ThePortForum.com

Posted: **16:47 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

We don’t yet have much information about the quality of the 2014 Douro grapes, but we have a hint of a little news.

Reuters, in an article entitled [url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/04/us-usa-weather-idUSBREA000JC20140104]U.S. Midwest, Northeast brace for Arctic blast, record lows[/url], wrote:Many parts of the U.S. Midwest braced for a blast of Arctic air this weekend that could bring some of the coldest temperatures in two decades before advancing to the Northeast, where residents are still digging out from a deadly snowstorm.

Starting Sunday, the deep freeze will be felt in the northern U.S. plains, including North and South Dakota, and through the Great Lakes region and Ohio Valley, according to the National Weather Service.

It will be some of the coldest weather to grip the region in two decades, with blizzard conditions expected in the Central Plains and Great Lakes regions, forecasters said.

"The last really big Arctic outbreak was 1994, said Bob Oravec, a forecaster with the National Weather Service. "Outbreaks like this don't occur everyday. They aren't unheard of, but they are unusual."

1994, eh?

Perhaps it would be better not to count chickens before they are conceived.

Posted: **17:51 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

But was the outbreak in early 1994 or late 1994, the latter resulting in the rather bland 1995 vintage.

Posted: **17:55 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

DRT wrote:But was the outbreak in early 1994 or late 1994

Wikipedia wrote:The 1994 North American cold wave occurred in the northern United States and southern Canada on January 18, 1994. Temperatures in Chicago, Illinois reached −21 °F (−29 °C)

Posted: **18:23 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

Is it too early to look for weather patterns in the Sahara to extrapolate the likelihood of slingshot hurricanes causing it to rain on the 28th of September and spoil the harvest?

Posted: **18:49 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

DRT wrote:Is it too early to look for weather patterns in the Sahara to extrapolate the likelihood of slingshot hurricanes causing it to rain on the 28th of September and spoil the harvest?

I heard that a butterly landed on a leaf in New Zealand this afternoon so it should all be fine,

Posted: **19:23 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

You just wait. In three years you’ll be reading AHB’s TNs of the ’14, the ’14 (or in five years, Roy Hersh’s), and I’ll be saying ‟told you so”. It’s inevitable.

Posted: **19:35 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

Anyone into numerology would be worried; '94 is the only year ending in 4 which was a general declaration in the last 100 years (unless 24 was? I know the RP24 was good); years ending in 9 don't generally do well. Nostrophil says 2014 will not be a general declaration, but looks forward to being spectacularly wrong.

Posted: **19:40 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

But 2+0+1+4=7. Need I say more?

Posted: **19:42 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

PhilW wrote:Anyone into numerology would be worried; '94 is the only year ending in 4 which was a general declaration in the last 100 years (unless 24 was? I know the RP24 was good); years ending in 9 don't generally do well. Nostrophil says 2014 will not be a general declaration, but looks forward to being spectacularly wrong.

I hear your 1924, and raise you a 2011. Previously (well, since 1881), even a perfect the harvest wasn’t enough for a ‘1’.

Posted: **19:47 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:
PhilW wrote:Anyone into numerology would be worried; '94 is the only year ending in 4 which was a general declaration in the last 100 years (unless 24 was? I know the RP24 was good); years ending in 9 don't generally do well. Nostrophil says 2014 will not be a general declaration, but looks forward to being spectacularly wrong.
I hear your 1924, and raise you a 2011. Previously (well, since 1881), even a perfect the harvest wasn’t enough for a ‘1’.

1931? And 1991 too now I think of it

Posted: **19:50 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

1931 should have been, but wasn’t.

1991 should not have been, and wasn’t.

Posted: **19:53 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:1931 should have been, but wasn’t.

1991 should not have been, and wasn’t.

Bit harsh on '91? Will take a bit more time to see, but seems 83-ish in quality to me at the moment (91/92 split aside).

Posted: **19:54 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

I think 1992 was definitely the right decision. I have heard many people agree with that.

Posted: **20:01 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

some of the coldest temperatures in two decades

Global warming strikes again..

Is it too early to look for weather patterns in the Sahara to extrapolate the likelihood of slingshot hurricanes causing it to rain on the 28th of September and spoil the harvest?

