The 1000 finest wines ever made

[DRT]

Is it fair to mention 1995 or newer ports? Would seem the verdict is still out on if they are worth of such a list.

Rule 3: There are no rules about which Ports you can nominate.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Is it fair to mention 1995 or newer ports? Would seem the verdict is still out on if they are worth of such a list.

I think it's fair, because you can taste a port and think "Wow! What a stunning port. That's going to be amazing in 30 years time.". I've tasted a few like that from 2000, 2003 and 2007. If a port brings the drinker massive enjoyment today either because it delivers a knock-out and mature taste or because it delivers wonderful potential and anticipation then it can be added to the list and argued about when we reach 101 different ports.

[Axel P]

My add ons would be:

Nacional 97
Dalva Golden White 1952
Warre 66
Cockburn 35
Niepoort 1970 (bulky bottle)
Niepoort Colheita 1863
Quarles Harris 1970

Axel

[Alex Bridgeman]

I'd love to know where they put the 1989 Haut Brion, if you don't mind a slight drift -- just for a second, I promise. Thanks.

Roy - the highest placed Haut Brion was the 1945 in 17th place. The 1989 was back in 53rd, just behind the 1929 in 50th spot.

[JacobH]

Anyone care to nominate another 50 so we can start arguing (and eliminate the Vargellas ’87 )?

[WS1]

Hi there,

outside the Ports mentioned by Alex:

Nacional 1963
Fonseca 1963
Fonseca 1966
Croft 1945
Croft 1927
Nacional 1994
Noval 1931
Graham 1955
Nacional 2003
Noval 1997
Morgan 1945
Gould Campbell 1977
Fonseca 1948
Taylor 1948
Croft 1948
Croft 2003
Graham 1963
Noval 2003
Nacional 1966
Nacional 1960
Nacional 2000
Sandeman 1963
Vesuvio 1994
Vesuvio 2003

and Derek:

Cockburn 1908
Cockburn 1912
Constantino 1941
Fonseca 1920
Calem Foz 1970
Dow 1980
Fonseca 1985
Vargellas 1987
Taylor 2003

and Axel:

Nacional 97
Dalva Golden White 1952
Warre 66
Cockburn 35
Niepoort 1970 (bulky bottle)
Niepoort Colheita 1863
Quarles Harris 1970

I think:

Calem 1970
Calem 1935
Taylors 1927
Taylors 1935
Smith Woodhouse 1970
Grahams 1970
Gould Campell 1970
Nacional 2003
Taylor VV 2000
Taylor VV 1995
Noval 1966
Noval 1967
Taylors 1966
Taylors Vargellas 1991
Taylors 1992
Taylors Vargellas 1995
Grahams 1991
Grahams 1994
Fonseca 1970
Fonseca 1977 (perfectly stored)
Fonseca Guimarens 1976
Fonseca 1992 (perfectly stored)
Smith Woodhouse 1977
Croft 1963
Dow 1955
Dow 1963
Dow 1960
Croft 1955
Croft 1960
Taylor 1960
Ferreira 1963
Sandemann 1966
Sandemann 1967
Warre 1970
Warre 1977 (in very good condition)
Warre Cavadinha 1987
Graham Malvedos 1987
Graham Malvedos 1990
Niepoort 1987
Dow 1977
Nacional 1931
Niepoort 1985 (in good condition)
Cockburns 1983 (in good condition)
Cockburns 1955
Delaforce 1966
Quarles Harris 1980
Warre 1980
Offley 1963
Taylor 1963
Fonseca 2003
Noval 2000

[Alex Bridgeman]

Combining all the lists together and liberally adding a few more of my own, I've come up with the following list of the 100 Greatest Ports Ever made (with minimum age of 10 years today and as judged when drunk today for both future potential and current enjoyability).

So which of these represent the top 10 - and why?

Which of these should be dropped from the list?

