ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

What happened?
Post Reply
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by g-man »

Review of the evening as a whole that started with this thread

Wines tasted for the evening: Links to follow
FG76
GC77
SW77
D80
GC80
RP 83
D85
F85
W85
GM86
Quevedo 40


With some yearly suspects in attendance along with a few new faces to the NY tasting crew, it was a fun time at the palm steakhouse where we got a private room.

All of the wines were much too young and dark and felt like, for me, a whole night of drinking tannins. The baga-esque theme is certainly lost at me as it felt like we had an entire line up of potential block busters that should have merited their shining with lesser bottles, but taken together over a course of 5 or 6 hours, was simply a daunting task.

Glenn has numbers but I believe a surprise was shown.

The Ramos Pintos 1983 (which Chris snuck in) was the WOTN. Certainly not for its brawn or power, but merely for its ability to show us what a mature port should taste like. Guesses were thrown out that it was either a 1970 (group think) followed by one lone vote of 1983 by John M. It was soft, supply, resolved and quite tasty. Slightly simple in some respects, but in a very fine place right now and would offer immediate enjoyment. I had it at a 91 pts.

The second of the night was the 1976 FG. Still showing its fresh legs, however, having had elderberry juice before (from my tea business), I'd swear this actually hints at it. There's certainly a non grape like component on the flavor profile that made it "different" then the rest of the port were drinking that night. The flavor profile had this chinese herb quality to it that one can't put their finger on but as Chris mentioned, because I'm actively trying to hunt for something distinct about this particular wine, it may have been my preconceived imagery of what I should have been tasting. That aside, this is still a very fine port worthy of the Fonseca name. Fresh, thick and showing no signs of age at all.

And being the distributor of Quevedo in NY, I felt it only right to open a bottle of his 40 yr Tawny that Glenn so graciously flew in from Seattle for me. I believe this was the third wine of the night. It showed it's difference in that it was mature, full, great balanced and indicative of a tawny that was made with care.

It was certainly fun times as I saw Sandy and Glenn giving ARS a few impromptu lessons about port and Dave at the far end of the table seemed better with his jester's hat impressing Chris and his wife to a chorus of boisterous laughter.



Not all was well, as one of our members Lamont Huxley, did not have the courtesy to inform me he was not attending. As such, I had to cover his share of the bill due to the guaranteed of a set number of people to reserve such private room.




EDIT:: Pardon the confusion it was the Ramos Pintos not the Rozes as originally typed.!
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Chris Doty »

Thanks Jeff for organizing a great dinner/tasting.

As I've said a few times now but will repeat, I confidently have in my pantheon of great ports the:

1977SW
1980D
and 1985F

Sadly, while none of these wines was 'flawed' none showed anywhere near the level of depth/complexity/pleasure/etc of prior bottles. They are not in a 'dumb phase' as wines, so I really don't know what to make of it.

The 'baga esque' theme, or whatever, never made sense to me, and makes even less in light of the results (the 1986Gm and the 1985D were in contention for darkest of the evening, despite not being 'baga esque').

The 1983 Ramos Pinto, which was Terry's contribution (served blind, as she was a late addition to the party), clearly punched above its weight -- despite my appeals against 'groupthink,' everyone guessed a 1970, and when I told them it was an 83, they all guessed either Graham or Fonseca (except Glenn, who guessed California).

Other great wines included the 1980 Gould, and Jeff's 40YR Tawny from Quevedo (though I was disturbed to learn that the designation on the bottle only reflects 'what the wine should taste like' rather than the actual average age of the grapes blended in -- as I had assumed was the case). The 1986 Gm was good, and improved over time, but was a bit impenetrable (but not nearly as much as the 77SW).

Anyway -- another thoroughly enjoyable evening, without a single corked/cooked wine in the bunch!

Thanks Jeff, et al
Last edited by Chris Doty on 00:08 Wed 13 Mar 2013, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by DRT »

g-man wrote:All of the wines were much too young and dark and felt like, for me, a whole night of drinking tannins. The baga-esque theme is certainly lost at me as it felt like we had an entire line up of potential block busters that should have merited their shining with lesser bottles, but taken together over a course of 5 or 6 hours, was simply a daunting task.

Glenn has numbers but I believe a surprise was shown.

