Crusted port database

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks, Spring 1985.

(Already on the list. Lower price is with bulk discount.)

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks, Autumn 1985.

(Already on the list.)

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks, May 1987.

(Already on the list.)

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks, Autumn 1988.

(Already on the list.)

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks, Autumn 1992.

(Not yet on the list.)

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks, 1995/96.

(Already on the list.)

[uncle tom]

would there be much unhappiness if it were to become a chapter in the book currently (not being) written by DRT and I?

None at all - but a tiny reference to my efforts woud be appreciated!

Tom

[jdaw1]

reference to my efforts woud be appreciated

Deal.

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks catalogue produced in 1963 for The Highland Brigade Wine Society

[jdaw1]

Justerini & Brooks’ purchasing book

[jdaw1]

In the tasting room of Ferreira, photographed 29 September 2008:

(Terrible kerning.)

[uncle tom]

Can we assume these are Ferreira wines?

We already have a record of a '52 Ferreira, but bottled a year earlier.

Tom

[jdaw1]

Can we assume these are Ferreira wines?

I have no information other than the photograph. Generally Hunt Roope ≈ Tuke Holdsworth.

[DRT]

Hunt, Roope and the Tuke Holdsworth brand were acquired by Ferreira in 1956. These were therefore bottled and sold under Ferreira's ownership but the wines would have been produced by Hunt, Roope. The wine could well be from Quinta da Eira Velha as that was the principle property owned by HR in that period. Pure speculation, of course

[jdaw1]

Corney & Barrow order book, March 1891, records sales of ‟Old Crusted Port”. The term was widely used, and I suspect imprecisely defined.

[jdaw1]

Peter Bedford Limited, Wine & Cigar Merchant, Leamington Spa and Warwick, catalogue of Autumn 1966.

[uncle tom]

A while back, the UK merchants jumped seamlessly from offering Churchill 2002 to the 2004, leading me to assume that there was no 2003 bottling.

Wrong! Rather bizarrely, a lone merchant in the Czech republic is offering the 2003, complete with photo - so now added to the list.

http://www.portugalmarket.eu/cz/katalog ... usted-port

Nickolls and Perks have acquired a small stash of Taylor '70 crusted (I bought a couple, despite being overpriced..) - so also added.

Tom

[jdaw1]

So that we don’t lose the image, added.

Churchill Crusted bottled in 2003

Ch2003c.jpg (15.75 KiB) Viewed 8156 times

[mosesbotbol]

Justerini & Brooks, Spring 1985.

(Already on the list. Lower price is with bulk discount.)

I had a case of 78 Taylor Crusted. Maybe 5-6 bottles left. Lot's of spearmint, kind of hot. Very sweet.

[RAYC]

How do the Vale Dona Maria "Lote No. XX" ports fit into the IVDP classifications?

It is billed as an "unfiltered reserve" port, though from the description on the website sounds rather like a crusted.

"From my own vineyard, Quinta do Vale D. Maria, located in the far hills of the Douro, this Port was bottled, unfined and unfiltered, as my personnal reserve. Issued from wines that were vinified foot troden in old granit stone ‟lagares” and aged in old wooden vats, this unfiltered ‟Reserve” is bottled only once every year, on the date shown on the label. The Lote nº indicates the series of the bottling. Lote nº 00 was the first Port of this style of Quinta do Vale D. Maria to be released. It is a blend of different years with the great majority of the wine in the blend being from the harvest of the second year before the bottling date (i.e, bottling in 2002, base wine in the blend from the 2000 harvest). It is bottled unfined and unfiltered in the tradition of the best bottle ageing Ports. This Port shows a great structure with intense fruit character and soft ripe tannins. It is specifically blended to age in bottle for many years to come but it can be thoroughly enjoyed now. Past and future predictable total productions in bottles of 75cl."

http://www.valedonamaria.com/pag15_1.asp

[uncle tom]

There is no reason why you should not market this as Crusted port, provided that (IIRC..)

- you put the year of bottling on the label.

- it gains IVDP approval as a Crusted port

- it is called Crusted port on the label.

- you cellar it for at least three years after bottling before offering it to the market.

IVDP rules aside, I would be very interested to try some samples of your product, with a view to possibly buying a commercial quantity.

Please send me an email or PM if you are interested in discussing business.

Tom

[RAYC]

Tom,

I was just quoting from the website in my post - am not anything to do with the quinta myself.

Looks like there is a bottling date on the label, though I've seen that AHB has tried some of their "Lote No.06" (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3099&p=27618&hilit=lote#p27618) which suggests that they may be releasing earlier than the 3-year qualification would otherwise permit.

[DRT]

I seem to recall that this is declassified VP. I can't remember why it had to be declassified but what is in the bottle is unfiltered port from a single vintage bottled after two years. I and a few others from here tasted some of this at the quinta last year and it was very nice juice.

[Dom Symington]

Very intrersting thread but much of what is being refered to as Crusted or Crusting in the comments and photo's is infact "old fashioned" LBV ... as Andy made clear in his post. These two terms were in quite common use in the wine trade even when I strated (!) and simply refered to wine that had already or were truely capable of developing a crust.
Many of these wines are either "old fashioned" LBV's or "vintage ports" from non-declared years which in part have been replaced by Single Quinta's.
Crusted has never included the vintage (year of vinification) but only the bottling year. If a vintage (year of vinification) is included on the label plus a bottling year it will effectivly be an LBV or non-declared vintage port.
Examples are the Hunt's 54/56 and 52/57 although both labeled as Crusted they are infact a non-decalred vintage and an LBV. (I don't know if Hunt's did or not, actually declare 54, although one would assume not!)

[jdaw1]

(I don't know if Hunt's did or not, actually declare 54, although one would assume not!)

There is no evidence that Hunt Roope declared 1954 let’s call that a ‘not’.