Page 5 of 5

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 16:23 Mon 23 Feb 2015
by djewesbury
Andy Velebil wrote:VA is a wine making issue. It will affect all the wine made. Though some bottles can show it more than others if exposed to more heat, as that will cause it to bloom and become more noticeable. Cockburn's had some issues during this period, as did some other producers.
I find this problematic - this concerned VA in a third of the bottles of a case of Ck 70, all bottles of which were presumably stored together, and so all subject to the same (variations in) heat. I have had very good bottles from particular vintages and I have had bottles absolutely ruined by VA; I can't see that the wine that does not have VA is just 'not exhibiting' the VA that it in fact contains. VA is acetic acid, it can't be there in a 'non-expressed' form, it's either there or it isn't. I have a Graham 85 next to me which is quite high in VA, though not spoilt completely. If it were the case that VA has to be present in all wine bottled from a VA-afflicated vintage, then I would expect many more ports to be written off in the way that (for example) the Ni97 has been. I think there must be more to VA than this.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 16:26 Mon 23 Feb 2015
by Andy Velebil
djewesbury wrote:
Andy Velebil wrote:VA is a wine making issue. It will affect all the wine made. Though some bottles can show it more than others if exposed to more heat, as that will cause it to bloom and become more noticeable. Cockburn's had some issues during this period, as did some other producers.
I find this problematic - this concerned VA in a third of the bottles of a case of Ck 70, all bottles of which were presumably stored together, and so all subject to the same (variations in) heat. I have had very good bottles from particular vintages and I have had bottles absolutely ruined by VA; I can't see that the wine that does not have VA is just 'not exhibiting' the VA that it in fact contains. VA is acetic acid, it can't be there in a 'non-expressed' form, it's either there or it isn't. I have a Graham 85 next to me which is quite high in VA, though not spoilt completely. If it were the case that VA has to be present in all wine bottled from a VA-afflicated vintage, then I would expect many more ports to be written off in the way that (for example) the Ni97 has been. I think there must be more to VA than this.
Disregard the heat and making it more noticeable. I was thinking Brett....That's what happens when I've just gotten up, only had one sip of coffee, and not thinking clearly. VA is a wine making issue though and will affect the whole lot.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 16:29 Mon 23 Feb 2015
by djewesbury
Andy Velebil wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
Andy Velebil wrote:VA is a wine making issue. It will affect all the wine made. Though some bottles can show it more than others if exposed to more heat, as that will cause it to bloom and become more noticeable. Cockburn's had some issues during this period, as did some other producers.
I find this problematic - this concerned VA in a third of the bottles of a case of Ck 70, all bottles of which were presumably stored together, and so all subject to the same (variations in) heat. I have had very good bottles from particular vintages and I have had bottles absolutely ruined by VA; I can't see that the wine that does not have VA is just 'not exhibiting' the VA that it in fact contains. VA is acetic acid, it can't be there in a 'non-expressed' form, it's either there or it isn't. I have a Graham 85 next to me which is quite high in VA, though not spoilt completely. If it were the case that VA has to be present in all wine bottled from a VA-afflicated vintage, then I would expect many more ports to be written off in the way that (for example) the Ni97 has been. I think there must be more to VA than this.
Disregard the heat and making it more noticeable. I was thinking Brett....That's what happens when I've just gotten up, only had one sip of coffee, and not thinking clearly. VA is a wine making issue though and will affect the whole lot.
Are you saying that all Graham 85 is affected by VA, because the one bottle I opened last night was? I wouldn't be able to agree on that. Get that next cup of coffee down you and let's have a heated debate!

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 16:30 Mon 23 Feb 2015
by Andy Velebil
Here's a really good explanation of VA in wine making.

http://www.sommelierjournal.com/article ... iclenum=77

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 16:55 Mon 23 Feb 2015
by djewesbury
Thanks for that article Andy - a good read and I'd recommend everyone here give it a look. It doesn't say to me, however, that a VA flaw must be present in all the wine of a vintage if it's detected in one bottle. While every bottle of port made by a particular shipper in a particular vintage will theoretically be the same blend of musts from the various harvested lotes, those blends are made in batches, and so the entirety of Graham 1985 has never sat in one place at one time before being aged and bottled. The musts have been fermented and vinified separately, and blending takes place at all sorts of stages. With some wines (e.g. the Niepoort Bioma 2011) different batches will be bottled at different times, from different barrels. So it would be possible for some balseiros of ageing VP to contain lotes afflicted by detectable VA, whilst other balseiros of the same blend of the same grapes would not have the same levels of VA. Add into this the rather variable hygiene standards that were in place across the board during the period of the worst-affected vintages, and you have what we drinkers recognise: VA is a problem that affects different wines in different measure.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 23:10 Thu 26 Feb 2015
by Alex Bridgeman
Going back on topic, we had a Graham 1977 that was badly corked on the 9th Feb.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 23:50 Thu 26 Feb 2015
by DRT
AHB wrote:Going back on topic
Should some of the above posts be split into a separate thread?

Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 23:53 Thu 26 Feb 2015
by djewesbury
DRT wrote:
AHB wrote:Going back on topic
Should some of the above posts be split into a separate thread?
Yes, please split Andy's and my conversation about VA.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 20:15 Wed 10 Jun 2015
by Alex Bridgeman
I've just opened and poured away a bottle of Croft 1991. Slightly tainted, but enough to leave me bitterly disappointed.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 11:49 Sat 14 Jan 2017
by griff
A 1996 Quinta do Vesuvio was mute on first pour and confirmed as corked by the better half. With port stocks in the Aussie cellar dwindling, this was a very sad turn of events. Thankfully the first of six to disappoint, with six still to go.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 12:27 Sat 14 Jan 2017
by LGTrotter
griff wrote:A 1996 Quinta do Vesuvio was mute on first pour and confirmed as corked by the better half. With port stocks in the Aussie cellar dwindling, this was a very sad turn of events. Thankfully the first of six to disappoint, with six still to go.
My condolences. A bit warm for port this time of year isn't it?

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 22:55 Sat 14 Jan 2017
by griff
LGTrotter wrote:
griff wrote:A 1996 Quinta do Vesuvio was mute on first pour and confirmed as corked by the better half. With port stocks in the Aussie cellar dwindling, this was a very sad turn of events. Thankfully the first of six to disappoint, with six still to go.
My condolences. A bit warm for port this time of year isn't it?
Indeed! The temperature is usually a very effective barrier to cellar erosion. Unfortunately a wedge of mature cheddar spoke to me most forcefully.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 22:12 Mon 23 Jan 2017
by idj123
G77 opened for the purposes of my brother-in-law's 40th and found to be riddled with VA-very disappointing and only a couple of years after similar with D77 at his birthday.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 00:56 Tue 24 Jan 2017
by DRT
Rather surprisingly, a corked bottle of Fonseca 1985 from the cellar of The Traveler's Club in Pall Mall this evening.

It's not often that happens on a Monday :roll:

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 11:58 Fri 04 Aug 2017
by RonnieRoots
Quinta de Vesuvio 2000. Slightly corked, and still - quite noticeably - a beauty underneath. What a pity...

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 16:23 Sun 09 Jun 2019
by NickA
Skeffington 2017 sample at Uncorked tasting. No back-up. Lightly corked but even so, still happening no matter what the cork producers are saying they have done to improve things :-(

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 19:04 Wed 12 Jun 2019
by DRT
NickA wrote: 16:23 Sun 09 Jun 2019 Skeffington 2017 sample at Uncorked tasting. No back-up. Lightly corked but even so, still happening no matter what the cork producers are saying they have done to improve things :-(
That is depressing, although it is possible the cask samples have been closed with different (cheaper) corks to the finished wines?

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 15:46 Thu 20 Jun 2019
by Alex Bridgeman
DRT wrote: 19:04 Wed 12 Jun 2019 ...although it is possible the cask samples have been closed with different (cheaper) corks to the finished wines?
Often the case. Some producers use t-stoppers as the samples really should be opened and consumed within a few weeks of bring filled.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 19:28 Fri 26 Jul 2019
by Will W.
A slightly-corked Burmester 1984. This was not the first time that I have found Burmesters of both the 1984 and 1985 vintages to be corked out of the relatively small number opened over the last three years. When these years are not flawed, they make for inexpensive, albeit pleasant second-tier wines. In the event, the odds of ending up with spoiled bottles is so unacceptably high - at least in my experience - that further purchases are best avoided.

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 15:33 Mon 29 Jul 2019
by Andy Velebil
1964 Taylor’s Single Harvest Tawny was horribly corked this weekend

Re: Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame

Posted: 23:25 Mon 29 Jul 2019
by DRT
Andy Velebil wrote: 15:33 Mon 29 Jul 2019 1964 Taylor’s Single Harvest Tawny was horribly corked this weekend Image
That's not good considering these were a special release at a premium price. Perhaps worth providing feedback to TFP HQ?