1960 Cockburn

Tasting notes for individual Ports, with an index sorted by vintage and alphabetically.
Forum rules
Tasting notes for individual Ports, with an index sorted by vintage and alphabetically.
Post Reply
User avatar
jdaw1
Cockburn 1851
Posts: 23628
Joined: 15:03 Thu 21 Jun 2007
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 1960 Cockburn

Post by jdaw1 »

C60: Nose had a slight woodiness, and a slight bottle stink. Taste matched.

Later the nose had resolved into overwhelming VA. I wrote ‟Horrible”.
User avatar
Chris Doty
Graham’s Malvedos 1996
Posts: 843
Joined: 12:30 Fri 29 Jan 2010

Re: 1960 Cockburn

Post by Chris Doty »

Crap.

(Flawed)
User avatar
Alex Bridgeman
Graham’s 1948
Posts: 14900
Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK

Re: 1960 Cockburn

Post by Alex Bridgeman »

Pale colour, light centre and a pale rim. Smelly on the nose, lots of rubber bands. Sweet entry, full of sugary rhubarb. Light bodied and elegant; quite simple and straightforward. Minimal aftertatse, but a light finish based on sweet sugar-syrup that lingers quite a long time. NR.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.

2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
User avatar
DRT
Fonseca 1966
Posts: 15779
Joined: 23:51 Wed 20 Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Contact:

Re: 1960 Cockburn

Post by DRT »

A little stinky/VA - nail varnish taste - not good.

No one above seemed to disagree.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Post Reply