The Ramos Pintos 1983 (which Chris snuck in) was the WOTN. Certainly not for its brawn or power, but merely for its ability to show us what a mature port should taste like.
Despite your claim that the theme was lost on you, you seem to have got the point. Baga-ridden Port isn't what mature Port should be like. RP1983 is.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by g-man »

DRT wrote:
g-man wrote:All of the wines were much too young and dark and felt like, for me, a whole night of drinking tannins. The baga-esque theme is certainly lost at me as it felt like we had an entire line up of potential block busters that should have merited their shining with lesser bottles, but taken together over a course of 5 or 6 hours, was simply a daunting task.

Glenn has numbers but I believe a surprise was shown.

The Ramos Pintos 1983 (which Chris snuck in) was the WOTN. Certainly not for its brawn or power, but merely for its ability to show us what a mature port should taste like.
Despite your claim that the theme was lost on you, you seem to have got the point. Baga-ridden Port isn't what mature Port should be like. RP1983 is.
but a whole tasting full of them is my point of the theme being lost on me.

I felt they would have been taken better on their own against wines of similar vintage to show indeed how they would shine against their fellow birth years. The fact we lacked a clear control just muddled my tastings because they were all so strong, potent and tannic.

The SW 77 and GC 77 for example, I would have preferred to do a tasting with those comparatively to the T, F, G, W 77s for instance.

The 80s, against the other big houses to both taste the difference and note the obvious color differences.
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by DRT »

g-man wrote:The SW 77 and GC 77 for example, I would have preferred to do a tasting with those comparatively to the T, F, G, W 77s for instance.
But then the outcome is surprise at how dark and youthful SW77 is compared to others from the same vintage. That isn't the point. The point is that you and all who were there and all those who read this will now know that a number of the VPs that stand out in a crowd in their vintage are actually unnaturally dark and, form whatever chemical process is involved, have not matured as they should have done had they been made entirely of grapes.

When you compare apples it is always good to avoid including a pear. So, when comparing things made from grapes it is possibly best not to include things made from elderberry.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by g-man »

DRT wrote:
g-man wrote:The SW 77 and GC 77 for example, I would have preferred to do a tasting with those comparatively to the T, F, G, W 77s for instance.
But then the outcome is surprise at how dark and youthful SW77 is compared to others from the same vintage. That isn't the point. The point is that you and all who were there and all those who read this will now know that a number of the VPs that stand out in a crowd in their vintage are actually unnaturally dark and, form whatever chemical process is involved, have not matured as they should have done had they been made entirely of grapes.

When you compare apples it is always good to avoid including a pear. So, when comparing things made from grapes it is possibly best not to include things made from elderberry.
No I get what you're saying, I was implying that it's certainly not enjoyable to taste so many youthful ports regardless of how they're made.

We already know they are abnormally dark. What is a taste comparison between them that we're trying to achieve? While I did get some similar notes across the board, I had no immediate reference as to what an appropriately aged port from the same vintage was suppose to taste like. It is daunting enough to taste and compare wines of the same vintage but it should be certainly easier to compare what would be potentially adulterated versus one made of grapes.


Take the comparison of SW77 to the GC77 showed that while the Sw77 is dark, the GC77 is abnormally dark and while both are darker from memory from almost any other 77s tasted I don't recall their "taste" being non port like or even non grape like and going from memory, I recall teh croft having more orange peel and the grahams being lighter and sweeter, but that is the extent of my memory.

However where as I have clearer recollection of what a fonseca should taste like to be able to identify the 76 as "something off". I lack the sheer amount of tastings provided to claim that either the Sw77 or the GC77 may have had the same sort of adulteration with the exception of color and perhaps the more noticeable tannins then i was expecting.
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
User avatar
John M
Fonseca LBV
Posts: 140
Joined: 18:45 Sat 31 Mar 2012
Location: USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by John M »

I got a distinct berry flavor off the FG76--actually my notes were it smelled and tasted of berry and berry bushes--(aroma from a berry patch in the sun). On none of the others, including the other Bagas, did I get berry as a powerful component. Many of the ports were Pop and pour (I think only the CG80, which showed quite well, the 85 Warres and the 85 Dows were decanted ahead of time--there may be a 4th but not sure) so I've wondered how that affected things.
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Glenn E. »

g-man wrote:I felt they would have been taken better on their own against wines of similar vintage to show indeed how they would shine against their fellow birth years. The fact we lacked a clear control just muddled my tastings because they were all so strong, potent and tannic.
We had a clear control - the flight of 1985s. It clearly demonstrated the range of color and flavor that is appropriate for Vintage Ports of that age.

