what was LBV called in the past?

[JB vintage]

What was LBV called in the past? In the past before LBV / Late Bottled Vintage was an accepted and mandatory other designations were used. Does anyone know these alternative names for LBV? For example I have seen the writing "Reserve Vintage" but do not know if this is a way of saying that this is a good (=reserver) vintage or if it is indicating more years in wood (=LBV) or how it should be interpreted.

[DRT]

It was mostly called "Vintage Port", and occasionally "Vintage Port, Lately Bottled".

[Andy Velebil]

Tough question as there wasn't a standard bottle between X years after harvest like today pre-1949-ish. So basically what DRT said.

[JB vintage]

What about the period 1949-isch to 1974?

[DRT]

The style existed during that period and had the same name as it does now.

[Andy Velebil]

What about the period 1949-isch to 1974?

To give some clarity for ease of understanding. Post late 40's everything was basically standardized to what it is now. So again, what DRT said. The biggest issue in identifying bottles as to what a producer really made and bottled was pre-late 40's.

[idj123]

It may be related to this thread (it may not) but I recent acquired a couple of bottles of what are labelled Warre 1962 Vintage Port. Now I'm pretty sure that that Warre didn't declare in 62 (not mentioned by Mayson anyhow). However, the clue would seem to be in their bottling dates-1966, which indicates to me that they're either LBV or Crusted. Thoughts?

Ian

[DRT]

Michael Broadbent mentions this Port in his book. I think it is a Wine Society bottling and is technically an LBV.

Could you please post a photograph of the label?

[uncle tom]

It may be related to this thread (it may not) but I recent acquired a couple of bottles of what are labelled Warre 1962 Vintage Port.

I have one of these - if you look at the label you will probably see it stated 'bottled in 1966' - i.e. late bottled.

[PhilW]

Could you please post a photograph of the label?

If possible could we have a picture of the top face of the capsule as well, and may I add them to the VPID please?

[Alex Bridgeman]

It may be related to this thread (it may not) but I recent acquired a couple of bottles of what are labelled Warre 1962 Vintage Port. Now I'm pretty sure that that Warre didn't declare in 62 (not mentioned by Mayson anyhow). However, the clue would seem to be in their bottling dates-1966, which indicates to me that they're either LBV or Crusted. Thoughts?

Ian

It's a very enjoyable port - I plan to open my last bottle of this at some point this year - but it is a late bottled vintage port.

[idj123]

Thanks for the responses and good to hear that it's an enjoyable port. Now had 5 mins to take a picture although there's no label at the back (which would probably have confirmed the LBV/Wine society side).Also, the seal is very encrusted. Happy to upload if still needs be-but being a Luddite someone will have to draw me a simple picture of how!

[DRT]

Happy to upload if still needs be-but being a Luddite someone will have to draw me a simple picture of how!

This is a picture of the screen while I am typing this response.

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 09.42.40.png (27.8 KiB) Viewed 12566 times

Look at the bottom left. Click "Upload attachment", "Browse" to select the picture and then "Add the file". You will then see the picture listed above the upload attachment button. If you want to put the picture in a particular place in your post you need to position the cursor where you want it and then hit "Place inline". Bingo!

Before doing the above you should reduce the size of the picture. I normally reduce them to about 3"-4" wide and 75-100kb.

[JB vintage]

Is Vintage Reserve Port a Vintage or an LBV? or perhaps something else? Picture of Croft 1953 Vintage Reserve Port enclosed. As far as I know Croft didn't declare 1953. Although, they might have bottled some 1953 vintage for some specific customer anyway. Anyone who knows? I do not have a better photo.

[Andy Velebil]

Typically, the "Reserve" designation on older Ports means it's a Colheita (single year tawny port). Though not always.

Hard to tell from the small picture, is there a bottling date on it?

[RAYC]

Typically, the "Reserve" designation on older Ports means it's a Colheita (single year tawny port). Though not always.

Hard to tell from the small picture, is there a bottling date on it?

No... i don't think so - at least not on the front label. Here's a slightly better picture from the listing.

1953.jpg (27.91 KiB) Viewed 12506 times

[idj123]

warre_1962.jpg (101.51 KiB) Viewed 12478 times

I've finally managed to upload!

[Glenn E.]

I've finally managed to upload!

Prior to Taylor Fladgate "inventing" the category in... 1965, I think... what we today call LBV might have been labeled as any number of things. A 1962 Port bottled in 1966 is right on the cusp of that "invention" so I wouldn't be surprised to see it labeled either way - VP or LBV.

As for what it actually is... well, that's really up to you to decide. Today it would be called an LBV, but the 18-30 month bottling requirement for VP didn't exist back then (though I can't remember precisely when it came into being) so just about any Ruby Port could be labeled as VP and accurately described as such.

