ThePortForum.com

This thread was quite prescient since before I saw it (on a circuitous trip into work this morning) and bagged the last seat, I had decanted a bottle of the Ck77 (the recent release) this morning. This is in preparation of a small cheese and Port soiree where it will be up against a G77 and a 40yr tawny.

AHB wrote: ↑12:31 Fri 02 Mar 2018 Currently I'm free on either the 2nd or the 16th so would be happy to go with Tom's and Julian's preference for the 2nd.

I'd rather not re-taste the vintages younger than 1977. They're not great. And SFE vintages are still too young to be at their best.

If we restrict the tasting to vintages 1977 and older (including 1975, which might not be as bad as it was) and a maximum of 14 vintages then we should be able to cope with this as a single sitting.

Where would 14 pre-1977 vintages of Cockburn take us? 1977, 1975, 1970, 1967, 1963, 1960, 1955, 1950, 1947, 1935, 1927, 1924, 1920, 1917. Once the line-up is as complete as we can get it, I'll fill a gap somewhere. I have a decent selection of Cockburn vintages.

That is not a shabby line-up. I agree we should exclude everything post-1977.

As hard as it is to admit, I'm not sure I or my palate would have the stamina for the all day affair we had in 2008. I think approximately 14 vintages (being a maximum of 20 plus or minus 6) is sufficient in a single sitting.

Decisions.
• Tuesday 2^nd October 2018. For which the Red Room has been booked.
• There are many of us. Much as I’d like an Industry Guest, I also want us. So I’ve put WPS ahead of any putative guest.
• One session. Pre-1977. As AHB has said.
• /2alph (initial presumably ‘R’): you were fifteenth, so aren’t yet in. Book not yet flights from Switzerland.
• We need bottles.

DaveRL wrote: ↑13:47 Fri 02 Mar 2018I currently have 70 and 83 (which agree isn't great). Plenty of time to aquire something else, or adopt.

Adoption usual in horizontals, in which most (non-NN) bottles have similar cost. In a vertical such as this there is usually some financial rebalancing: bottles are ‘sold’ to the tasting; those under-providing bottles instead provide money; those over-providing bottles receive money.


AHB edited first post (for which thanks). I have re-edited. Checking of work welcomed.


I thought of this Ck vertical whilst editing the list of placemats (c.f. discussion). The placemats for this will echo that of the 2008 tasting (/GillSans and /Palatino-BoldItalic, and /ShapesToUse [/Star] def; /ColourSchemeTitles /MidGrey def; /InlineTitles false def).

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:58 Fri 02 Mar 2018• There are many of us. Much as I’d like an Industry Guest, I also want us. So I’ve put WPS ahead of any putative guest.

A very good decision.

DRT wrote: ↑23:14 Fri 02 Mar 2018

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:58 Fri 02 Mar 2018• There are many of us. Much as I’d like an Industry Guest, I also want us. So I’ve put WPS ahead of any putative guest.

A very good decision.

There might not be a guest. We might wear our own cufflinks.

uncle tom wrote: ↑05:00 Fri 02 Mar 2018Is there still stock of the '77 that was gifted to us after the tasting ten years ago?

That stock was entrusted to four of our group, and is now mildly depleted. I still have one or two (I need to check), and that is the bottle I mentioned earlier - which comes free of any re-balancing of finances.

I also have some of the re-corked bottles, as do others. It might be interesting to have both the old and the new in this line-up.

DRT wrote: ↑23:18 Fri 02 Mar 2018I also have some of the re-corked bottles, as do others. It might be interesting to have both the old and the new in this line-up.

Decision: yes, both.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑23:17 Fri 02 Mar 2018There might not be a guest. We might wear our own cufflinks.

If no guests have been invited then there I would vote for it being 14 of us. Cufflinks should be compulsory.

DRT wrote: ↑23:27 Fri 02 Mar 2018If no guests have been invited

So far, this has been a ‘private’ discussion between ourselves.

My notes suggest that the '75 blossoms after a long decant.

Have never seen a Cockburn '17..

PhilW wrote: ↑08:48 Fri 02 Mar 2018 I'm in. I have Ck60, plus Ck77 (recent release) and CkC2000, the latter two both in storage though happy to take either out if needed.

(original post now updated after checking)

uncle tom wrote: ↑05:42 Sat 03 Mar 2018 My notes suggest that the '75 blossoms after a long decant.

Have never seen a Cockburn '17..

agreed; stupid me drank up too early the sixpack of Ck 75 you let go after the Cockburns sale before Cockburns was sold to the Symmingtons...