Yes

'94 is the only year ending in 4 which was a general declaration in the last 100 years (unless 24 was? I know the RP24 was good);

Yes, 1924 was declared. but 2011 was the first year ending in a one to be generally declared, ever..

Mystic Tom says:

I predict that 2014 WILL be declared, unless it's a total washout.

Reason: We sold out on 2011 in no time, so let's not hang about before we party again..

Posted: **20:02 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

DRT wrote:I think 1992 was definitely the right decision. I have heard many people agree with that.

I'm not disagreeing about '92, nor trying to restart a '91 vs '92 debate right now.

Posted: **20:10 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

nor trying to restart a '91 vs '92 debate right now

'91 - too many lame ducks, '92 - prices too high.

Debate ends.

Posted: **20:12 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

uncle tom wrote:
nor trying to restart a '91 vs '92 debate right now
'91 - too many lame ducks, '92 - prices too high.

Debate ends.

Not quite. You forgot to add "buy 1994 instead"

Posted: **20:14 Sun 05 Jan 2014**

Not quite. You forgot to add "buy 1994 instead"

+1

Posted: **00:30 Mon 06 Jan 2014**

uncle tom wrote:
nor trying to restart a '91 vs '92 debate right now
'91 - too many lame ducks, '92 - prices too high.

Debate ends.

Hear Hear

Posted: **00:35 Mon 06 Jan 2014**

uncle tom wrote:
Not quite. You forgot to add "buy 1994 instead"
+1

1994 which are insanely priced. Buy 2000 at the moment.

Posted: **00:44 Mon 06 Jan 2014**

Andy Velebil wrote:1994 which are insanely priced.

Wine Searcher is showing Graham 1994 at £45 today compared with £109 for Taylor 1992 and £31 for Graham 1991.

I know which one I would rather spend my money on

Posted: **09:32 Mon 06 Jan 2014**

Buy 2000 at the moment

Yes.

When the first two or three cases of a VP appear at auction, the prices are quite high as there are always a few people in the wings who didn't buy at release and have it on their wants list.

However, a decade after release these people are mostly sated, whilst the wines themselves are closed and will normally remain so for several years more, depressing market interest.

If you factor in storage costs and capital tie-up, ten to fifteen years after release is clearly the optimal purchase period (at the moment..)

1994 has past this period now, and as it becomes an acceptable candidate for near-term consumption, so prices have risen over the past two years.

Posted: **20:55 Wed 08 Jan 2014**

On a related note, do we have a single, locked article somewhere that links to our discussions of specific vintages (i.e. 2013 harvest report, 2012 release discussion, 2011 declaration list, etc)

Posted: **05:30 Sat 18 Jan 2014**

Andy Velebil wrote:
uncle tom wrote:
Not quite. You forgot to add "buy 1994 instead"
+1
1994 which are insanely priced. Buy 2000 at the moment.

I dunno Andy, I got an email last month asking me to buy 94s, and some of them look rather attractive (Graham's at 67 per, delivered!?). The 94 Vesuvio is obviously a joke. My biggest problem with them is they wont start to be ready for another 6-8ish years yet. I fear the 00s will take aeons to fully integrate/develop. Will be great wines when they do though.

Grapes the Wine Company

Who needs Port for their holiday dinners? We have a great selection of 1994s that will definitely please all comers!

1994 Cockburn Vintage Port
24 btls available
Grapes Sale Price: $44.99/btl
WS 92

"A big and juicy, young vintage Port. Round, with loads of very ripe roasted and raisiny character. Full-bodied and medium-sweet, with a tannic backbone. Try after 2008.”-James Suckling, 1997

1994 Fonseca Vintage Port
24 btls available
Grapes Sale Price: $149/btl

WS 100 (WS WOTY 1997)

"Hold on to your hat. This is the best Fonseca since 1977, and it's probably even better than that classic vintage--more like the breathtaking 1948. Mind-blowing, with masses of color, aroma and fruit flavor. Smells like fermenting berries, boasting loads of crushed grape, violet and berry character. Big, full-bodied and very sweet, with tons of tannins and a sweet finish. Tannic and huge, it's a long-term, great Port.”-James Suckling, 1997

