Strawberry Fields Forever (Mon 1st July - Spot The Taylor Vertical)

[cem]

Date/Time: Monday 1st July 5pm onwards
Place: Green Room, B&F
Places: 12
Bottles: 18

The genesis of this fun tasting came when I opened a bottle of unknown 1924 with Harry recently. We both remarked that it had the structure of Taylor and was incredibly vibrant for a 100 year old port. I then swayed towards Fonseca until eventually once it fully opened Harry pointed to the strawberry finish which he confidently declared as redolent of Taylor.

The proposition is thus that a blind Taylor vertical should be arranged at the earliest juncture to ascertain the veracity of Harry’s claim!

The 6 vintages to test: 1955, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1977, 1985

I will provide all the Taylor and a minimum of 8 bottles in total.

1955 x 2
1963 x 2
1966 x 1
1970 x 1
1977 x 1
1985 x 1

Which leaves 10 non-Taylor bottles to be brought to make up 3 bottles from each vintage.

All will be served blind. Points awarded for guessing the Taylor in each vintage, followed by guessing the other producers served and WOTN naturally.

People already attending:

Cliff
Harry
Christopher (Guest of Cliff)
Alex B.
Charles
Ian
Julian
Martin
Neil C.
Mike
Gavin C. Guest of Harry)
Alex M.

If you can come please put down the vintage (not the producer) of what you are bringing (a 1st or 2nd rank producer is preferable).

If you don’t have a non-Taylor from any of the vintages that’s not a bar from coming just note you don’t have one but wish to attend.


Current version of the food order.

Draft of the placemats.

[CPR 1]

Sounds fun, yes please. I will bring a 77.

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

[idj123]

Yes, please Cliff, count me in.

[idj123]

And, I should say, happy to plump for 70.

[jdaw1]

Great theme. Yes please. I’ll bring a ’70, and something else to be decided.

[mcoulson]

May I join in please?

[cem]

Of course Martin

[nac]

Yes please.

[mcoulson]

So I've had a look and I'll bring a 77 and a 66

[nac]

I'll bring a 63.

[PhilW]

Love the idea for the tasting, but unlikely to be able to make the date (I only get back on the Sun).
Might be able to take a seat at last minute if any late drop, which hopefully won't happen ofc.

[Alex M]

Placeholder for yes please. Will get back to you with bottle availability. Right now it's 1970 or 1966.

[cem]

Love the idea for the tasting, but unlikely to be able to make the date (I only get back on the Sun).
Might be able to take a seat at last minute if any late drop, which hopefully won't happen ofc.

I'll stick you down as first reserve Phil if we reach the 12 then.

[jdaw1]

85 x 2

I can provide one or two ’70s and a few ’85s.

Are there any rules about which shippers may or may not be brought? Cliff providing all the Taylors, so presumably non-Cliff people must bring non-Taylors. Are there other constraints?

Should we ask somebody such as Glenn to act as co-ordinator? That is, we reveal possibilities to him; he selects from those possibilities to prevent too many overlaps (not necessarily preventing all) and to further such mischief as he thinks would be most amusing.

[cem]

There are no constraints, just that 1st or 2nd rank producers ought to be brought so the quality difference from a Taylor is not too stark/obvious. Happy to have Glenn as a coordinator or let chaos reign on the choices.

One person needs to organize the pouring so we don't know what is in what glass but has the list to identify them afterwards naturally. All bottles need to be poured at the same time and will need to be hidden away afterwards too.

- Okay I've just read your blinding techniques, so something of that ilk will be required.

Taking the San Pelligrino bottles as an example, I think it would be best if everyone decanted in the same method. I've found refrigerating the bottle overnight, then double decanting and back in the fridge in the morning for an evening pour works well to avoid being over oxidized. Whatever the method agreed if we all stick with it, that would be best.

[jdaw1]

- Okay I've just read your blinding techniques, so something of that ilk will be required.

Explanation of the blinding technique used for the 1958 horizontal (June 2014).

Taking the San Pelligrino bottles as an example, I think it would be best if everyone decanted in the same method. I've found refrigerating the bottle overnight, then double decanting and back in the fridge in the morning for an evening pour works well to avoid being over oxidized. Whatever the method agreed if we all stick with it, that would be best.

No. There is not to be a “method agreed”. You are the organiser. You are to command. The agreement of others might be welcome, at least slightly, but agreement is not necessary.

That said, I hope the organiser chooses a method that allows for some working-class folk’s inability to access a fridge during the day.