I do not think we should look out for a 17 but a 12 which so far I liked most of all Ck I tasted. Obviously they are in very scarce supply...

regards

WS1

jdaw1 wrote: ↑23:17 Fri 02 Mar 2018

DRT wrote: ↑23:14 Fri 02 Mar 2018

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:58 Fri 02 Mar 2018• There are many of us. Much as I’d like an Industry Guest, I also want us. So I’ve put WPS ahead of any putative guest.

A very good decision.

There might not be a guest. We might wear our own cufflinks.

Thank you!

I would have:

1983, 1985 (big risk of failure, only one bottle left for academic reasons)
1987 Tua
1992 Canais
1994
1995 Canais
1997
2000
2003
2003 Canais

jdaw1 wrote: ↑22:58 Fri 02 Mar 2018Decisions.
…
• One session. Pre-1977. As AHB has said.

Axel: if you believe this decision is very wrong, please make your case. (AHB’s argument made at post 23 in reply to my questions at post 22.)

+ Wolfgang Giehrl.

uncle tom wrote: ↑05:42 Sat 03 Mar 2018My notes suggest that the '75 blossoms after a long decant.

Tom: there is a risk that we might hope for several bottles from you, and I’m reluctant to exhaust your hospitality on a 1975. But your observation is interesting.

Question for team: should we have two ’75s, a pair from the same case with similar fill levels, decanted 3 and 27 hours before?

Question for team: should we have two ’75s, a pair from the same case with similar fill levels, decanted 3 and 27 hours before?

I could supply that.

there is a risk that we might hope for several bottles from you, and I’m reluctant to exhaust your hospitality on a 1975

I could supply the twin of the '50 bottle opened a decade ago, and have plenty of all declared vintages after that.

Can easily supply a '35 - any interest in the 1908 magnum?

uncle tom wrote:

Question for team: should we have two ’75s, a pair from the same case with similar fill levels, decanted 3 and 27 hours before?

I could supply that.

there is a risk that we might hope for several bottles from you, and I’m reluctant to exhaust your hospitality on a 1975

I could supply the twin of the '50 bottle opened a decade ago, and have plenty of all declared vintages after that.

Can easily supply a '35 - any interest in the 1908 magnum?

Yes please in general: 1908 magnum (already on the draft placemats); 1935 (about to be); two × 1975.

Charles has already offered the 1950, so that might be from him.

My doctor says that the uncomfortable tightness I feel in my torso is caused by multiple problems: ‘Cockburn 1912 deficiency syndrome’, ‘Cockburn 1927 deficiency disorder’, and perhaps also ‘Cockburn 1900 deficiency malady’. Surely my friends will rescue me from these terrible medical ailments?

jdaw1 wrote: ↑09:40 Wed 07 Mar 2018My doctor says that the uncomfortable tightness I feel in my torso is caused by multiple problems: ‘Cockburn 1912 deficiency syndrome’, ‘Cockburn 1927 deficiency disorder’, and perhaps also ‘Cockburn 1900 deficiency malady’. Surely my friends will rescue me from these terrible medical ailments?

By strange coincidence, my orthopaedic consultant told me that the arthritis in my left knee was caused by a deficiency of Cockburn 1947 whilst the right knee shows classic signs of a lack of Cockburn 1955. The blood pressure issue is apparently more difficult to pin down and "a wide range of old Cockburn" has been prescribed.

jdaw1 wrote: ↑09:40 Wed 07 Mar 2018

uncle tom wrote:Can easily supply a '35 - any interest in the 1908 magnum?

Yes please in general: 1908 magnum (already on the draft placemats); 1935 (about to be); two × 1975.

I am very happy to see the '08 included as this is a port I would very much like to try. I did contemplate responding to Alex's "what do we get by counting back 14 vintages from '77" and asking why on earth we would stop there when the next two would be '27 and '12, though not having them to offer I held off; However, since we are including the '08 (hurray!) and the question has been asked, I would very definitely agree with including the '12 and '27 if we have access to them, and to test their curative properties!

I have 27, 35, 47, 55, 60, 63, 67, 70, 75, 77 (recent release)

There is an outside chance I may have a spare 12 - but would need to find it.

should we have two ’75s, a pair from the same case with similar fill levels

Checking my stock I notice that in case B057 I have two bottles that not only have the same visual fill level, but when inspected last April, both weighed in at exactly 1401.6g

forest26 wrote: ↑14:04 Wed 07 Mar 2018I have 27, 35, 47, 55, 60, 63, 67, 70, 75, 77 (recent release)

There is an outside chance I may have a spare 12 - but would need to find it.

Of which we are currently missing ’27 and ’12. Yes please.

27 confirmed and put aside - Don't get too excited about the '12... proving a little difficult to locate.