Hear Ye, Hear Ye! 2007 Vintage Ports have been ...

2007 Vintage Ports are “generally declared.”

This was a no-brainer and I saw this coming from the time my feet were crushing the grapes. I have been to quite a few harvests now and none had more excitement than what I witnessed in 2007. People knew as the grapes were coming in from the vineyards that this was something special, if not extraordinary. I have wonderful memories of that time.

Sweet! (no pun intended)
Thanks Roy.

'tis my pleasure, Mark!

So Roy, what producers do you recommend?

Steve,

Probably the usual suspects. But in all seriousness, although I have had early versions of cask samples last year, it was too early to make any kind of assessment on any VPs.

I will head to Portugal and try 50-60 and produce a 2007 Vintage Port Forecast, as per usual, with two weeks over there.

Interestingly, now a few years after Parker has hired Jay S. Miller to do the Vintage Port reviews, I am really looking forward to his very first foray into writing about Port, and the 2007 VPs will make this even more important.

If Dickhead is reviewing it there should be a dozen 100 point wines.

You sure have a way with words and a subtle manner there Steve.

Well I put a lot of thought into it Cris.

With Dr. Jay rating we can guarantee on most being 98ers with some 100ers

Buy futures, do it now.

But I must way, while Parker was better than Jay, neither I feel have shown they evaluate based on current and future drinking. Yeah my palate agrees with RMP on the early stuff, I also love some of the big wines, but I am still not sure, and maybe he is right, that he understands port with regards to aging. Then again he is better than the Speculator every day.

Having been in the Douro during harvest in 2006, 2007, and 2008 it was interesting to see the higher level of excitement with the 2007 vintage. You could feel it in the air, not to mention the color extract in lagars. Very good excitement about 2008 as well, but it didn’t have quite the same overall excitement in the air as the 2007 harvest did. But both ended up being very good years, despite some nay-sayers. While I’ve had a good number of cask samples, lagar samples, and component samples it’s still to early and would be irresponsible to make a prediction on what houses are the best at this time without being able to taste the “final version” that was approved by the IVDP. So you’re going to have to wait a little longer for Roy’s Vintage Report, sorry

Typically how long is it past vintage when you can get a good feel for the vintage from the final product? Is it longer that non-fortified still wines?

RP fully admits to not being a Port drinker, so it’s no surprise that most Port lovers I know, including me, look elsewhere for reviews. Lets not get into P. Revoni (sp?), wow what a mess that one was. I do disagee though with WS. Suckling has generally done a very good job with Ports and his book, even though now showing it’s age, is still highly reveared in Port circles.

i do look forward to Jay’s review as I’ve heard he at least likes Port and he couldn’t be any worse than Rovani.

Maybe there is another WA writer who frequents that area of the world that might be of skill to tackle fortified Ports.

IMO it really depends on how much experience a reviewer has with really young Ports. They can be real monsters when young and it’s no easy task figuring out what will make great old bones. That is something that only comes with lots of experience. older Ports are much easier to figure out as they have already started to flesh out.

An experienced reviewer can make a pretty solid and accurate assesment the same year they are released. But again, there are not many reviewers that drink super young VP on a regular basis. So chose your reviewer wisely

Only Mark Squires goes there often for WA, but he only does Portuguese dry wines. While I know he has Ports while he is there, I don’t know his true level of experience and passion for Port. I would guess not that high if he isn’t doing Ports and only doing dry wines…but that is only a guess on my part, nothing more.

Parker stated early and often that Jay Miller is a big fan of Port wine. I think he deserves the chance to prove himself. Whether or not you agree with ANY previous assessments he has done on other regions’ table wines … Port is a very different animal.

So if Jay Miller winds up doing a fabulous job, I’d be thrilled!

Parker did Vintage Ports (no other Ports … and never VPs from non-generally-declared years) for many years. Whether you agreed with his assessments or not, he certainly helped to move the market either way.

My issue with his reviews is simple:
a. How does a critic/journalist/consumer advocate rate wines when he has never stepped foot in a Port Lodge in Vila Nova de Gaia and never visited the Douro to see what the region, the people, the history, the vineyards … are all about? This makes no sense to me and AFAIK, this was the ONLY area in the world that he used to review that he never visited. IMNSHO, I just don’t see that working. Can he rate the Ports? Probably so and obviously he did so. But doesn’t the lack of any contextual significance complicate the ability to review a region? What if he had never visited Bordeaux … would anyone have taken him seriously?
b. When evaluating Port cask samples or just bottled samples, how do you do this without tasting blind? Are you going to give a better score to a Barros than you would a Taylor … if the former wine was better … but you were staring at the labels? I’m not saying it is impossible, I just know how difficult that would be.


Now there IS someone beyond Jay Miller on the WA staff very qualified to review Port wine. I have consumed Port with Neal Martin and although we have different palates and preferences in Port, after evaluating over 40 Vintage Ports together, I must say … he would have been a great choice to review VPs. Honestly, whether you like his writing style or not (and I do) he “gets” Port. Vintage Port was one of his earliest loves in the world of wine, going back to his college days. He also participates in Port tastings often, in the UK and occasionally in Portugal too. Again, he’d be on my short list … but in all fairness, I do not know Jay S. Miller and feel we should all give him a fair chance, as Parker gave him lots of props about his enthusiasm for Port. I am actually very psyched to read his first Port eval this year!


