Roy et. al.,
I would be grateful for any serving/decanting advice on the above wines, as well as any recent experience with them. They are going to be comsumed relatively quickly as opposed to over a long period of time, so I am hoping to catch them at a very balanced and expressive stage. Thanks in advance.
Neal
Serving Advice: 1977 Fonseca (Mag) and 1985 Graham
Moderators: Glenn E., Roy Hersh, Andy Velebil
-
Frederick Blais
- Posts: 2744
- Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: Porto, Portugal
My suggestion would be to decant them 6hrs prior to drinking, then 3hrs later put it back in the bottle so it will be ready for the service, you should get your "very balanced and expressive stage"
Don't forget to write your appreciation of these 2 great ports!
Don't forget to write your appreciation of these 2 great ports!
Living the dream and now working for a Port company
The last time I had the Graham 1985 was in the middle of 2004 and it was showing brilliantly. Having had the '85 Fonseca within two months of that experience, my long term preference for the Graham's changed as the Fonseca took the lead by a nose. The Graham's however, is a beautiful and balanced wine and truly one of the great Graham's from the 2nd half of the 20th century.
I have always loved the 1977 Fonseca (duh) and had it last about three weeks ago (7/18/05). I advocate decanting the Magnum at least ten hours at cellar temp without the stopper and up to twelve hours depending on the provenance of the wine ... to achieve your "goal" described in your post. Below is my tasting note that I published on another website from a 750 ml bottle:
Let me preface my tasting note by saying that I broke one of my own cardinal rules. Normally, I will NOT smoke a cigar with a Vintage Port.
But after a great offline with top notch Burgs and having had the incredible pleasure of 3 great dessert wines, including a 1900 Taylor VP, a group of us headed to play pool, watch old footage of Frank Zappa and continue our evening of fun at Chris' place.
He had arranged for the bottle to be decanted (this is a Sommelier's secret trick!) and waiting for our arrival.
Cigars were being passed around, but I wanted to make sure I got the Fonseca in glass and in my mouth a few times before going for the stogie.
1977 Fonseca Vintage Port - dark ruby in color with a clear edge that showed the virtual youth of this wine. In a word, this wine was seamless. I do believe that Suckling made the right choice when annointing this with 100 points in his Ultimate Guide to Vintage Port in 1990. It had heady aromas of purple fruits, slight vanilla essence and anise that showed up initially. This was a full-bodied beauty with the curves in all the right places. It was juicy and fruit filled and provided a multi-layered mid-palate that dazzled the senses with dark berry fruit. I loved the exceptionally smooth mouthfeel of this VP. No rough edges that need time to meld them. This drinks at top form now and at 28 is just reaching the beginnings of the 3rd gear in this sportster. Not as brash or powerful as the '77 Taylor, but filled with finesse and longevity. 98+ points
Other comments that followed:
The Fonseca is a beauty now and certainly is a fabulous VP that can be thoroughly enjoyed right now. Will it improve? Yes, of course, as currently there are no signs of secondary development.
Looking at many of the other top '77s:
Dow, Gould Campbell, Taylor, Smith Woodhouse etc. these are wines with great promise for long term aging, and I am talking about decadeS. IMO (which has not changed in the past 15+ years in re: to '77s) this is a great vintage and naysayers may change their mind down the road.
Do these big bad boys drink well now. I have had all of the aforementioned Ports in the past 5 years and although brawny, they have all turned the corner and shown that they are in synch and balanced wines. The Taylor was the last of the '77s to do so. There is not one of them that can not be enjoyed today ... as far as being too primary. Don't forget that most VPs at 28 are mature and showing very differently. The names mentioned in this post are ALL very youthful still today, BUT can be enjoyed today too.
More info in the same thread:
All I can speak about is my own palate preferences, even if I do understand others. So, please bear that in mind while I try to offer you my best response here.
I PREFER OLD AND FULLY MATURE PORTS and prefer them this way.
I also love cask samples of VPs and think I am really good at evaluating them. I also like Ports at ten years old. I also like VPs at 15 and 20 and 25 years old.
GIVEN MY DRUTHERS THOUGH, I would drink most of my VPs at 40+ years of age. Is that realistic? Depends on your cellar or if you are rich and want to buy old bottles.
Again, I prefer to drink mature VPs with secondary, if not tertiary notes of development.
So, will 1977 Fonseca improve? Yes without question. For my palate, as good as the wine is now (notice I put a + sign in the score I gave this wine?) it has not even begun its secondary flavor or aromatic profile yet. I have had this wine 14x from my own stash and countless other times from generous friends and at tastings.
I have NO doubt whatsoever, that for the way I like to see and taste and smell VP, the Fonseca 1977 will continue to get better ... for many years to come.
Now the counterpoint to this is well made in your description of this wine. Again, I can not say for anyone else's palate what turns them on with VP.
I am famous for having teased friends on the old AOL BB for their "infanticidal habits" of drinking their just released 1992s and 1994 and then, 1997s. But I rarely if ever do that anymore. I have accepted those that want the primary "rush" of fruit in a young VP. Heck I just tried the last 2 of 45 2003s, this a.m. So, I do "get it" when it comes to young ones. I just happen to like 'em older.
