ThePortForum.com

Here

jdaw1 wrote:Meanwhile, we drink more eighty-fives than any other year. We also over-consume 2000s and 1994s, which are far too young.

1994 too young to drink?!

This statement is just blatantly wrong and should be challenged.

When is a Vintage Port "too young" to drink? Surely a Vintage Port is only too young to drink when the person opening the bottle fails to enjoy it. Has anyone on the forum ever opened a bottle of 1994 and failed to enjoy it? Fine, it might be better in 10 years, but did you actually take a sip and say to yourself "Euch! That's horrible!".

So to prove my point, please vote in the poll and help me to demonstrate to JDAW that he should be opening and drinking far more of his 1994 ports than clearly he is at the moment.

Sure, 1994s might be good to drink today. I’ll vote yes. Wrong question.

But if 1994s will be much better later, one should wait. There should be a small number of experimental bottles, just to check whether one should be drinking them. But to have regular drinking of one’s stock 1994s better than Osborne is just wasteful.

Like JDAW, I voted yes but think the question posed doesn't grasp the point JDAW tried to make in the post that initiated this thread.

Yes, 1994 ports are enjoyable to drink today. A fact that worries me more than it makes me happy. But, they are not yet at their peak and I agree with JDAWs ascertion that popping the better ones too often is wasteful.

I wish I had tasted a 1994 6 or 7 years ago. I could then assess the difference between those and the many 2000 VPs that I have tasted and thought "OMG, I can't drink this stuff cos it is horribly young".

I agree - wrong question.

Are they good to drink today? Yes, absolutely, especially if you like young, immature Ports.

Too young to drink? If by that one means that they will improve significantly with time, then yes they are too young to drink. But if by that one means that there's some arbitrary age at which it is finally okay to drink a Port, then no they're not too young to drink. If you like immature Port, then drink up! But don't come whining to the rest of us 30 years from now when you're out of 1994s and they're finally starting to hit their stride.

AHB wrote:help me to demonstrate to JDAW that he should be opening and drinking far more of his 1994 ports than clearly he is at the moment.

How goes the help with the demonstration?

jdaw1 wrote:

AHB wrote:help me to demonstrate to JDAW that he should be opening and drinking far more of his 1994 ports than clearly he is at the moment.

How goes the help with the demonstration?

Don't you mean "na-na, na-na-na"

Not quite DRT. I think AHB asked the wrong question. He might disagree.

jdaw1 wrote:How goes the help with the demonstration?

I was inviting comment — though, as you intimate, hinting that it seems that the consensus is not unequivocally against me.

Though, upon reflection, it could have been phrased more concisely as something along the lines of “na-na, na-na-na†.

I think I asked exactly the right question and have proven my point.

The 1994 ports are not "too young to drink". I chosen the question quite carefully and deliberately did not ask the question "Should we wait a few years before opening lots of 1994 ports because they will be better then".

Your original statement simply said "too young" to drink. Perhaps you made the wrong assertion on the other thread. I think a 6-0 vote says these are not too young to drink.

So, I urge you all, open your 1994s now. Carpe diem, for tomorrow we die.

And yes, I have been drinking.



A little more seriously, I will happily open a bottle of 1994 port now, because it gives such pleasure. However, I try to restrict myself to opening no more than 2-3 per year at the moment.

Are the 1994s good to drink today?

On the basis that they are not bad to drink, I voted 'Yes' - but if the question was worded to ask whether they should be drunk, I would have said 'No' as I believe almost all of them have much more to offer.

The vintage is exceptionally forward however, leading me to suspect that they may follow the lead of the '60's and wilt early. I am only drinking one or two '94's a year at present, but expect to bring them into the mainstream in perhaps five years.

1985 is another vintage that I am only making brief sorties into, as it seems to be the opposite of '94 in terms of maturation speed.

Tom

The last two '94 VP's I've had ( Grahams & Croft ) leed me to believe that , no the '94's aren't too young to drink .

I like to keep Vintage Port at a 20 year minimum. Many need more than that, but I do not mind going for tawny or LBV if my port on hand is not old enough for proper consumption. I do not like young Vintages; with port at least

Had an '85 Fonseca last weekend I would put on the "Too Young to Drink" list for sure.