[cem]

Ahh good point on the fridge issue. Then let's just double decant an overnight refrigerated bottle in the morning and keep at room temperature.

[jdaw1]

Should we ask somebody such as Glenn to act as co-ordinator? That is, we reveal possibilities to him; he selects from those possibilities to prevent too many overlaps (not necessarily preventing all) and to further such mischief as he thinks would be most amusing.

Glenn, by WhatsApp:

I'm happy to serve as curator of the Port list for a tasting, if that is the ask.

[cem]

Thanks, I will be in touch. I will also organize a competent setup person who is not of the 12 to do the pouring, thus none of us will know what is in what glass until the end.

[jdaw1]

competent

This quotation contains an important adjective.

[flash_uk]

Yes please Cliff. I have candidates for 55, 66, 70, 77 and 85.

[cem]

Added you Mike.

Just to make this even madder, I've thought up a fun tie-breaker.

I'll ask Seckford to choose 1 bottle each of the missing intervening vintages from my stocks with them 1960, 1975, 1980, 1983 and then for them to decide how many should be Taylor and how many should not be Taylor i.e 0-4 Taylor bottles. Then to remove all labels and capsules and simply label the bottles as 1-4 in no particular order. And to send the actual information to a 3rd party of what each one is.

[Alex Bridgeman]

I'll ask Seckford to choose 1 bottle each of the missing intervening vintages from my stocks with them 1960, 1975, 1980, 1983 and then for them to decide how many should be Taylor and how many should not be Taylor i.e 0-4 Taylor bottles. Then to remove all labels and capsules and simply label the bottles as 1-4 in no particular order. And to send the actual information to a 3rd party of what each one is.

The third party being Glenn, I suggest.

[hadge]

I have a quick think, we could bring our ports in a unlabeled (the Sandeman labeling removed) Sandeman 20 year old bottle, so they are all the same, then print the shipper label from Julian's blind list on 80gram paper and then put the blank over the top. then when you bring it, it can go on the table for the Greek letter can be added by a 3rd party to each of them all.

the only challenge will be supply Clif with enough Sandeman bottles for his ports.

[flash_uk]

Some thoughts on blinding and bottles/decanters. The ’58 tasting in 2014 which utilised the blinding method outlined by JDAW, saw bottles arriving and being decanted into identical San Peligrino bottles, with a shipper tag then being hung onto the SP bottle. The use of identical SP bottles being necessary, because if the original bottle was visible (say a re-used Rioja bottle), then at least one attendee would know which port was behind the Greek on that bottle.

That was I suspect the best option for that tasting, as there were only 8 attendees and thus prepouring didn’t happen, and the bottles sat on the table for the duration of the tasting.

If prepouring were to happen, then really all that needs to happen is that the original bottle is camouflaged until it is prepoured. Say, using foil. If someone wanted to make some effort to discerne some features of the camouflaged bottle beneath the foil, they no doubt could - colour of glass at the neck, for example. That aside, using the foil method would mean only needing a single decant into a re-used bottle, and no need to orchestrate the same bottles everywhere, either on the day or in advance.

So procedure would be:
- arrive, cover bottle in foil and put the shipper tag on it
- follow rest of blinding procedure as outlined for the ‘58 tasting

[Glenn E.]

I'll ask Seckford to choose 1 bottle each of the missing intervening vintages from my stocks with them 1960, 1975, 1980, 1983 and then for them to decide how many should be Taylor and how many should not be Taylor i.e 0-4 Taylor bottles. Then to remove all labels and capsules and simply label the bottles as 1-4 in no particular order. And to send the actual information to a 3rd party of what each one is.

The third party being Glenn, I suggest.

I have an account at Seckford's, so they do have my contact information.

If I am to attempt any shenanigans with the Port selections, I will need to know Seckford's selections prior to finalizing what everyone else is bringing.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Some thoughts on blinding and bottles/decanters. The ‘58 tasting in 2014 which utilised the blinding method outlined by JDAW, saw bottles arriving and being decanted into identical San Peligrino bottles, with a shipper tag then being hung onto the SP bottle. The use of identical SP bottles being necessary, because if the original bottle was visible (say a re-used Rioja bottle), then at least one attendee would know which port was behind the Greek on that bottle.

That was I suspect the best option for that tasting, as there were only 8 attendees and thus prepouring didn’t happen, and the bottles sat on the table for the duration of the tasting.

