Punch Churchill 2003

[strayvector]

Smoked this last night. The last of my aged Punch singles.

Construction:

This Churchill was a mottled medium Colorado brown with a wrinkled wrapper, not the prettiest of wrappers. Nicely box pressed. There is moderate veining with a well done triple cap. Good construction, firm feel, and no hard or soft spots. The nose of the cigar gave a nice slight barnyard citrus aroma. The prelight draw exposed a dusty and firm draw with an earthy tone.

1st third:

Lighting the cigar was easy and started with an even burn. The cigar had an excellent firm draw and produced a good volume of smoke. My first draw revealed a very clean mild tobacco taste. Then it developed some faint nuttiness. It was smooth and balanced, but lacked any flavor nuances. Pretty boring start, but not unpleasant. About 10 minutes in, the cigar developed a slight earthiness to it with subtle cinnamon spice. It started off as a light bodied smoke and at this point it developed some strength. Exhaling through the nose highlighted a citrus udertone to the cigar.

2nd 3rd:

Burn became a little uneven and required a slight correction with the torch. The cinnamon gave way to the more familiar Punch woodiness, while retaining its earthiness. At the halfway point the cigar became markedly stronger, developing into a medium bodied smoke. A very pleasant fungal/mushroom like creaminess developed. The woodiness continues, but the cigar was developing some bitterness. I suspect that this had a lot to do with the build up of humidity as the cigar progressed. I had to purge it at this point.

Final 3rd:

Slight bitterness accompanied the cigar the rest of the way. The flavors took on a more wet wood sensation, the creaminess continue to build and the earthiness diminishes. At the one inch mark, the cigar culminated in that tingly sensation to the lips. The ending of the cigar was very pleasant and I put it down at the half inch mark when it took on some acridity to it.

Assessment:

Good cigar. Boring beginning, good middle, better ending. The faults of the cigar is that it took too long for the flavors to develop. 88

[El Presidente]

Ahhh the Punch Churchill. Akin to a beautiful woman with PMT. You have no idea who really will be turning up today.

Some of the finest I have had are from 1998. Cream, wood, slight spice, medium bodied. The difference I see between a great Punch Churchill and an average one is weight on the palate, density of smoke, viscosity.

Great review

[Guest rob]

What vintage was the Punch Churchill we had on the balcony last month, Pres?

It was one of the nicest I have had in the last 10 years. Ordinarily I find them a bit bland - but that one was a cracker.

[El Presidente]

» What vintage was the Punch Churchill we had on the balcony last month,

» Pres?

» It was one of the nicest I have had in the last 10 years. Ordinarily I

» find them a bit bland - but that one was a cracker.

One of my last personal stocks from 2001.

[Mel]

» » What vintage was the Punch Churchill we had on the balcony last month,

» » Pres?

» » It was one of the nicest I have had in the last 10 years. Ordinarily I

» » find them a bit bland - but that one was a cracker.

»

» One of my last personal stocks from 2001.

The tubed Monarchs are the only ones worth a damn.

[strayvector]

Just had another one on Saturday that a friend gave me from recent vintage, 2006 I think. Seemed to have more flavor, but also a lot more bitterness. Very pleasant smoke and one that will probably age better. Seemed to have more legs for aging than the 2003.

[PDC1]

» Just had another one on Saturday that a friend gave me from recent vintage,

» 2006 I think. Seemed to have more flavor, but also a lot more bitterness.

» Very pleasant smoke and one that will probably age better.

I had one of these (2006)meself on Saturday, also a gift from a friend.

Apart from an annoying burn problem, i thoroughly enjoyed this smoke.

Stronger than the Hoyo, and not quite the punch of the Partagas, i found it really hit the spot for me. Absolutely loved it.