[Andy Velebil]

As for what it actually is... well, that's really up to you to decide. Today it would be called an LBV, but the 18-30 month bottling requirement for VP didn't exist back then (though I can't remember precisely when it came into being) so just about any Ruby Port could be labeled as VP and accurately described as such.

The requirement for VP to be bottled between the second and third year after harvest came about in the late 1940's. Far before this (Warre's) was produced.

[Glenn E.]

As for what it actually is... well, that's really up to you to decide. Today it would be called an LBV, but the 18-30 month bottling requirement for VP didn't exist back then (though I can't remember precisely when it came into being) so just about any Ruby Port could be labeled as VP and accurately described as such.

The requirement for VP to be bottled between the second and third year after harvest came about in the late 1940's. Far before this (Warre's) was produced.

Really? That's interesting considering the number of bottles similar to this Warre that I've seen. Was the requirement just not enforced until later?

[Andy Velebil]

Really? That's interesting considering the number of bottles similar to this Warre that I've seen. Was the requirement just not enforced until later?

Well it is the Douro, so who knows

[JB vintage]

As for what it actually is... well, that's really up to you to decide. Today it would be called an LBV, but the 18-30 month bottling requirement for VP didn't exist back then (though I can't remember precisely when it came into being) so just about any Ruby Port could be labeled as VP and accurately described as such.

The requirement for VP to be bottled between the second and third year after harvest came about in the late 1940's. Far before this (Warre's) was produced.

The Port wine institute, IVDP, has informed me that the bottling requirement of 2-3 years after harvest for vintage port was definite as of the new regulation 1974.

[Andy Velebil]

The Port wine institute, IVDP, has informed me that the bottling requirement of 2-3 years after harvest for vintage port was definite as of the new regulation 1974.

JB,
Here is what Paul Symington has stated regarding this in the following ftlop thread.
http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 545#p47545

There is more misinformation about LBV than just about any Port category, with some wild claims made to say the least. The real story is that for centuries the actual bottling time for Vintage Port was not defined. The producer would decide when he wanted to bottle, sometimes aftet two years in cask, sometimes after 4 or even 5 years. When the IVDP decided, shortly after the II World War, that the bottling times should be defined, some producers pushed for two years but some pushed for longer. My father, Michael, just back from the war, was working with his father Maurice and his uncles as a Port producer in our company in 1948, and he was actually on the committee that decided this (called the Gremio at the time, now the AEVP) with the IVDP. The compromise solution found was that Vintage Port would be bottled in its 2nd year and that a new category would be formed, called, very logically; Late Bottled Vintage Port. I believe that the first such wine was Ramos Pinto (who would certainly have had older wines that could use this new designation as they historically bottled their Vintage Ports later). My friend Joao Nicolao de Almeida from Ramos Pinto can certainly confirm this for you. Obviously the wine was supposed to be bottled un-filtered and un-fined, just like Vintage Port. We ourselves still have bottles in our cellar of Dow's 1964 LBV and Warre wines from the 1950's made in this way and duly registered with the IVDP. At a later stage Cockburns decided to launch a filtered LBV, in an attempt to widen the Port market that was very very difficult at that time, but the outcry from all the major Port houses was such that they rapidly withdrew the wine. Peter Cobb, retired Director of Cockburn's, can confirm this fact for you. Later Taylor's introduced a filtered LBV that became a considerable commercial success in the UK and credit to them for having done so. We later introduced a Graham LBV and so have many others. These wines have become one of the mainstays of the Port trade (and of course for the Douro) and are essential to its survival. Incidently, with our Warre's LBV we have always stuck to the original intention: 4 year bottling, no fining or filtration, driven cork and above all, we mature it in bottle for at least 3 years before release. A different (and inevitably more expensive) LBV. But both styles of LBV have a rightful place in any Port lovers cellar, they are both excellent wines.

From another warm and sunny day in the Pinhao valley. I will now take my dogs for a walk through my vineyard and check how the grapes are coming along,

Paul

[DRT]

I find it difficult (in fact impossible) to believe that the IVP could pass regulations or laws that dictated when and how VP should be bottled at a time when 90%(?) of the bottling took place in the UK, Ireland and a few countries in Scandinavia. The reality is that until the early 1970s almost all VP was shipped in cask and bottled either by the end consumer or by foreign wine merchants that were beyond the reach of the IVDP's or Portuguese government's jurisdictions.

The fact that many bottlers chose to bottle VP at their convenience was one of the principle reasons why the Portuguese changed their own laws to force shippers to bottle VP at source in order to protect the style. That fits well with the IVDP's current claim that the regulations kicked-in in 1974.

Paul's description certainly rings true in relation to the development of LBV as a style, but it does not fit particularly well with what was happening in reality in relation to shipping un-bottled VP. If there was a regulation at that time it could only have been enforced on the shippers themselves and would only have affected the very small proportion of VP bottled in Oporto at that time.

