For The Love Of Port

Croft 70

A bottle with an interesting provenance, it came from the sale of the cellar of the late Lord (Patrick) Lichfield - a first cousin of the queen.

All the bottles from that sale have shown incredibly young, and even after thirteen years in my cellar, this bottle was showing more like a '94 than a '70.

Dark and inky in the decanter, the meniscus not yet clear in the glass - lovely juice. Score 9-9

Moses Botbol wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 6:39 am

Tom Archer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 9:53 am

If this bottle was representative, this Port is basically fully mature and drinking very nicely. No reason to hold them any further - drink 'em up and enjoy!

My experience of Croft '85 is that there are a lot of duff bottles out there..

Agreed. '85 Croft has been a the butt of jokes when talking about a crappy port. That being said, I had one about a year ago and it was way better than I expected. Probably 89 points on that occasion?

This particular bottle received as high as 92 as I recall. I gave it 91.

I have many "rules of thumb" to help me rate Ports. One is the words that come to mind when I drink it, and 90-93 usually means "excellent" or something similarly positive but not "outstanding" or "wow!" In this case it was more along the lines of "this is really quite nice" which could have been the 90-93 range or could have been the 87-89 range. (My "label" for the 87-89 range is "very good" so sometimes the words can blend across a couple of scoring ranges.)

Another rule of thumb is, "do I want another glass?" In that case the dividing line between 89 and 90 for me is the difference between accepting another glass if offered, and asking for another glass. In this case, it was really easy to drink and really pleasant and so I felt that I would have asked for another glass. It seemed like a really nice "party Port" or "conversation Port" where you keep refilling and the next thing you know the bottle is empty.

I waffled between 90 and 91 but eventually settled on 91 because I liked the '85 Croft better than the '95 Tuke Holdsworth, but the Tuke also qualified for the 90-93 range using the above criteria, but just barely. So 90 for it and 91 for the Croft.

Another little test is: 'do I want to finish this decanter this evening, and move on to something else - or save some for tomorrow?'

Tom Archer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 7:06 am Croft 70

My only experience with Croft '70 (that I can recall) is an 8-pack that I purchased from WineBid many years ago. It was rather ridiculously inexpensive and Andy warned me that the bottles were suspect. I figured for $30 each, how bad can they be?

Not bad at all, as it turns out. No, they're not pristine. They're faded and mostly pink, not inky dark and purple. Probably poor storage, possibly some slight heat damage. They're very pleasant to drink, albeit not what you'd normally expect from a 1970. I count them as a good purchase, but as only a good Port. Not great, not even excellent, but a decent Port that's pleasant and easy to drink. They've been fun to open and share with others.

I'd love to be able to try a good bottle some time - your 9-9 bottle sounds fantastic!

Glenn E. wrote:

Tom Archer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 7:06 am Croft 70

My only experience with Croft '70 (that I can recall) is an 8-pack that I purchased from WineBid many years ago. It was rather ridiculously inexpensive and Andy warned me that the bottles were suspect. I figured for $30 each, how bad can they be?

Not bad at all, as it turns out. No, they're not pristine. They're faded and mostly pink, not inky dark and purple. Probably poor storage, possibly some slight heat damage. They're very pleasant to drink, albeit not what you'd normally expect from a 1970. I count them as a good purchase, but as only a good Port. Not great, not even excellent, but a decent Port that's pleasant and easy to drink. They've been fun to open and share with others.

I'd love to be able to try a good bottle some time - your 9-9 bottle sounds fantastic!

The price helps. If you paid $150/bottle you’d say they suck. Just saying lol.

Andy Velebil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 11:56 pm

Glenn E. wrote:

Tom Archer wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 7:06 am Croft 70

My only experience with Croft '70 (that I can recall) is an 8-pack that I purchased from WineBid many years ago. It was rather ridiculously inexpensive and Andy warned me that the bottles were suspect. I figured for $30 each, how bad can they be?

Not bad at all, as it turns out. No, they're not pristine. They're faded and mostly pink, not inky dark and purple. Probably poor storage, possibly some slight heat damage. They're very pleasant to drink, albeit not what you'd normally expect from a 1970. I count them as a good purchase, but as only a good Port. Not great, not even excellent, but a decent Port that's pleasant and easy to drink. They've been fun to open and share with others.

