Simon Field | Imperial or cardinal purple, depending on your persuasion, tight in the rigging and firm on the tiller, little room for gradation of color yet far from monochrome, for all that. The nose is fulsome, a touch raisined, with figs, quince, and hints of toffee-apple evidenced; the fruit character recalls myrtle, loganberry, and the last of the season’s raspberries. In the mouth, there is sweetness, precocity, and a gentle alcoholic burn. Wet cindery notes, with an earthy subtext; austere in a cerebrally challenging fashion, with plenty more to give and plenty of time to resolve. Let’s see where this goes. | 93

Andrew Jefford | This is a lighter wine than our two 1991 examples: dark black-red at the core but no longer opaque, graduating to clear scarlet at the rim. It has attractive, refined, elegant, rather soprano aromas, with lots of sweet hay and lifted wild flowers over a cherry-fruit substrate: very pretty and expressive already. Vanilla and unlit Virginia tobacco behind: nice. On the palate, it is pretty, sweet-fruited, and toothsome, with much the same aromatic repertoire as the aromas sketched out. Pleasant, tasty wine, even if it won’t reset anyone’s Vintage Port horizons. | 88

Richard Mayson | Mid-deep, with a youthful hue and thin browning rim; a bit hollow and jammy on the nose, lacking definition at this stage; similarly quite rich and jammy in style on the palate, with licorice at the core. Firm, tight-knit tannins lead to a ripe, powerful finish but with the fruit seeming rather stewed and soupy. This is a wine that may still need time to find itself. | 85