The development of an old Port compared to a young one is analagous to those that prefer a bottle of VP with extended decanting, vs. popping the cork and drinking the Port directly after removing the sediment. Neither is right or wrong ... just different ways to love VP.
And finally:
I agree about some Ports with cigars. Vintage Port and cigars is a no no for me normally. This was a special celebratory evening though and I had a chance to have the wine before the cigar for at least a few minutes. Tawny Port goes great with cigars, by the way.
I have always loved the 1977 Fonseca (duh) and had it last about three weeks ago (7/18/05). I advocate decanting the Magnum at least ten hours at cellar temp without the stopper and up to twelve hours depending on the provenance of the wine ... to achieve your "goal" described in your post. Below is my tasting note that I published on another website from a 750 ml bottle:
Let me preface my tasting note by saying that I broke one of my own cardinal rules. Normally, I will NOT smoke a cigar with a Vintage Port.
But after a great offline with top notch Burgs and having had the incredible pleasure of 3 great dessert wines, including a 1900 Taylor VP, a group of us headed to play pool, watch old footage of Frank Zappa and continue our evening of fun at Chris' place.
He had arranged for the bottle to be decanted (this is a Sommelier's secret trick!) and waiting for our arrival.
Cigars were being passed around, but I wanted to make sure I got the Fonseca in glass and in my mouth a few times before going for the stogie.
1977 Fonseca Vintage Port - dark ruby in color with a clear edge that showed the virtual youth of this wine. In a word, this wine was seamless. I do believe that Suckling made the right choice when annointing this with 100 points in his Ultimate Guide to Vintage Port in 1990. It had heady aromas of purple fruits, slight vanilla essence and anise that showed up initially. This was a full-bodied beauty with the curves in all the right places. It was juicy and fruit filled and provided a multi-layered mid-palate that dazzled the senses with dark berry fruit. I loved the exceptionally smooth mouthfeel of this VP. No rough edges that need time to meld them. This drinks at top form now and at 28 is just reaching the beginnings of the 3rd gear in this sportster. Not as brash or powerful as the '77 Taylor, but filled with finesse and longevity. 98+ points
Other comments that followed:
The Fonseca is a beauty now and certainly is a fabulous VP that can be thoroughly enjoyed right now. Will it improve? Yes, of course, as currently there are no signs of secondary development.
Looking at many of the other top '77s:
Dow, Gould Campbell, Taylor, Smith Woodhouse etc. these are wines with great promise for long term aging, and I am talking about decadeS. IMO (which has not changed in the past 15+ years in re: to '77s) this is a great vintage and naysayers may change their mind down the road.
Do these big bad boys drink well now. I have had all of the aforementioned Ports in the past 5 years and although brawny, they have all turned the corner and shown that they are in synch and balanced wines. The Taylor was the last of the '77s to do so. There is not one of them that can not be enjoyed today ... as far as being too primary. Don't forget that most VPs at 28 are mature and showing very differently. The names mentioned in this post are ALL very youthful still today, BUT can be enjoyed today too.
More info in the same thread:
All I can speak about is my own palate preferences, even if I do understand others. So, please bear that in mind while I try to offer you my best response here.
I PREFER OLD AND FULLY MATURE PORTS and prefer them this way.
I also love cask samples of VPs and think I am really good at evaluating them. I also like Ports at ten years old. I also like VPs at 15 and 20 and 25 years old.
GIVEN MY DRUTHERS THOUGH, I would drink most of my VPs at 40+ years of age. Is that realistic? Depends on your cellar or if you are rich and want to buy old bottles.
Again, I prefer to drink mature VPs with secondary, if not tertiary notes of development.
So, will 1977 Fonseca improve? Yes without question. For my palate, as good as the wine is now (notice I put a + sign in the score I gave this wine?) it has not even begun its secondary flavor or aromatic profile yet. I have had this wine 14x from my own stash and countless other times from generous friends and at tastings.
I have NO doubt whatsoever, that for the way I like to see and taste and smell VP, the Fonseca 1977 will continue to get better ... for many years to come.
Now the counterpoint to this is well made in your description of this wine. Again, I can not say for anyone else's palate what turns them on with VP.
I am famous for having teased friends on the old AOL BB for their "infanticidal habits" of drinking their just released 1992s and 1994 and then, 1997s. But I rarely if ever do that anymore. I have accepted those that want the primary "rush" of fruit in a young VP. Heck I just tried the last 2 of 45 2003s, this a.m. So, I do "get it" when it comes to young ones. I just happen to like 'em older.
The development of an old Port compared to a young one is analagous to those that prefer a bottle of VP with extended decanting, vs. popping the cork and drinking the Port directly after removing the sediment. Neither is right or wrong ... just different ways to love VP.
And finally:
I agree about some Ports with cigars. Vintage Port and cigars is a no no for me normally. This was a special celebratory evening though and I had a chance to have the wine before the cigar for at least a few minutes. Tawny Port goes great with cigars, by the way.
Ambition driven by passion, rather than money, is as strong an elixir as is Port. http://www.fortheloveofport.com