I'd love to be able to try a good bottle some time - your 9-9 bottle sounds fantastic!

The price helps. If you paid $150/bottle you’d say they suck. Just saying lol.

Yeah that was really my point. Even an off bottle can be a good deal if the price is right!

A wildly different pair of Feist 20 and 30 year tawnys. Could not have been more different...

2015 Dows LBV....Classic Dow dry pucker. Nice and easy drinker. Only $15 so an awesome QPR. 87 Points

2011 Quinta do Crasto LBV...After the Dows, the finish on this is so distinctively different. Still have most of the bottle left for the weekend. I've onky got a couple left but must bury them---let them age a bit. 89 Points

For dinner tonight!

Glenn E. wrote: ↑Sat Nov 07, 2020 12:33 pm For dinner tonight!

2020-11-07 11.17.09.jpg

With those 2 bottles, who needs food?

Cockburn 75

Fresh out of an owc, this bottle showing obvious seepage and a top shoulder level. This, incidentally, was my oldest unopened owc. I have it in mind to work towards getting everything out of its case, checked and weighed by 36 years of age - but I have some catching up to do..

Quite a respectable wine for the vintage, a little on the light side, but nicely mature. One to start drinking up I think.. 5-4

Tom Archer wrote:Cockburn 75

Fresh out of an owc, this bottle showing obvious seepage and a top shoulder level. This, incidentally, was my oldest unopened owc. I have it in mind to work towards getting everything out of its case, checked and weighed by 36 years of age - but I have some catching up to do..

Quite a respectable wine for the vintage, a little on the light side, but nicely mature. One to start drinking up I think.. 5-4

Chop chop, man. Open those cases up and let us know how the contents are coming along. No time like now. lol

Tom Archer wrote: ↑Sun Nov 08, 2020 1:39 am Cockburn 75

Quite a respectable wine for the vintage, a little on the light side, but nicely mature. One to start drinking up I think.. 5-4

I like this too. I have a few bottles somewhere in my offsite storage. It a good, lighter styled VP. I'll have to find mine soon.

2016 Graham VP (375 mL) (11/1/20)

I just had to compare this to the easy-drinking 2016 Vesuvio VP.

Total Wine has been stocking a lot of Quinta das Carvalhas port this year. I’ve been generally ignoring it, but last week I noticed they had a packaged set of miniatures - 10yo, 20yo, 30yo, and 40yo. I love sets like this - it’s how I got into Scotch years ago, with a miniature set of 4 different regions. Anyway, this looked like too much fun to pass up, so I bought one and split each bottle with a friend last weekend. I found them perfectly acceptable and enjoyable. Not up to the standards of the ‘reference’ bottles we compared them against (Noval 10, Ferreira 20, Kopke 30, Vale d. Maria 40), but not bad.

Mike K. wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 5:58 pmTotal Wine has been stocking a lot of Quinta das Carvalhas port this year.

That brand is exclusive to Total Wine in the US

Had '63 Grahams the other night and have something planned for Friday. A friend coming over for dinner. Perhaps '70 Grahams, or even better one his '70 Grahams I sold him a while back

Had a few friends over for a chilly evening outside...
1988 Q. Do Crasto VP....a bit simple yet nice. Dry grass finish typical to Crasto. 88 Points

2011 Q do Crasto LBV. Great LBV... still has aging potential. Really nice. 89 Points

2012 Q do Portal LBV. Still a fruit bomb. Quite sweet. Also would benefit with 5 ..to 10 more years. 88 Points

1977 Smith Woodhouse...flawed. Argh! When I cut the capsule, the top of the cork was riddled with mold. The cork was saturated and came out in pieces. It smelled musty as I was decanting it but I took a sip and could taste a very smooth, sweet, slightly spicy port, but nonetheless tainted. But the taint grew stronger the longer it sat in the decanted. I had a glass the first few nights but it progressively became overwhelming and I had to pour the remains down the drain. I have a few other bottles of it so I will try it again soon.

Mike J. W. wrote: ↑Sat Nov 14, 2020 8:27 am 1977 Smith Woodhouse...flawed

Arrrrg! Too bad