1994 Graham’s Vintage Port
48 btls available
Grapes Sale Price: $66.99/btl
WS 95, WA 96

"In a port tasting, tasting Graham's is almost like tasting a big, rich, succulent Merlot after a group of blockbuster, tannic Cabernets. Sweeter and more obvious than many ports, the opaque purple-colored 1994 is fruity, powerful, and rich, with an addictive hedonistic quality. It will be ready to drink in 8-10 years and keep for up to 30. As always, this is a showy, flamboyant port that has the advantage of being slightly sweeter than other 1994s. A great Graham's.”-Robert Parker, 1996

1994 Warre’s Vintage Port
60 btls available
Grapes Sale Price: $61.99/btl
WS 95, WA 94

"One of the finest Warres I have ever tasted, this opaque purple-colored wine is made in a drier style (a la Dow), yet it is expressive, extremely full-bodied, with superb richness, purity, and well-integrated alcohol and tannin. It possesses a great mid-palate as well as impressive length. Tasters should take note of the wealth of peppery, licorice-scented and flavored raspberry and blackcurrant fruit. Look for it to be ready to drink in 10-12 years, and keep for 30+. This is a profound example of Warre vintage port.”-Robert Parker, 1996

Posted: **13:30 Thu 27 Mar 2014**

Merged into this thread by jdaw1.

Possibly the wettest winter in the Douro for eighty years..

http://quevedoportwine.com/very-wet-win ... 4-harvest/

Posted: **18:29 Thu 27 Mar 2014**

May I move this into The 2014 Harvest?

Posted: **21:41 Thu 27 Mar 2014**

May I move this into The 2014 Harvest?

That thread seemed to get have got very sidetracked, so I thought better to start afresh...

..but up to you!

Posted: **22:55 Thu 27 Mar 2014**

Above three posts merged into this thread by jdaw1.

Posted: **00:01 Tue 01 Apr 2014**

uncle tom wrote:Possibly the wettest winter in the Douro for eighty years..

http://quevedoportwine.com/very-wet-win ... 4-harvest/

I am sure that someone in the trade once told me that a wet winter pays dividends one harvest after the event - so, using that logic, the harvest in 2015 would benefit from the 2013/14 wet winter. I have no idea whether or not that is true.

Posted: **08:35 Wed 04 Jun 2014**

Everything seems to be going very smoothly so far this season - early flowering and plenty of groundwater to see the vines through the summer.

And the forecast for the rest of June is for a cool spot with a drop of rain this weekend, followed by slightly higher than average temperatures.

Posted: **19:00 Wed 04 Jun 2014**

I heard yesterday that there was quite a lot of rain last week, right in the middle of flowering. This is likely to have damaged the flowers, thus reducing the overall crop size (which is not necessarily a bad thing from a quality point of view) and has created ideal conditions for oidium to set in.

Posted: **20:27 Wed 04 Jun 2014**

I'd be very surprised if 2014 is *NOT* declared. I guess that means they won't be declaring 2015 (and usually they seem to like factors of 5), but I sense a declaration in the air.

Low yields would certainly help make their case to the market that this requires attention in lieu / addition to 2011 (which will certainly prove superior).

woo woo
chris

*importantly edited*

Posted: **08:42 Thu 05 Jun 2014**

I'd be very surprised if 2014 is declared. I guess that means they won't be declaring 2015 (and usually they seem to like factors of 5), but I sense a declaration in the air.

2011 sold so well, there is a discernible hunger for another declaration. In hindsight, the producers probably wish they'd made a lot more '11 than they did.

Low yields would certainly help make their case to the market that this requires attention in lieu / addition to 2011 (which will certainly prove superior).

I have a lot of confidence in the '11s, but I wouldn't predict that '14 couldn't be even better!

Posted: **12:21 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

Update..

Fruit set was affected by cold humid weather. The predicted size of the crop is lower than last year and the long term average.

That's the bad news. Otherwise things are looking good. The last six weeks have been slightly cooler than average with well spaced rainfall. The immediate prospect is for a few days of intense heat - something that helps define a classic vintage.