If prepouring were to happen, then really all that needs to happen is that the original bottle is camouflaged until it is prepoured. Say, using foil. If someone wanted to make some effort to discerne some features of the camouflaged bottle beneath the foil, they no doubt could - colour of glass at the neck, for example. That aside, using the foil method would mean only needing a single decant into a re-used bottle, and no need to orchestrate the same bottles everywhere, either on the day or in advance.

So procedure would be:
- arrive, cover bottle in foil and put the shipper tag on it
- follow rest of blinding procedure as outlined for the ‘58 tasting

Another variation would be to book half a dozen decanters with the B&F.

We arrive with our identifiable, decanted bottle and hand it over to a member of staff. The member of staff puts a random greek letter on the bottle and on a decanter before pouring the contents into a decanter. At some point in the evening, the member of staff brings the decanter to the pre-pouring team (not in the order received!) and we pour the contents into glasses, ensuring we keep track of the greek letter which applies to the wine.

Later in the evening, the member of staff brings us the empty, identifiable bottles and we reveal all.

[Glenn E.]

I have in the past, when needing to splash decant multiple bottles, done so thusly:

Port 1 -> decanter
Port 2 -> Port 1
Port 3 -> Port 2
...
decanter -> Port N

Obviously, as each bottle is emptied, it should be rinsed thoroughly of sediment before the next Port is decanted into it. Also, the use of a second decanter is easier than trying to decant directly into another bottle, but not strictly necessary. Use of randomly available empty bottles also adds to the confusion, particularly if multiple empty bottles of the same Port but from different shippers.

Keep very detailed notes throughout the process!

[jdaw1]

If prepouring were to happen, then really all that needs to happen is that the original bottle is camouflaged until it is prepoured. Say, using foil. If someone wanted to make some effort to discerne some features of the camouflaged bottle beneath the foil, they no doubt could - colour of glass at the neck, for example. That aside, using the foil method would mean only needing a single decant into a re-used bottle, and no need to orchestrate the same bottles everywhere, either on the day or in advance.

Are you sure this is enough to blind you from the bottle you brought?

[jdaw1]

We arrive with our identifiable, decanted bottle and hand it over to a member of staff. The member of staff puts a random greek letter on the bottle and on a decanter before pouring the contents into a decanter. At some point in the evening, the member of staff brings the decanter to the pre-pouring team (not in the order received!) and we pour the contents into glasses, ensuring we keep track of the greek letter which applies to the wine.

This could work, if the staff are attentive — and not so busy that they can be attentive. We supply two decanter labels “α”, two decanter labels “β”, two decanter labels “γ”, etc. Then the staff member puts one around the decanter, and one around the bottle, the latter being kept hidden.

Would B&F staff have the time and concentration to do this on the likely scale of this tasting?

We also have a timing problem: Ian and Christopher will arrive late. Ooh, I wonder whether that suggests something about the late-arriving glass “ζ”‽

[flash_uk]

Are you sure this is enough to blind you from the bottle you brought?

After everyone has arrived, there are (say) 18 bottles wrapped in foil with the shipper tag around the neck. That tag is then blanked by someone, and the blank is greeked by someone. There are now 18 bottles in foil with Greek tags.
Each bottle is prepoured into glasses for the 12 attendees.

Sure, the prepourer could try and discern which bottle is under the foil, and it wouldn’t help much if someone had decanted into a Riesling bottle, but it is probably a good enough method for a bunch of folks looking to get 18 ports guzzled conduct an experiment. And in this situation, the prepourer should be left alone to get on with it without an audience.

[jdaw1]

Perhaps: bottles to be labelled α55, β55, γ55, δ63, ε63, ζ63, η66, θ66, ι66, κ70, λ70, μ70, ν77, ξ77, ο77, π85, ρ85, and σ85. Labels are pre-assigned to people, so the JDAW 1970 might be “κ70”, and the bottle or decanter is to be thus labelled. Same labelling on placemats. Yes, as with the MPM scheme, people bringing would know what they have brought. Is that enough blinding?

[Glenn E.]

So far I have only received a single PM containing a list of available Ports for this tasting. Please do send me your list, even if it is only a single bottle, so that I can hopefully create something interesting.

[Alex Bridgeman]

I haven’t yet told Cliff what I can contribute to the tasting.

Should I instead tell Glenn?

[jdaw1]

Should I instead tell Glenn?

I have just told Glenn.

[Glenn E.]

I have received several lists now and can start looking through them to see if anything interesting pops up. More lists would still be good!

[Alex Bridgeman]

I have also told Glenn. I have not told Cliff.

[flash_uk]

Have messaged Glenn with my offerings.

[mcoulson]

I've also messaged Glenn

[Glenn E.]