1 AJS Da Silva colheita 1890
2 Andresen colheita 1982
3 Calem 1935
4 Calem 1970
5 Calem Foz 1970
6 Cavadinha 1987
7 Cockburn 1908
8 Cockburn 1912
9 Cockburn 1935
10 Cockburn 1947
11 Cockburn 1955
12 Cockburn 1983
13 Constantino 1941
14 Croft 1917
15 Croft 1920
16 Croft 1924
17 Croft 1927
18 Croft 1945
19 Croft 1948
20 Croft 1955
21 Croft 1960
22 Croft 1963
23 Croft 2003
24 Cruz 1989
25 Dalva Golden White 1952
26 Delaforce 1966
27 Dow 1955
28 Dow 1960
29 Dow 1963
30 Dow 1970
31 Dow 1977
32 Dow 1980
33 Ferreira 1945
34 Ferreira 1963
35 Fonseca 1920
36 Fonseca 1948
37 Fonseca 1963
38 Fonseca 1966
39 Fonseca 1970
42 Fonseca 1977
43 Fonseca 1985
44 Fonseca 1992
40 Fonseca 2003
41 Fonseca Guimarens 1976
45 Gould Campbell 1977
46 Gould Campell 1970
47 Graham 1955
48 Graham 1963
49 Graham 1966
50 Graham 1970
51 Graham 1977
52 Graham 1980
53 Graham 1983
54 Graham 1991
55 Graham 1994
56 Kopke colheita 1940
57 Malvedos 1987
58 Malvedos 1990
59 Manuela colheita 1970
60 Morgan 1945
61 Niepoort 1970
62 Niepoort 1985
63 Niepoort 1987
64 Niepoort Colheita 1863
65 Noval 1931
66 Noval 1963
67 Noval 1966
68 Noval 1967
69 Noval 1997
70 Noval 2000
71 Noval 2003
72 Noval Nacional 1931
73 Noval Nacional 1960
74 Noval Nacional 1963
75 Noval Nacional 1964
76 Noval Nacional 1966
77 Noval Nacional 1994
78 Noval Nacional 1997
79 Noval Nacional 2000
80 Noval Nacional 2003
81 Noval Nacional 2003
82 Offley 1963
83 Quarles Harris 1970
84 Quarles Harris 1980
85 Sandeman 1963
86 Sandeman 1966
87 Sandeman 1967
88 Sandeman 1970
89 Smith Woodhouse 1970
90 Smith Woodhouse 1977
91 Smith Woodhouse 1994
92 Taylor 1927
93 Taylor 1935
94 Taylor 1948
95 Taylor 1960
96 Taylor 1963
97 Taylor 1966
98 Taylor 1980
99 Taylor 1992
100 Taylor 2003
101 Taylor VV 1995
102 Taylor VV 2000
103 Vargellas 1987
104 Vargellas 1991
105 Vargellas 1995
106 Vesuvio 1863
107 Vesuvio 1989
108 Vesuvio 1994
109 Vesuvio 1997
110 Vesuvio 2003
111 Warre 1966
112 Warre 1970
113 Warre 1977
114 Warre 1980

[DRT]

Combining all the lists together and liberally adding a few more of my own, I've come up with the following list of the 100 Greatest Ports Ever made ( with minimum age of 10 years today and as judged when drunk today for both future potential and current enjoyability).

So which of these represent the top 10 - and why?

Which of these should be dropped from the list?

You can start by disqualifying these as they are not yet 10 years old...

23 Croft 2003
40 Fonseca 2003
71 Noval 2003
80 Noval Nacional 2003
81 Noval Nacional 2003
100 Taylor 2003
110 Vesuvio 2003

[RonnieRoots]

Interesting list.