Oscar tells me: "in terms of quality there is no reason not to expect a great vintage"

Obviously the weather can play havoc over the next six weeks, but the outlook is reassuring at this point. The Atlantic hurricane season has only produced two named storms so far this year, with nothing of note brewing, which is quite unusual, and rather at odds with the edicts of the climate change doomsters..

Posted: **12:40 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

uncle tom wrote:The Atlantic hurricane season has only produced two named storms so far this year, with nothing of note brewing, which is quite unusual, and rather at odds with the edicts of the climate change doomsters..

Not really at odds. 'Climate' is a measure of something that extends across a much longer period of time than one half of one year. It isn't the same as 'weather'; it's about long-term shifts, and the long-term data show that climate change is definitely happening, whatever it's caused by. Within any pattern there will always be outliers (a less wet season, for example), and their could be any number of explanations for this.. But the 'freak' occurrences are now happening far more often than they used to (ask Owen how the Levels were looking a few months back). The winemakers in Mosel and Rheingau certainly seemed to think so when they talked about it last week anyway – a number of them attribute a real change in the style of the wines over the last 20 to 30 years to generally warmer conditions, year on year. Needless to say it was pouring while we were there!

Posted: **14:48 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

But the 'freak' occurrences are now happening far more often than they used to (ask Owen how the Levels were looking a few months back).

I think this is a bit of an urban myth.

Take the ways of measuring weather - wettest, driest, hottest, coldest, windiest - and the choice of time frame - hour, day, week, month, season, year - then multiply by the thousands of geographical locations on the planet, and you end up with a fraction of a million weather stats. Bearing in mind that most of the data has been collected for less than two centuries, it is entirely to be expected that each year will throw up a thousand or so all-time record weather events - routinely dubbed as 'freak' weather by the press.

As for the Somerset levels, that had little to do with abnormal weather and everything to do with incompetant government ministers thinking it was a good idea to stop dredging the rivers..

Posted: **14:50 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

There seem to be a lot of hailstorms in Western Europe in late summer these days. The article Mike posted about Burgundy (apologies, on Tapatalk so not practical to link) mentioned that they'd had very nasty, sharp hailstorms late in summer for the past few years and these are causing havoc. Did Oscar mention whether this is an increased problem in the Douro?

Posted: **15:53 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

Did Oscar mention whether this is an increased problem in the Douro?

Hail is a perennial menace to vineyards. There was a report of hail earlier this year in the Douro which I checked out with Oscar. He told me it was a localised event near Alijo, and mostly affected the same quintas that were hit two years ago.

There was a very serious hailstorm in the early summer of 2006 that led to headlines of 'port harvest destroyed' - it was certainly badly damaged.

Posted: **19:24 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

uncle tom wrote:
Did Oscar mention whether this is an increased problem in the Douro?
Hail is a perennial menace to vineyards. There was a report of hail earlier this year in the Douro which I checked out with Oscar. He told me it was a localised event near Alijo, and mostly affected the same quintas that were hit two years ago.

There was a very serious hailstorm in the early summer of 2006 that led to headlines of 'port harvest destroyed' - it was certainly badly damaged.

Yup, summer hail seems to be a somewhat regular happening in the Douro. Thankfully it seems to be sporadic. 2006 was ugly depending on where your vineyard was. As some got hit hard and some next door didn't get hit at all, or very little. IIRC, Vale d. Maria was one of the harder hit ones in 2006 and suffered lots of damage. I was there that year and saw the damage first hand, it was quite sad.

Posted: **19:44 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

Andy Velebil wrote:
uncle tom wrote:
Did Oscar mention whether this is an increased problem in the Douro?
Hail is a perennial menace to vineyards. There was a report of hail earlier this year in the Douro which I checked out with Oscar. He told me it was a localised event near Alijo, and mostly affected the same quintas that were hit two years ago.

There was a very serious hailstorm in the early summer of 2006 that led to headlines of 'port harvest destroyed' - it was certainly badly damaged.
Yup, summer hail seems to be a somewhat regular happening in the Douro. Thankfully it seems to be sporadic. 2006 was ugly depending on where your vineyard was. As some got hit hard and some next door didn't get hit at all, or very little. IIRC, Vale d. Maria was one of the harder hit ones in 2006 and suffered lots of damage. I was there that year and saw the damage first hand, it was quite sad.