What you are proposing wouldn't have been a control, it would have been counter-examples. It wouldn't have shown the proper range of color and flavor for VP of that age because it wouldn't have been a control set, just a hodge-podge of examples. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's a different tasting.
g-man wrote: The SW 77 and GC 77 for example, I would have preferred to do a tasting with those comparatively to the T, F, G, W 77s for instance.

The 80s, against the other big houses to both taste the difference and note the obvious color differences.
Those sound like great tastings, but that wasn't what this one was trying to accomplish. I wanted to include as many Group A Ports as we could find and taste them against a control group. SW77 and GC77 vs a flight from 1977 would be great, but wouldn't have allowed us to taste the other Group A Ports. Same for D80 and GC80 vs a flight of 1980s.

Again, those would be great tastings to do separately, but together I think would have been more confusing than the way things were laid out for this one.

Of course a big part of the problem is that the G85 didn't show up and we had a RP83 in there that wasn't supposed to be there. That cost us one of our control bottles and added another non-theme bottle to the tasting, further diluting the control group. (The GM86 was also non-theme, but we'd agreed to have that one ahead of time.)
Glenn Elliott
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by g-man »

The 85s as a control group were a pretty terrible example except to note that the colors on the 85 pretty much matched alot of the colors on the older baga-esque wines.

Simply saying the tasting we did only showed that we had a bunch of very young / youthful ports that would certainly all stand out in their respective tastings.

Perhaps I am still misunderstanding how one tells a wine is baga-esque if all we are to glean from this is that an older port can be darker than a younger one?

Wouldn't it be fair to say the F70 along with alot of the wines from the 70s vintage are quite dark for their age and compared to most 1980s, would we be able to judge that the 70 is baga-esque compared to the much lighter, rainier 1980 vintage? Surely not. Which is why i'm argue this particular tasting ended up being a hodgepodge of very fine wines being opened and enjoyed rather than a "this is baga-esque" type tasting. With the exception of the 76, as I noted due to my preference for drinking more things fonseca.
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Glenn E. »

I had a great time as usual, but my palate was not at all right prior to the arrival of food and so my notes are both short and disappointed. Food seemed to help correct or reset it, but by then I was reaching my limit and so not fully capable of writing proper notes. No matter, I shall soldier on!

It was great meeting Alan and John, especially after having communicated with John via email for so long, and as always I very much enjoyed seeing the NYC crowd again. Thanks to Jeff for doing all the leg work and once again securing us a splendid venue.

WOTN voting, it should be noted, took place earlier than usual. As I recall it was after the soup/salad course but before the arrival of the main course.

As has already been revealed, there were some surprises in the results.

While I thought that the theme was quite clear and easy to understand, everyone else seemed to have difficulty understanding it. The point was to taste as many "baga-esque" Ports in Group A as possible against a flight of quality 1985s in Group B that could serve as a reference point of what good VP should look and taste like. Group B - the control group - was deliberately younger than all of the "baga-esque" Ports in Group A to help emphasize the difference - the older Ports shouldn't be able to match the power of the 1985s, but if the supposition is correct they would. In that sense, I think it worked very well. But what surprised me is that none of the "baga-esque" Ports turned out to actually be all that "baga-esque" to me.

Of the Group A Ports, only the FG76 really stood out to me because it did seem to be a slightly different hue than all of the other Ports in both groups, and as others have already noted it did have a berry-like nose and palate. However that berry-like nose and palate is something that I find in a lot of Ports, so in and of itself it did not seem to me to be evidence of anything out of the ordinary. And unlike others, I didn't think it was the darkest Port of Group A, let alone of the night. 2nd place overall for WOTN with 11 points.

The GC80 had some interesting flavors and was quite dark, but it didn't make me think of elderberries. Rather marshmallow cream, cream cheese, and chocolate. I had it in 3rd place, but others disagreed and it ended up 5th overall.

The SW77 and D80 were both much lighter than previous examples I have had. This D80 was so light (relatively speaking) that it looked like a perfectly normal, albeit high quality, 1980 VP. Served blind I would have never guessed it was a D80. I'm not as experienced with the SW77, but again this one was no darker than other dark 1977s like the Taylor and Fonseca. I noted it only as "dark garnet in color" but not at all opaque. On the other hand the GC77 was very purple and fully opaque, which is consistent with other examples of it that I have had. My notes have the GM86 as the only other fully opaque Port served, though I did also note that the F85 and FG76 were very very close to opaque in the center.

