Simon Field: Strong colour, with a powerful hothouse nose, this promises to be a wine of significant gravitas. The palate is dense, gravelly, tight-knit, very concentrated and very tannic, ably buttressed by crisp acidity and a generous dosage, possibly a shade overworked. A big, unforgiving and delightful wine, with floral elegance on the finish, as pleasing as it was unexpected, and probably with a long life ahead. 17

Andrew Jefford: A magnificently dark wine, with more saturated depth to it than many ’82s and '83s. First bottle: really unhappy TCA-spoiled aromas. Second bottle: much better nose. Sweet, spicy, rich, broad, really decked out with good things. A sense of generous perfumed ripeness that is almost Rhone-like here: fat fruits, bay leaves, Christmas spices. (Final revisit: even the second bottle isn’t perfect...) Close texture and dense, good, taut, tight, lots of power still left in reserve, while the flavour spectrum is broadening out from the tight-knit fruits of youth to something much richer and spicier. No hurry to consume this hugely diverting and entertaining wine. The fruit qualities are still very much the fresh plum and damson rather than anything more cooked or caramelly. The tannins don’t quite have the ‘Atteeeeention!’-commanding quality of the very greatest ’77s, and perhaps the Graham’s has just a bit more push and thrust, but the generosity of this Port is disarming. 18

Richard Mayson: A very deep youthful colour, with a purple rim. Closed on the nose, with an underlying musky quality, but giving very little away. The second bottle was much better: still closed and withdrawn, but none of the mustiness. Ripe, round plummy fruit with firm ripe tannins rising in the mouth and a peacock’s tail of a finish. Very good now but with more to give over the next 20 years or more. 17.5