I'm even further away from Portugal here in Berlin than I am when I'm in Belfast, but I guess being on the same landmass I'm more conscious of the weather across the continent right now. There was a sudden and very heavy hailstorm here this afternoon and when I look at the weather maps in the papers or on TV they show a LOT of unseasonal rain, not just here way up north but a good deal further south too. I hope what sounds like an already diminished harvest isn't further depleted by some late storms.. Thankfully we seem to be missing out on the annual flooding for the moment, as Tom said. Fingers crossed it stays that way.

Posted: **21:27 Mon 18 Aug 2014**

unseasonal rain

If you look here:

http://www.weather-and-climate.com/aver ... in,Germany

You will see that August is the second wettest month of the year in Berlin, with average rainfall levels that are over 50% higher than the winter months..

Posted: **05:09 Sat 23 Aug 2014**

Yes, 1924 was declared. but 2011 was the first year ending in a one to be generally declared, ever..

Not true. 1851 was too.

Posted: **15:11 Mon 25 Aug 2014**

Roy Hersh wrote:
Yes, 1924 was declared. but 2011 was the first year ending in a one to be generally declared, ever..
Not true. 1851 was too.

But was it truly declared? Or was it like a lot of houses back then who seemingly made a "VP" in just about every year that was at least decent?

When exactly did the "classic declaration" as we know it today really start?

Posted: **16:25 Mon 25 Aug 2014**

Andy Velebil wrote:
Roy Hersh wrote:
Yes, 1924 was declared. but 2011 was the first year ending in a one to be generally declared, ever..
Not true. 1851 was too.
But was it truly declared? Or was it like a lot of houses back then who seemingly made a "VP" in just about every year that was at least decent?

When exactly did the "classic declaration" as we know it today really start?

I suspect it is similar to the ancient and noble tradition of declaring on St George's Day, which has been going on since at least the mid 1980s

Posted: **16:38 Mon 25 Aug 2014**

DRT wrote:
Andy Velebil wrote:
Roy Hersh wrote:
Yes, 1924 was declared. but 2011 was the first year ending in a one to be generally declared, ever..
Not true. 1851 was too.
But was it truly declared? Or was it like a lot of houses back then who seemingly made a "VP" in just about every year that was at least decent?

When exactly did the "classic declaration" as we know it today really start?
I suspect it is similar to the ancient and noble tradition of declaring on St George's Day, which has been going on since at least the mid 1980s

Oh yes, that tradition. Thank you I almost forgot

Posted: **14:04 Sun 31 Aug 2014**

Consistent with the forecast made almost eight months ago at the top of this thread, Graham’s has now written A Very Good Year In The Making.

(And an excellent article. Not puff salesmanship, just professionally delivered fact-rich clean prose. Me like.)

Posted: **15:54 Sun 31 Aug 2014**

Wet winter, crop yield down below average due to issues at flowering/fruit set, summer temperatures not overly high..

A similar story to 1963 and 1994 - so far..

- And very nice to see the Malvedos site return to good factual reportage!

Posted: **02:11 Fri 05 Sep 2014**

Reports tell me that a little pre-harvest rain is needed to freshen things up, and this looks set to arrive over the next few days. The only worry is that the forecast is for thundery conditions, which increases the risk of hail.

After that, the forecasts are looking very settled and benign. The Atlantic hurricane season has been quiet so far, with nothing of note currently brewing. There is therefore a good prospect of the port harvest coming in under optimal conditions.

Posted: **18:44 Mon 08 Sep 2014**

Reports are of rain the past couple days. Not sure exactly how much. Hopefully it stops and gets sunny again. To much rain right now is not good.

Posted: **07:36 Tue 09 Sep 2014**

I've just taken a look at the BBC 5-day forecast for the Iberian Peninsula. It's showing alternating days of rain and sun. Could be a challenge this harvest.

ThePortForum.com

The 2014 Harvest

The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

2014 vintage off to a good start

Re: 2014 vintage off to a good start

Re: 2014 vintage off to a good start

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: 2014 vintage off to a good start

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest

Re: The 2014 Harvest