The GC77 was consistent with past experience. Rather than baga-esque, I think it is just over-extracted. Some have complained of bottle variability in GC77, but I've yet to see it. This bottle was as solid as any I've had in the past. Epic? No. But definitely excellent.

The Group B Ports had the strangest showings for me, in no small part because 2 didn't show at all. The T85 and G85 were both missing, one for known reasons and the other for unknown reasons. Sad, as really both were needed to make the control group work properly.

In their place we had a mystery Port, which I wildly incorrectly guessed was a 1970 after having to be convinced that it was, in fact, Portuguese and not some faux Port masquerading at the ball. It was revealed to be a 1983 Ramos Pinto, which I have had before further compounding my poor detective work. Up until we voted for WOTN, I found it to be the most enjoyable and most drinkable VP present. Once the clock struck midnight (voting took place), however, it turned into a pumpkin. The cliff it fell off after voting was extremely surprising to me. An hour after voting I thought it completely flat and uninteresting, while all of the other Ports were coming around and starting to show nicely. Perhaps the RP83 simply suited my off palate? No, that can't be as everyone else helped vote it the WOTN with 14 points over the FG76 with 11 and Quevedo 40-yr old with 10. Even ignoring my votes it won WOTN.

The W85 disappointed me. I should be used to being disappointed by Warre's Ports, but I still go into every tasting with high hopes only to have them shattered every time by a thin and hot Port. This one was no different, and was noted only as "light and red" to the eye. I give up. No more Warre for me. No Josh, you may not organize a Warre vertical for the next ACPT tasting.

The F85 and D85 were both good, but nothing special. As Chris reported, there was nothing truely "off" about the F85 but there was also nothing normal about it. It was one of the darkest Ports of the night, helping to dis-prove the theme. The D85 was mid-pack visually, and had I bothered to score everything probably would have ended up mid-pack that way as well.

By the end of the evening, the GM86 was easily my favorite VP besting the by-then cratered RP83 and the still sound GC80 and FG76. I would like to try it side-by-side with the GM87 as that one is also a superb SQVP. It was powerful and luscious at the same time, with plenty of tannins to give it long life and good acidity to balance all of the still very much present fruits. Classic stuff. The group didn't like it as much as I did, though, rating it 4th overall.

For me the WOTN was the Quevedo 40-yr old. This surprised no one at the time, nor should it surprise anyone now. Jeff thought it started to fade by the end of the night, but I didn't think so. (It does fade rather quickly for a 40-yr old, but for me that takes a day or two.) It must have been pretty good, because it slipped into 3rd place overall for WOTN. Ignoring the Quevedo, the GM86 was 3rd overall.
Glenn Elliott
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Glenn E. »

g-man wrote:Simply saying the tasting we did only showed that we had a bunch of very young / youthful ports that would certainly all stand out in their respective tastings.
...
Which is why i'm argue this particular tasting ended up being a hodgepodge of very fine wines being opened and enjoyed rather than a "this is baga-esque" type tasting. With the exception of the 76, as I noted due to my preference for drinking more things fonseca.
Actually, what I think you are seeing is not that there was anything wrong with the tasting as a theme, but rather two things:

1) The 1985 control group didn't show as well as it normally should. The D85 and F85 were both relatively lackluster examples of what would normally be superb Ports. This was compounded by the fact that we were missing the T85 and G85, and that an RP83 was tossed into the mix further confusing the test.

2) The "baga-esque" test group really didn't seem to show all that "baga-esque" at all. One could make the argument that the tasting disproved the hypothesis with the main exception being the FG76. I thought the GC80 was also exceptionally dark, but neither off hue nor especially berry flavored. The SW77 and D80 were so far off their norms that they looked like "normal" Ports. Both are normally inky-dark monsters.

