Vintage port - leaky bottle : (

Interesting question, Nicola. I think that it would help to know what exactly you've got: how old, and what kind of Port? If it's vintage Port, it can age for many decades and still be quite robust. OTOH, if you mean a vintage Port from before WW II, or if it's a Ruby or Tawny Port, the story is different. I'd suspect from your description that it is a vintage Port (not many Rubies or Tawnies are sealed by wax AFAIK). To answer the question, no, leakage is not a sure-fire sign of ruination, but a fragile (older) wine may be heat damaged. In any case, I'd probably open it sooner rather than later but you'll get a better and more informed answer if you can provide more information about the wine.

HTH Mark Lipton

Many thanks for your help Mark

We don't exactly know what it is because it was unlabeled (long story) but we were actually given two bottles, and on opening the first all the cork said was 'Oporto Cabral 1877' and we believe the second might be the same thing. The bottle was sealed with an old, short cork and had black wax over the top. The first bottle was fantastic, so you can imagine my reaction when I noticed the second one leaking...!!

Do you think we've got a bottle of vinegar on our hands? (and while I'm here does 'Oporto Cabral' mean anything to you, as it's a bit of a mystery to us!)

Mark Lipt> snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

OK. Yes, this is an old vintage Port, but (assuming that Cabral was the producer) not a producer whose name I am familiar with (note that I'm nothing like an expert on Port, so my lack of familiarity means next to nothing). Someone more knowledgeable about Port might chime in to provide a more educated opinion.

No, it won't be vinegar. At worst, it'll just taste flat and tired, with little to no flavor or maybe thin and acidic. But, chances are that the leakage just resulted from a spike in temperature that increased the internal pressure of the bottle enough to force out some wine. However, that does allow the ingress of some oxygen, so your Port may have suffered a bit. As I said before, consume it sooner rather than later and be prepared for the worst case by having something else handy to drink instead should it prove to be over the hill.

(BTW, it's my understanding that vintage Port from that era didn't have any labels on the bottle. Even today, most don't. Usually, the year and producer are stenciled on the bottle to avoid mold destroying the label during the years when it lies in a dank, humid cellar).

Have fun with the bottle, and if you can let us know how it is when you

Mark Lipton

I'm with Mark all the way on this one. Until post-WWII, most Port was bottled away from the lodge and was often labeled with the hotel, the restaurant, or the importer. I do not know this producer, but there have been quite a few changes in the houses over the centuries.

As for your Port, it might still be holding its own, regardless of the leakage. However, it could, as Dr Lipton states, be heat damaged. Port is a very durable wine and can withstand quite a bit of mishandling, though one should NOT mishandle it.

As an example, I have had most of the Taylor-Fladgate Vintage Ports from the '30s, except for the '55. In London, the club was opening a bottle and offered me a glass. Hey, the '55, finally!! I noticed the stains on the label. I helped the wine steward extract the cork. She poured my glass, and it looked like a Tawney. Hm-m-m, not a good sign. It smelled maderized a bit (burnt pecans, almonds, caramel, that sort of thing), but I tasted it. It was very similar to either a Tawney, or a Madeira, but NOT a Vintage Port. It was OK, just not what I had been waiting for. Too bad. To this day, I still have not had the '55, but I'm off to London again, so there still might be a chance...

Good luck, and experience it for what it is now, especially as you have had the opportunity to taste it without the heat (or other) damage.

Hunt