One thing that immediately comes to mind: why eliminate ports younger than 10? These should definitely make the list IMO:
- Taylor 2003
- Fonseca 2003
- Noval 2003
- Croft 2003
- Niepoort 2003

Of Alex' list, I would dispose of the following:
- Andresen Colheita 1982 (no idea why this is on the list, had it once and thought it to be quite mediocre)
- Cavadinha 1987 (a good port for sure, but one of the best 100...? No.)
- Cruz 1989 (why not cruz ruby?)
- Fonseca 1992 (1992 instead of 1994? Surely a mistake)
- Graham 1991 (not the best Graham on the market)
- Malvedos 1987 (same story as Cavadinha)
- Noval 1966 (a feeble port at best)
- Vesuvio 1989 (I understand the emotional value, but it isn't one of the great Vesuvio's)

Of course, I have to find replacements for these ports. I would think of the following:
- Niepoort Garrafeira 1952 (there isn't a single garrafeira in the list, which is a mistake. The only one I've tasted is the 1952, therefore my nomination.)
- Sandeman 1955 (a port of beautiful balance and elegance, and showing the wonderful potential of Sandeman ports)
- Fonseca 1994 (why was this not on the list????)
- Taylor 1994 (same question)
- Fonseca 2000 (one of the best Fonseca's in modern history and better than 2003 IMO)
- Niepoort 2003 (Dirk may consider his 2005 and 2007 superior but I think this one is a legend in the making)
- Niepoort 1977 (came out best at our 1977 tasting in 2008, so deserves a spot here)
- Croft 1991 (there aren't many ports of 1991 that impress me, but Croft is one of them)

I'm sure there are plenty of others but this should do for now.

[JacobH]

Which of these should be dropped from the list?

Hang on; were all my suggestions so bad that they deserved unilateral disregarding from the first draft of the list?

I understand the emotional value, but it isn't one of the great Vesuvio's

I think there’s something to be said for certain bottles being on for sentimental reasons. For instance, the Noval Nacional 1931 is on the list, but I think I’m correct in saying that the only people on who have tasted it had a poor bottle; its reputation is what makes it great.

Niepoort Garrafeira 1952 (there isn't a single garrafeira in the list, which is a mistake. The only one I've tasted is the 1952, therefore my nomination.)

Perhaps we need a separate ‟oddities” list for things like this and the Dalva White Colheita &c. which are quite hard to rate against VPs?

[RonnieRoots]

Niepoort Garrafeira 1952 (there isn't a single garrafeira in the list, which is a mistake. The only one I've tasted is the 1952, therefore my nomination.)

Perhaps we need a separate ‟oddities” list for things like this and the Dalva White Colheita &c. which are quite hard to rate against VPs?

Why are they hard to rate against VP's? They are very good ports. There's more in the world of port than VP, you know.

[JacobH]

Niepoort Garrafeira 1952 (there isn't a single garrafeira in the list, which is a mistake. The only one I've tasted is the 1952, therefore my nomination.)

Perhaps we need a separate ‟oddities” list for things like this and the Dalva White Colheita &c. which are quite hard to rate against VPs?

Why are they hard to rate against VP's? They are very good ports. There's more in the world of port than VP, you know.

I completely agree. There are some fabulous SQVPs and many very good Crusteds, LBVs and Ruby Reserves

More seriously: I do like a tawny Port as much as the next person in the Crusting Pipe, but we just don't see nor get to drink very many of them over here.

However, the question was phrased more specifically: I was just wondering whether there is a difference between Vintage Port and Colheitas, on the one hand, and things like the Garrafeira and White Colheitas on the other? For instance, from what I have heard (not having tasted any), all the Garrafeira Ports are pretty good and would probably deserve a place on the list; but that would account for quite a big percentage of the overall number. The same could apply to some of the ultra-rare, very old bottles on the list as currently stands.

And whilst we are on the topic of tawny Ports, to those of you who drink a lot of them: are there no blended ones which deserve a place?

[benread]

And whilst we are on the topic of tawny Ports, to those of you who drink a lot of them: are there no blended ones which deserve a place?

I had a Niepoort 20YO recently and it was superb. Been looking fo rmore of it but it has a price tag to match! Even Nuala loved it, which is saying something.

[Glenn E.]

And whilst we are on the topic of tawny Ports, to those of you who drink a lot of them: are there no blended ones which deserve a place?

There are. (Or to answer the question as phrased, no.) The Kopke and Noval 40 Year Old Tawny Ports are both 95+ points in my book. A good bottle of either could reach 97. There are at least two others that I have heard can be in that range, but I haven't had the opportunity to taste either the San Leonardo or the Vista Alegre.