[RAYC]

warre_1962.jpg

I've finally managed to upload!

Is there anything on the neck of the bottle?

In view of what DRT argues above (which I agree with), it would be interesting to know whether there's a selo..?

[RAYC]

Is Vintage Reserve Port a Vintage or an LBV? or perhaps something else? Picture of Croft 1953 Vintage Reserve Port enclosed. As far as I know Croft didn't declare 1953. Although, they might have bottled some 1953 vintage for some specific customer anyway. Anyone who knows? I do not have a better photo.

Did you end up bidding on this? (& did you win...?)

[JB vintage]

Here is what Paul Symington has stated regarding this in the following ftlop thread.
http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... 545#p47545

Thank you Andy for the story of how LBV was developed. However, I believe that this new LBV category was implemented as an optional designation, there was still no definite 2-3 year requirement for vintage until 1974. This is in line with the inability to control bottling made in other countries such as UK.

[JB vintage]

Is Vintage Reserve Port a Vintage or an LBV? or perhaps something else? Picture of Croft 1953 Vintage Reserve Port enclosed. As far as I know Croft didn't declare 1953. Although, they might have bottled some 1953 vintage for some specific customer anyway. Anyone who knows? I do not have a better photo.

Did you end up bidding on this? (& did you win...?)

No I passed.

[Andy Velebil]

JB.
Reread what Paul wrote. There was a change for VP bottling times back in 1948. But Derek would be correct. Outside of Portugal the IVP (now IVDP) had no control over what the old wine merchants in the UK and elsewhere did.

[DRT]

I think what is likely to have happened in 1948 is that the IVP defined VP (and perhaps others) as a specific style with guidelines around how it should be produced and bottled. The shippers probably made best efforts to stick to those guidelines but their distribution network didn't play ball, resulting in the 1974 regulations and the cessation of bulk shipments in the early 1970s.

[Andy Velebil]

I think what is likely to have happened in 1948 is that the IVP defined VP (and perhaps others) as a specific style with guidelines around how it should be produced and bottled. The shippers probably made best efforts to stick to those guidelines but their distribution network didn't play ball, resulting in the 1974 regulations and the cessation of bulk shipments in the early 1970s.

Agree. Most merchants outside Portugal were very reputable and generally stuck to the bottling time lines. But some didn't, for whatever their reasons at the time. There was also no control as to what a non-Portuguese merchant put in a bottle as well. Again, most were reputable but I'm sure there were some who took liberties.

1972 was the shift where everything had to come out of Gaia in a bottle. That was so the IVP could regulate all aspects of the trade and ensure outside merchants weren't bottling substandard Port, which it previously couldn't. I'm sure there are other reasons as well, this being just one of them.

[RAYC]

1972 was the shift where everything had to come out of Gaia in a bottle. That was so the IVP could regulate all aspects of the trade and ensure outside merchants weren't bottling substandard Port, which it previously couldn't. I'm sure there are other reasons as well, this being just one of them.

Andy - are you sure that's correct?

Not everything had to come out of Gaia in bottle - I thought that was some time later?

[DRT]

It was only VP (or perhaps only premium styles) - basic port continued to be shipped in bulk until the 1990's. When it was banned completely it killed the Newman's practice of shipping Port to Newfoundland to be aged in cold storage before being bottled.

[Andy Velebil]

It was only VP (or perhaps only premium styles) -

Yes, sorry as we were talking about premium styles I should have been more clear.

[JB vintage]

As of Jan 1, 1974, the new act states that all vintage port (and I believe all premium port) must be bottled in Portugal. The standard port that did not have to get approval from I.V.P. could still be shipped in bulk.

[idj123]

Apologies for the slow response but in terms of rhe W62, there's nothing on the neck although one of the bottles does have the paper seal (that the 'selo'-right?) but it is too foxed to read without the use of a magnelite or similar which I don't have. Best thing is I bring one to an off-line or else as perhaps part of a Warre unfiltered LBV vertical (has there been one of these?). As has been remarked before, these do seem represent good value and it's interesting to hear that this style seems to date back to the 50s (I had thought that the earliest example was thw W61-although I did see a CK61 up for sale the other day (bottled in '68)).

[RAYC]

although one of the bottles does have the paper seal (that the 'selo'-right?)

something like this?

selo.jpg (43.51 KiB) Viewed 9056 times

If so, that would seem to pour cold water on the theory that people - even in Oporto - paid much attention to any agreement that Oporto-bottled VP had to conform to the 3 year bottling rule from the late 40s....(also, aren't there a number of Sandeman "vintage ports" from 50s / 60s which are bottled 4-5 years after harvest?)

[idj123]

Rob. yes. something exactly like that (the number for what it's worth and I can make out is 055754).