It can happen at any tasting, but at this tasting the large number of missing or slightly off bottles really muddled the theme.
Glenn Elliott
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Glenn E. »

Glenn E. wrote:It can happen at any tasting, but at this tasting the large number of missing or slightly off bottles really muddled the theme.
Maybe this will help. Here's what I expected to have happen:

In the control group, I expected the F85 to be the darkest and be mostly purple throughout, though hinting at garnet, and very nearly opaque but not quite, and fade through pink at the rim. The D85 and G85 would follow with the G85 being more purple/red with a pink rim and the D85 being more garnet in color and possibly being slightly darker with a rim that fades more through orange than pink. Then the T85 would be deep but clear garnet, and the W85 would be a medium red. That would show the "normal" range for a mature VP of around 30 years old.

In the test group, I expected every single one of them to be opaque, and unquestionably so. The SW77 and GC80 are normally intensely purple and so dark that they almost look like newly released vintage Ports. The D80 at times almost looks black, but in reality is such a deep, dark garnet that almost no color escapes. The GC77 is usually less inky, but such a rich purple that it seems to glow with black light. I didn't know what to expect of the FG76, but figured it would be similar to the above.

Essentially, none of that happened.
Glenn Elliott
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by DRT »

A very good description, Glenn.

Why that didn't happen is a mystery to me. I have had all of the ports you listed at least once, but most of them many times. Perhaps you just had an unlucky batch of bottles that did not show the "normal" characteristics of these wines?
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Glenn E. »

DRT wrote:A very good description, Glenn.

Why that didn't happen is a mystery to me. I have had all of the ports you listed at least once, but most of them many times. Perhaps you just had an unlucky batch of bottles that did not show the "normal" characteristics of these wines?
I think that's it in a nutshell.

Not all of the Ports were properly decanted, which I'm quite certain added to the irregularity. Only the D85, F85, W85, and GC80 had been decanted before arrival at the event (all between 9:30 and 10:00 am). That was probably sufficient for the D85 and W85, but was short for the F85 and GC80. Pop-n-pour for the D80 and SW77 could not have helped their showings, but I also do not believe that the lack of decanting was the only issue. Lack of decant didn't seem to bother the FG76 or GM86... or maybe it did and both could have been even better than they were.

I would love to hold the tastings that g-man is proposing as I think they would be equally fun. Especially the 1980 version for me because I haven't had that much experience with 1980 VPs.
Glenn Elliott
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by g-man »

DRT wrote:A very good description, Glenn.

Why that didn't happen is a mystery to me. I have had all of the ports you listed at least once, but most of them many times. Perhaps you just had an unlucky batch of bottles that did not show the "normal" characteristics of these wines?

and sandy has pictures to prove i'm not making up my colors!
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Chris Doty »

Glenn E. wrote: No Josh, you may not organize a Warre vertical for the next ACPT tasting.
Well, Josh, and anyone else, I am eager to organize a Warre vertical, as it is a shipper I have rarely had multiple VPs from in a single evening.

Maybe Fall 2013?

I believe I have on hand the: 58, 63, 66, 70, 77, 80, 83, 85, and 94 (if not others). Can start a separate thread for planning if there's sufficient interest.
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Chris Doty »

Glenn E. wrote:Here's what I expected to have happen:

In the control group...

In the test group....

Essentially, none of that happened.
Thanks for that (and other) explanations. I think I now understand the intent of the evening, and was just happy to drink some great ports. Had the theme been 'your favorite ports from 1976 until 1986' I think we would have had a similar line up, so I didn't especially mind 'baga-esque' as an idea, even though it wouldn't have been on my own list of preferred port tasting themes.
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Chris Doty »

Glenn E. wrote:
1983 Ramos Pinto...An hour after voting I thought it completely flat and uninteresting, while all of the other Ports were coming around and starting to show nicely.
I didn't have a whole lot left after we paid the bill, but I remember enjoying this through the end of the evening, not seeing any of the 'cliff' that Glenn observed
Glenn E. wrote: Quevedo 40-yr old....Jeff thought it started to fade by the end of the night, but I didn't think so. (It does fade rather quickly for a 40-yr old, but for me that takes a day or two.)
On the other hand, I think this may have been the best (most pleasurable and most cerebral) tawny that I've ever had (I generally dont like them), and I believe I gave it either my 2nd or 3rd place vote, but it certainly DID fade to my palate over the evening (losing a lot of the opulent 'marbled cotton candy' flavors that appealed to my childlike tastes). Still bang tidy, but not something I would leave open for several days on the basis of this showing.
Glenn E. wrote: By the end of the evening, the GM86 was easily my favorite VP
As this was my humble contribution, I'm glad it was well received. I liked this a lot as well, and thought it could have vied for my 3rd place vote. I didn't, however, feel that it really opened up over time. It certainly wasn't nearly as monolithic as the SW 77, or the GC77, but it was quite opaque and reserved throughout the evening -- just with more purity of fruit and expression than had been present in most other bottles on this evening, allowing it to 'shine' on a relative basis.

