1922 Martinez Vintage Port

[Tom Archer]

One of three bottles bought some time ago as vintage 1922 - believed Taylor.

Well the '22 bit was right, but the shipper wasn't - no matter though. Lists of Taylor vintages do not include 1922, but surprises are not uncommon at that age.

The cork broke neatly in half as it was pulled, and after pushing the bottom half down into the bottle and decanting, I broke the bottle to recover the bottom half.

Putting them together, the cork was so tightly waisted and splayed at the bottom that it is hard to believe that it could ever have made it's way out of the bottle in one piece.

Clearly branded on the side: MARTINEZ VINTAGE 1922.

1922 was the year of the Tutankamun discovery. It was also the birth year of my late father, so it seemed an appropriate choice to share with my brother and his house guests on Christmas eve. Not to be outdone, my brother produced a Lafite '61 to precede it...

The wine decanted very cleanly, and was a dull brick red in the decanter.

In the glass it was a very even tawny with clear rim. On the nose there was a distinct note of violets and an earthiness that reminded me of the '75's. A mite corked? possibly, but not sure.

I gave the wine four hours decanter time, and wish I'd given it more.

On the palate it was sharp and spiritous - would it have composed itself given more time? I don't know, and their were too many participants to contemplate saving some for the following day.

However, the wine was very drinkable, and, as always, a treat to contemplate it's age.

This was probably a very sound wine at it's peak, but that was probably 40 years ago. It has now reached it's low plateau.

To score, ignoring it's age:

2-2

Tom

[*sweetstuff]

I was glad to read your note, recogizing that in a bottle of wine there are often emotional values in addition to its tastes and scents.

What kind of scoring system do you use? It's a bit mysterious to me--2 out of 2.

[Tom Archer]

What kind of scoring system do you use? It's a bit mysterious to me--2 out of 2

I detailed this a week or two ago - here it is again:

My scoring system is designed to compare wines against their peers-

So a VP is judged against all other VP's, a Colheita against all other Colheitas - etc.

The first score relates to the ability of the wine to give immediate gratification, the second is your perception of how good it will be when fully mature, or in the case of a mature wine, where it will be in ten years time.

If you feel that the wine you're tasting is in the top 5% of all the wines you've known, then it gets a 10, if it's in the bottom 5%, it gets a zero.

Each of the other scores gets a 10% share.

In practical terms, start by considering whether the wine is better or worse than the median. If it's neither, score 5.

Then consider whether the wine is in the top quartile (if it's good) or bottom quartile (if it's poor).

A wine that is better than the median, but not in the top quartile, will score either 6 or 7. A wine that is worse than the median but not in the bottom quartile, will score 3 or 4.

A wine that is in the top quartile, but not decisively so, will score an 8, a better wine will score 9 or 10, but remember that only one bottle in 20 should be good enough for a 10 score.

The same happens in reverse at the bottom end of the scale. An uninspiring, but drinkable wine will normally rank a 2, a poor wine a 1.

Only one bottle in 20 should rank a zero - for VP, this is about the proportion that gets dumped in the cooking or down the sink.

If a bottle is so badly corked that you have to abandon it, don't venture a score. If you suspect a poor bottle, put your score in parentheses ().

Over time, an average of all your scores should come to 5. A slightly higher average is forgiveable if you focus on the best and ignore the rest, and a lower average is equally forgiveable if you are a budget drinker.

This gives you your first score. You then have to consider where it's going.

Even top wines may earn quite a low first score when they are young, raw, immature and closed down, but it is often possible to get a feel for where they are going.

So for a 2003 VP, a score of 3-9 would not be exceptional. A typical 1991 VP, which have generally got a little way to go, might rank a 5-6 or 6-7.

When wines are mature and set fair on a plateau, the first and second scores are the same, so a 1983 VP might rank a 7-7 or 8-8.

When wines are mature, but beginning to run out of steam, a point off for the second score is in order - most 1980 VP's fall into this camp.

Where an old wine is beginning to fall apart, and seems to have very little future, two points off for the second score is appropriate - some of the 1960 VP's are in this category.

Tom

[Nevski]

Thanks for the TN Tom. Btw, any idea how good port year 1922 was overall? Was it fully-declared? I have Burmester VP 1922 thus it would be nice to know more about the vintage. For some reason Richard Mayson skipped that year in his famous Port-bible..

-Antti-

[Roy Hersh]

I know a man whose Holy Grail VP is the 1922 Martinez. He is going to die when I send him this in an email. He had it once (as far as I know, only once) and said it was one of the great Port experiences he's ever had. This from a guy with well over 20,000 bottles in his cellar.

Tom,

IF ... you ever see another bottle of 1922 Martinez for sale, please let me know!

Thanks.

[Tom Archer]

IF ... you ever see another bottle of 1922 Martinez for sale, please let me know!

I do have a couple more of these, although I wasn't immediately planning to sell them. Would consider an offer though.

~~~

1922 as a vintage was an intermediate year between the widely declared years of 1920 & 1924, and was passed over by most of the principal shippers.

However, that does not necessarily mean that they thought it to be an inferior year - more likely that they did not need another declaration that soon. There is a lot of resistance to declaring after an interval of only two years.

Whether the wines were better or worse is a matter for debate. Personally, I have not drunk enough of these venerable wines to draw a conclusion.

Tom

[Roy Hersh]

Thanks Tom,

I have sent the gent an email and want to make sure it was the '22 Martinez he was so in love with. Will let you know and put him in touch if it is the right wine.


Roy

[Nevski]

Ok, thanks Tom. I think those ´22s are quite close to 20 year old tawnys what comes to taste & colour. Btw, I recall to hear/read that when Dominic Symington was asked about the best port he has been tasted the answer was Warre VP 1922! Thus it can't be so bad, maybe even one of those "overlooked" vintages??

-Antti-