive character. 91 pts

Kurt,

You make the comment in your note that

JR is correct that this vintage is aging at a faster pace

Who is JR and where have they said this? (I'm interested as I have quite a few of the 1994's but haven't seen this comment before.)

Thanks,

Alex

Hi Alex,
Here is the link to Jancis Robinson's (JR's) article.

http://www.jancisrobinson.com/winenews/winenews1016

Kurt,

Thanks for posting the link to this brilliant and controversial article. I agree with a lot of what is in it and disagree with other parts. Jancis is one author/journalist/critic/professional taster that I hold in the very highest esteem, not only for what she writes, but how she writes. Additionally, few journalists I have met (in wine) are as brutally honest as Ms. Robinson.

This article is must reading for any true Port lover!


Thanks again!

Kurt,

Thanks for the link. I will read the article with interest...but not being a Purple Pager I miss out on the tasting notes

But I will look out for the magazine that Jancis mentions and see what it looks like.

Thanks,

Alex

bridgema wrote: where have they said this? (I'm interested as I have quite a few of the 1994's but haven't seen this comment before.)

I don't think I've seen this explicitly, but isn't it inevitable than an early-maturing vintage will fade earlier in the long-run? I'm not being argumentative here, but asking a genuine question.

As someone who prefers older wines from classic vintages, it must say something that I am quite happy to tuck into the 94s now - the only vintage younger than 85 that I touch, really.

I agree with JR in that I don't think that a wine can stay on a great drinking plateau from young to old age. They're either classics (97, 77 etc), delicious early-drinkers (94) or somewhere in between. However, even if in between, the duration of the optimum drinking window is surely not indefinite?

Mind you, with the shelf-life of port, is anyone old enough and knowledgeable enough to give an example of an old wine that was early-drinking and still great at 40? Maybe MB?

Has anyone read Jancis Robinson's tasting notes for the Noval 2000? I'm curious why it seemed less sparkling than the first time around for her.