Page 1 of 1

1935 Cockburn

Posted: 21:30 Mon 13 Oct 2008
by jdaw1

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 04:05 Tue 14 Oct 2008
by jdaw1
As we were unable to procure a 750ml bottle of Cockburn 1935, two halves were served. One, this, was given to those on the right side of the table (as seen from the only entrance to the tunnel); the other to those on the left.

Alas I, and perhaps others, failed to record which half went to which side, so we now don’t know which way round the pictures of the halves belong. This error is regretted.

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 18:13 Tue 14 Oct 2008
by jdaw1
One of the half bottles of Cockburn 1935.
Image

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 18:14 Tue 14 Oct 2008
by jdaw1
The cork from the above bottle:
Image

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 18:15 Tue 14 Oct 2008
by jdaw1
One of the half bottles of Cockburn 1935.
Image

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 18:15 Tue 14 Oct 2008
by jdaw1
The cork from the above bottle:
Image

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 18:20 Tue 14 Oct 2008
by jdaw1
1935 Cockburn (right side): “another pale red†. Nosing of soft red fruit, including very faint strawberry. Much more fruit, especially cherry, and less spice, than the left-side ’35.

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 16:41 Sat 25 Oct 2008
by DRT
Soft fragrant nose. Thick jammy fruit. Delicious.

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 16:50 Sun 07 Dec 2008
by Alex Bridgeman
From a half bottle. Deep red in colour with a clear centre. Nose surprisingly closed but revealing fresh raspberries. A good texture in the mouth and great fruit development with an interesting nutmeg spice. An elegant aftertaste , gentle and intriguing. A lovely wine. 88/100.

Re: 1935 Cockburn

Posted: 03:14 Wed 07 Jan 2009
by jdaw1
Miguel Côrte-Real sent AHB some of his own notes on the various vintages, some obviously drafted in advance, some from the day itself.
Miguel Côrte-Real wrote:1935

Generic Information
The year of '34 as well as '35 produced excellent vintages. There was some discussions. Some declared '34 (Martinez, Noval, Dow) and others the '35 (Cockburn's, Taylor, Graham). I think the one who did it right was Sandeman because, against the normal rule, they declared both

Year/Viticulture
Production of '35 was smaller than '34 but, as far as we know, the climate conditions were very similar.

A dry winter, the spring frost has prevented many bunches from setting; particularly Touriga grapes (E. Cockburn)

Tasting Notes
1934s are considered to have a better structure; but the '35s are soft, elegant, with lots of finesse and more refined than the '34s. Lots of balance and harmony compensates the lack of structure.

Other
Very fruity and floral, with an obvious fig and pomegranate quality. Soft and elegant, it's quite dry for a vintage port though with a rich, long finish. (L.Murphy)

Last minute notes
Very light and delicate. Less colour than 1912! Very spicy. Lots of finesse.

MC-R notes
8.5/10