There is a very long list of Colheitas that could make this list - several from 1937, for example - but I think limiting the list to Vintage Port is probably a good idea since you guys don't get the chance to taste all that many Tawnies.

[DRT]

Can we at least agree that out of the top 100 ports ever produced those Tawny/Colheita things deserve no more than 5 places on the list?*

Derek

*Not that I would want to inject any controversy into this thread

[Glenn E.]

Can we at least agree that out of the top 100 ports ever produced those Tawny/Colheita things deserve no more than 5 places on the list?*

No.

[RonnieRoots]

Can we at least agree that out of the top 100 ports ever produced those Tawny/Colheita things deserve no more than 5 places on the list?*

No.

Ditto. The fact that you Brits don't drink tawny doesn't mean it's no good. It just means you have to broaden your horizon.

The Niepoort 30YO and Vallado 20YO are also serious candidates for the list IMO.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Can we at least agree that out of the top 100 ports ever produced those Tawny/Colheita things deserve no more than 5 places on the list?

I think it perfectly reasonable to eliminate ALL tawny / colheita ports from a list of the top 100 vintage ports ever made.

And Ronnie spotted my little joke - Cruz 1989 in the list

And the other 2003's weren't on the list because no-one suggested them.

And Jacob's wines weren't on the list because I must have missed them.

When I get the chance, I'll trawl through this thread again and revise the list. More thoughts would be welcome.

[Chris Doty]

Now that we're over 100 ports...can we remove the 1980 Taylor from the list?

Only had two experiences, but both were pristine bottles, neither of which meritted a score above 89pts. Not one I would recommend, particularly when bottles like the 2000 Niepoort remain off the list.

[WS1]

Hi Chris,

to remove the 1980 Taylor is fine by me. The wine is good but bot as good as Dow 1980, Grahams, Quarles Harris and Warre 1980.

regards

WS1

[Alex Bridgeman]

Perhaps we should have a rule - you can only remove something from the list if you suggest a replacement?

That way we can have a debate about what to do. Should we remove the Taylor 1980 and replace it with Niepoort 2000?

Personally, the Taylor 1980 was my suggestion because I once had bottle of it which impressed me significantly. However, is the Niepoort 2000 a better wine in the opinion of The Port Forum?

[RonnieRoots]

Perhaps we should have a rule - you can only remove something from the list if you suggest a replacement?

Very good!

That way we can have a debate about what to do. Should we remove the Taylor 1980 and replace it with Niepoort 2000?

Personally, the Taylor 1980 was my suggestion because I once had bottle of it which impressed me significantly. However, is the Niepoort 2000 a better wine in the opinion of The Port Forum?

I definitely think Niepoort 2000 is a better wine and deserves a spot in the top100. I've only had the taylor 80 once. It was pleasurable, but not outstanding.

[SushiNorth]

I think there are some gaps on here. If we are willing to look at undrinkably young ports (which I would suggest we exclude, btw, to make this easier), then we really need to include some of these:
Taylor 94
Fonseca 94
Graham 00

(1st ed) As for Tawny's and Colheita's, i would suggest a "top 10" of the former and a "top 20" of the latter, as separate lists.

(2nd ed) Perhaps we ought to have a list of top 100 drinkable v.ports, top 50 v.ports of yesteryear (i.e. too old now), and top 30 most promising v.ports (undrinkably young)

[RonnieRoots]

(which I would suggest we exclude, btw, to make this easier)

I doubt if that would make things easier. I, for instance, thought the Graham 2000 was very drinkable when I tasted it in December.

Why the Fonseca and Taylor 1994 are missing from the list is beyond me as well, as I've noted before.

[DRT]

Can Morgan 1991 please be added to the list in place of Taylor 1980?

My reasoning is that Morgan 91 is a fantastic port that is great for drinking now but will last for another two decades or more. Taylor 1980 just isn't a good Taylor, or a particularly good VP.