1963 Taylor

[uncle tom]

A lone bottle bought as part of a mixed lot of old bottles last year, and found to have a slight seepage issue.

Decanted last night - well and truly corked

But, nose aside, not too bad a drink, pale amber in the glass, not too aggressive, not too much fire - fading gracefully.

I would judge this to be a wine to drink rather than keep, I'm not sure it will retain its integration for many more years.

As this was a tainted bottle, no score offered.

Tom

[RonnieRoots]

Pity that it was corked. It was one of one of my favourite ports that I drank last year. Such a beauty.

[jdaw1]

I have half-a-dozen T63s remaining. Not improving, but not obviously in urgent need of drinking. One drunk on the first anniversary:

13:30 decantation. At D+0 I tested a tiny sample that had been used to prime the decanter and the washed bottle. Brick red, edging towards brown . Nose very spirity. Mouth also showing the spirit, which I hope fades, along with a brief flash of mint. Sweetness in the mid-palate, dry at the end, and no signs of big fruit. This bottle might be a little past its prime, but we shall see.

At D+6hr the same brick red. Nose has more red fruit and more sugar than earlier—a better wine. Still some heat in the mouth, lovely length, Taylor backbone, and much red fruit, and chocolate, agreed to be mousse rather than solid. The chef thought it leathery, but I didn’t concur.

[uncle tom]

A post-script is worthy here

At D + 0 and D + 24, the wine had the same, heavy, soggy cardboard, corked nose...

A day later, and the corked nose is still there, but is much less intrusive; also,.. the wine has developed some integration that gives me more hope for the future of untainted bottles.

Tom