Again -- an enjoyable (if head scratching) experience. Happy to 'run it back' in a decade!
User avatar
John M
Fonseca LBV
Posts: 140
Joined: 18:45 Sat 31 Mar 2012
Location: USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by John M »

Glenn Wrote:

Not all of the Ports were properly decanted, which I'm quite certain added to the irregularity. Only the D85, F85, W85, and GC80 had been decanted before arrival at the event (all between 9:30 and 10:00 am). That was probably sufficient for the D85 and W85, but was short for the F85 and GC80.
I brought the GC80, thought 8-10 hours would be enough.... :P

I get the theme and despite anyone's misgivings/misunderstandings in the end it was fun, educational, memorable on numerous levels AND we had no corked/cooked ports. That sounds like success to me. Plus, you'll always remember the "Baga-esque / elderberry whines"--<<pun intended>>. :twisted:

Warre's sounds fine with me.

Lastly, curious as to how Mrs. E. did in the tournament after all.
Last edited by John M on 18:58 Tue 12 Mar 2013, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by g-man »

Chris Doty wrote:
Glenn E. wrote: No Josh, you may not organize a Warre vertical for the next ACPT tasting.
Well, Josh, and anyone else, I am eager to organize a Warre vertical, as it is a shipper I have rarely had multiple VPs from in a single evening.

Maybe Fall 2013?

I believe I have on hand the: 58, 63, 66, 70, 77, 80, 83, 85, and 94 (if not others). Can start a separate thread for planning if there's sufficient interest.
if you add the lbvs I can throw in almost every vintage from 74? to 89 i believe
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Chris Doty »

g-man wrote:
if you add the lbvs I can throw in almost every vintage from 74? to 89 i believe
wow -- a monster tasting in the making! :P

Will need to be held on a Saturday...
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by DRT »

Warre vertical including bottle matured LBVs = very good idea.

As Jean Luc Picard would say...make it so!
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by DRT »

...and a London parallel event with the same line-up would be fun :D
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Chris Doty »

DRT wrote:Warre vertical including bottle matured LBVs = very good idea.

As Jean Luc Picard would say...make it so!
aye aye, captain

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6755
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4172
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: ACPT Port tasting, NYC, March 9, 2013

Post by Glenn E. »

John M wrote:Lastly, curious as to how Mrs. E. did in the tournament after all.
She was in 105th (out of 570) after 7 puzzles, but before "corrections" had taken place. After corrections she had mysteriously moved to 116th. I just looked again now and she has moved down again, to 118th. Very strange. There must have been a very large number of scoring errors for there to be this much movement around the 20% cutoff between divisions B and C.

Her overall score was higher than in the past, which indicates that competition was tougher this year for whatever reason. She's a little bummed to have fallen out of the top 20%, but she's still in the B division because you have to fall out for 3 consecutive years before you are moved down a division.

She's mostly frustrated by the four errors she made - two in puzzle 3 and two in puzzle 5. Had she not made those errors, which cost her ~360 points (20 points per incorrect word - in both puzzles the two errors were adjacent thus only affecting 3 words, plus loss of the two 150-point perfect puzzle bonuses), she would have finished right about 85th. But at her skill level, the types of errors she made are hard to detect while doing a quick double check at the end of a round as the seconds tick away. All were real words that fit properly... they just weren't the right words. There's not time to check the clues to make sure each answer fits; you just do a quick scan to look for blank squares or obviously wrong answers that aren't even words.

Interesting footnote from the finals: for the first time that I can remember, someone didn't finish a finals puzzle in the allowed 20 minutes. Tyler Hinman, who won the tournament 5 times in a row starting with the year that Word Play was filmed, got stuck in the upper left quadrant because he answered the across clue "Jesus Christ, with 'the'" with "Redeemer" instead of "Nazarene". What made it worse for him was that two of the crossing down clues also had alternate answers that worked with "Redeemer" and he'd filled those in as well. That's how tough the A division clues are! They are often deliberately deceptive, as opposed to merely "hard" as the B division clues are.
Glenn Elliott
Post Reply