Pick a year

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 23:17 Wed 20 Jun 2007

As the World actually started in 1963, we can start there. Could always do an older one later and a younger one as well. Cue Al B. picking a completely different year but I'm not leaving the option.

Post by **DRT** » 00:00 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Ahh, we already have lurkers who can vote - cool 8)

I went for 1966. In my limited experience the major houses offerings are at least as good as their 63's and seem to be holding longer. I haven't had enough 1970's v 1977's to form a view but I have not yet had a bottle from either vintage that came close to the WOW factor as any of the top end 66's

Derek

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 00:27 Thu 21 Jun 2007

As I haven't tasted 63 or 66, you guys have me at a great disadvantage. I'm saving my 63 for my birthday in January. Out of the other two, I would have to plump for 77, but its not on the greatest experience.
Great Site. 8)

Alan

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 00:28 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Hang on, I've seen you drink a 1963 as well as a superb 1970 Fonseca.

Post by **DRT** » 00:32 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Yes, so have I - exactly how much did you drink that night in Birmingham that you can't remember drinking 2 of the best VP's produced in the past 50 years?

Derek

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 00:41 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Oops!

I did didn't I! D'ya know, there's something in this taking Notes lark.
Anyway. Hands up. Your right, but I cant remember it clearly. And it was such a quiet civilised evening...what went wrong!
What I am beginning to remember, was there was a clear equal or close second to the Harveys. Which one was that one?

Alan

Post by **DRT** » 00:44 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I think it was the Fonseca 1970 followed by the Graham's 1963. That said, I have a feeling we had an SQVP in there somewhere that gave the big boys a run for their money. I wish I had taken notes

Derek

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 01:01 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I thought there was an 87, that was special??? You know that someone is going to have to nip 'Down The Road' and check up on the original Thread!

Alan.

PS. Dont you think thats a good expression and one we should use for you know what?

Post by **DRT** » 01:04 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I think you're right on both counts, and the first one was a Graham's Malvedos

KillerB will correct us if we've got it wrong as he brought it along.

Derek

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 08:02 Thu 21 Jun 2007

It was the Graham's Malvedos 1987 and it was really nice.

Other terms:

The Other Side
The Dark Side
The Alternate Universe
Another Planet

etc.

Post by **DRT** » 08:36 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I would vote for Another Planet 8)

Derek

RonnieRoots · Post by **RonnieRoots** » 08:39 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I heard there is a party going on over here? 8)

I voted for 1963. Mostly based on heresay, because I actually only tasted one '63 (Niepoort, being fully mature and great) and two '66's (Sandeman and Noval, both not the greatest examples of the vintage probably). But, from what I read and heard, the good 1966's should have long lasting power and the 1963's are more reaching their maturity now. The 1970 top ports are just young monsters still (Taylor, Fonseca and Dow) and the top 1977's are even younger (same suspects), although some are also early maturing, like Graham.

RonnieRoots · Post by **RonnieRoots** » 08:40 Thu 21 Jun 2007

By the way, how many posts do I have to make before I move on from Cheap Ruby to Cruz Reserve?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 08:43 Thu 21 Jun 2007

RonnieRoots wrote:By the way, how many posts do I have to make before I move on from Cheap Ruby to Cruz Reserve?

It's now Cruz Ruby at the beginning, then Cheap Ruby at 10, Reserve at 25, I'll be adding as we get there.

RonnieRoots · Post by **RonnieRoots** » 08:44 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Hey, that's not fair! I thought I was a Cheap Ruby, but I'm actually a Cruz Ruby!!

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 09:17 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Ronnie - obviously you didn't like that category. I suspect a record for getting to Cockburn's Ruby the fastest is about to be set.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 10:02 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I recognise that cat.

RonnieRoots · Post by **RonnieRoots** » 11:06 Thu 21 Jun 2007

She likes you.

But she's a bit stressed at the moment. Work is being done in our house (the ceiling is gone and we can wave to our upstair neighbours) and it's a complete mess. However, she insists on laying on her favorite spot. Every evening when I come home, she's completely covered in dust. Poor cat.

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 11:43 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I used to have a wife like that!

StevieCage · Post by **StevieCage** » 22:12 Thu 21 Jun 2007

Shame, Ronnie, shame - you've tasted another '63: I opened a Warre '63 for my 30 birthday dinner...

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 22:18 Thu 21 Jun 2007

I thought you'd had that. I still haven't had mine and I was strangely jealous that you'd beaten me to it. What is it with people forgetting they'd sipped '63s?

RonnieRoots · Post by **RonnieRoots** » 22:59 Thu 21 Jun 2007

True. But that was completely mature as well (I'd say even more so than the Niepoort), so I see no need to adjust my point.

bman · Post by **bman** » 03:24 Fri 22 Jun 2007

I almost didn't post, rather than be called ruby port. Those of us who have lots of bottles, or have tasted 1945 Croft (you know who you are

), should be able to jump forward to at least a 75 vintage port!

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 00:17 Sun 08 Jul 2007

I'm catching up with threads that have been posted here while I was away in the home of the other place and I came across this one.

Alex K has it spot on, I really can't vote for one of the 4 options that he has presented. Clearly the '66s, '70s or '77s are nowhere near mature-ish. Some of the '63s are but as a vintage in general I always consider only the top tier producers and I would suggest that Nacional, Taylor, Fonseca, Dow and Graham's at least still have a good decade ahead of them before reaching a mature-ish stage in their development. However, since the second tier ports from the vintage (Noval, Sandeman, Croft, Warre etc.) are probably at that stage then, if forced to, I could probably vote for 1963.

However, I would prefer to suggest some alternatives from the same sort of period. Certainly 1975 has a reputation of being mature-ish but having never tasted a vintage port from that year then I can't really comment.

1978 is drinking beautifully now, but is still probably a few years from maturity-ishness. 1965 is approaching maturity, as Derek can testify, but I have only ever tasted colheitas from that year so I again disqualify myself from comment.

So the only two years from the period that I would suggest fall into the category of "mature-ish" would be 1962 and 1967. 1967 produced the wider range of ports of these two years and the Fonseca-Guimaraens, Vargellas and Nacional are drinking extremely well at the moment, with a lovely mix of fruit, secondary flavours and some hint of those tertiary flavours of brown sugar and treacle.

So my vote is for 1967 and is presumably rejected as a spoiled ballot paper.

Alex

(Happy not to disappoint the invitation in Al-K's first post.)

bman · Post by **bman** » 17:12 Sun 08 Jul 2007

Had a 1970 Rebello Valente last week that was definitely mature - TNs in that forum.

ThePortForum.com

Pick a year

Pick a 'maturish' year

Pick a year