If I've managed to correlate names to userids correctly, I believe I'm only missing lists from Harry and Ian.

Nice matrix so far! No shenanigans are leaping out at me just yet, but I'll keep looking.

[jdaw1]

Nice matrix so far! No shenanigans are leaping out at me just yet

But this might be a misdirect, just to trick us.

[mcoulson]

Nice matrix so far! No shenanigans are leaping out at me just yet

But this might be a misdirect, just to trick us.

I think it's best to trust nobody in this particular game ..

[cem]

I'll message Glenn what I'm bringing for the 55 and then I'll have leave it up to Glenn to choose from the 1963s so I won't know what will get pulled from Seckford on that and only Christopher D. (my guest) will know it. That way everyone knows 1 port from 1 vintage and 6 Taylors for sure.

[jdaw1]

Glenn: the blinding doesn’t seem to have been decided. As you know everything, are you also willing to give such blinding instructions as you think optimal? Please — we need a puppet-master.

[Glenn E.]

For me, especially at a large tasting such as this, it is sufficient to be blind to what everyone else brought. If I know my own bottle it doesn't really matter. That is but 1 out of 18 (or more?) bottles.

If that is sufficient for the attendees, then my recommendation would be to decant into a random different new bottle (Port, wine, madeira, or otherwise) so that no clue can be discerned from the bottle itself, mark the label of the new bottle so that its owner can be identified later (in case by random chance multiple people decant into the same random different bottle), and then the new bottle wrapped in foil to cover the identification. Number or otherwise mark the bottles as they come in so that glasses can be placed correctly on the placemats.

Now any/all can help with pouring and it makes the evening much simpler.

Bring the original bottle with you for the reveal, but of course well hidden so that no one else can gain a clue from it. A 2-bottle wine carrying case works perfectly.

[jdaw1]

I think Glenn’s suggestion is consistent with:

Perhaps: bottles to be labelled α55, β55, γ55, δ63, ε63, ζ63, η66, θ66, ι66, κ70, λ70, μ70, ν77, ξ77, ο77, π85, ρ85, and σ85. Labels are pre-assigned to people, so the JDAW 1970 might be “κ70”, and the bottle or decanter is to be thus labelled. Same labelling on placemats.

[jdaw1]

Bring the original bottle with you for the reveal, but of course well hidden so that no one else can gain a clue from it. A 2-bottle wine carrying case works perfectly.

Is that how it works in America: nobody brings more than one bottle‽ How cute.

[Glenn E.]

Bring the original bottle with you for the reveal, but of course well hidden so that no one else can gain a clue from it. A 2-bottle wine carrying case works perfectly.

Is that how it works in America: nobody brings more than one bottle‽ How cute.

I have a 12-bottle suitcase and an 8-bottle suitcase for larger tastings.

[Glenn E.]

I think Glenn’s suggestion is consistent with:

Perhaps: bottles to be labelled α55, β55, γ55, δ63, ε63, ζ63, η66, θ66, ι66, κ70, λ70, μ70, ν77, ξ77, ο77, π85, ρ85, and σ85. Labels are pre-assigned to people, so the JDAW 1970 might be “κ70”, and the bottle or decanter is to be thus labelled. Same labelling on placemats.

Mostly, yes, provided the list of labels isn't known to those attending. There is information available in this thread that might affect guessing if the owners of the bottles are known.

My method also keeps the vintages hidden, should you wish to be as blind as possible for bottles other than your own.

[flash_uk]

For me, especially at a large tasting such as this, it is sufficient to be blind to what everyone else brought. If I know my own bottle it doesn't really matter. That is but 1 out of 18 (or more?) bottles.

If that is sufficient for the attendees, then my recommendation would be to decant into a random different new bottle (Port, wine, madeira, or otherwise) so that no clue can be discerned from the bottle itself, mark the label of the new bottle so that its owner can be identified later (in case by random chance multiple people decant into the same random different bottle), and then the new bottle wrapped in foil to cover the identification. Number or otherwise mark the bottles as they come in so that glasses can be placed correctly on the placemats.

Now any/all can help with pouring and it makes the evening much simpler.

Bring the original bottle with you for the reveal, but of course well hidden so that no one else can gain a clue from it. A 2-bottle wine carrying case works perfectly.

I like Glenn’s method. It is a simpler version of what I proposed above, dispensing with the need for stapling blanks and Greeks over an identifying bottle tag. Rather instead, the bringer of the bottle is noted on the bottle label under the foil, while only a Greek tag is required around the bottle neck.