Lots of people can take shots at James Suckling. I have great respect for him as a writer and as a Port palate. My only quibble and it is a very minor one (and people fault me for going too far out in the other direction) is that his drinking windows are so short, that virtually any Vintage Port should and will exceed them by a significant margin. That said, I’ve tasted with him as well and he has a very very deep sense of Port, AT ALL STAGES OF ITS LIFE. Kudos to James for sticking his neck way out on a limb in his (1989) book when just about nobody in the USA had a fucking clue about Vintage Port. He has tasted more Ports than most people ever will in a lifetime. And although I certainly disagree with some of his scores and takes on specific VPs, it is easy to do that with ANYBODY. So for my money, I’d probably pay the most attention to his read on young VPs. Nobody gets 'em all, but his % of accuracy with VP is probably as high as anybody out there … and I am talking about evaluating VP in its pre-release form.


Broadbent (although I wish he had used a 100 pt. scale ) is another brilliant mind when it comes to Vintage Port and he has been over there more than most other reviewers. His style of writing appeals to me (yes I am very close friends with his son but so what) and I have tasted Port with him more times than I have fingers to count them on. He “gets” Port. His depth of tasting of Port exceeds possibly anyone else alive today. Enough said.


Richard Mayson is also a very savvy Port palate and although he writes more about the historical perspectives and detailed nuances from regulations to vineyard practices in the Douro … make no mistake, Mayson has an outstanding Port palate. Critics point out that he has certain allegiances and I understand their concerns, but I’ve met him enough times and consumed copious quantities of Port with him and don’t believe those are a factor in his ratings. Look, as mentioned, I am friends with the Broadbent’s and yet when Bartholomew released his first VP (1994), I was his greatest critic (in print) and it strained our friendship for years. Mutual friends questioned how I could do such a thing (after the fact). I calls 'em as I sees 'em. So, I see no reason that Mayson would not be equally objective and the critics should drop that nonsense already!


Last but not least. I have plenty of my own critics too: people who disagree with my long drinking windows, many say that I am too tough with scores, some feel my scoring range which typically fits between 78-100 is way too narrow and others have said they feel my scores are too generous because I am too close to the Port trade. So, take my above comments with a grain of salt, as it is easy to find fault with any critic/journalist who reviews wine or anything else.

I left out Mark Squires but that was an oversight.

Mark has said on numerous occasions that he likes Port wine but doesn’t drink it much. I have not ever paid attention to his tasting notes over the years EXCEPT with his Douro wine reviews. Friends and a few people on this BB accused me of being a hypocrite when I started a thread after his first article and complimented him loudly. It truly was not a “suck up” situation, but having had many of the same wines and some on numerous occasions (I started drinking Douro wines in 1994, upon my very first visit there) I felt he did a really splendid job in not only providing ratings very similar to my own (which really matters not that we had similar reads) but in his astute conveyance of his descriptions of those wines. I felt he did a marvelous job, with lots of people ready to lynch him with any mistakes.

It would certainly save Parker money to have Mark do Port too, as he already goes over there, but as he already is covering so many regions there … I think Parker was wise to keep the two functions separate.


As for me, I’ve been reviewing cask samples or just bottled samples since the early 1990s vintages, although I started drinking Port in the early 1980s. As Bob Wood and Brad Kane are two of the only people left here (or on Squires’ from the old AOL wine message boards) they first saw my writing on Port in 1995. Then in 1997 when I did my first online review of the 1994 vintage. Like I did for years on Robin Garr’s board and for the past six years on Squires’ … the old AOL wine message board was my place to spew about Port for seven years (and occasionally Madeira too).

In fairness, I don’t just drink VP, I drink every type of Port … even the cheapies on occasion. Since 2004 when I dropped my career to begin more serious writing about Port, I’ve been to Portugal more often than any other non-Portuguese writer with the exception of Richard Mayson – and he lives over there. I have written between 350-550 Port TNs per year ever since. I had over a thousand on the old AOL BB from my earlier days … but sadly, as Bob can attest to, without any notice … the archives were shut down and we all lost all of our TNs.

It has been fun writing for my own little niche site and newsletter and trust me, it is not for the money … in reality … just as it started, it is all for the love of Port.

I’m done after this:

Evaluating cask samples of Vintage Port is one of the most palate fatiguing and truly monumental tasting tasks one could ever undertake. I’ve been a professional judge in CA/OR/WA beginning in 1999. I can honestly say that tasting through 150 wines in an eight hour day for a couple of days in a row was only challenging my first year of doing so and I enjoy it very much. I know dozens of people who can do that with ease. But anyone who has ever tasted Port cask samples, can tell you this is hard ass “work.” Andy has come on my Port tours each of the past three years and I can tell you he gets it. Even though we have not had many at a single sittlng, we get to try quite a bit during the course of the trip (and tons of oldies too). Unless someone has some experience at doing this … it is not something that you can tackle just because you are used to evaluating lots of table wines. The sheer alcohol level, enormous concentration of fruit and palate punishing and puckering tannins are just in a different league. As of the 2000 Vintage, I’ve rated between 30 - 52 Ports in just about every year since and will be doing the same with the 2007s.

My best advice, read as many people’s opinions as you can get your hands on and if your palate aligns with one or two of theirs, follow their impressions. But never forget, we/they all make mistakes and their read on cask samples or just finished bottles of Vintage Port … is just the opinion of one person.

Out.

Very exciting.

I’ll pay attention to Roy’s reviews before those previously mentioned.

JD