OOPs i mis-read you previous statement thinking it said you agreed with all of thier reviews.
A brief Truth in Cigars
- Thread starter tatuaje
- Start date
Mitch
BOM 2/09-Keeper BOTtLe
I see how you came to that. I'll edit.
Electric Sheep
Dsicle - BoM Dec 06
To be perfectly fair, ALL cigar rating are nothing more than a subjective perception of the reviewer.
Naturally, there are a million little things in everyday life that can alter someone's perception...like what you've eaten, what you're drinking, the environment you're in, the mood you're in, whether you got a piece of ass last night, if your allergies are acting up, if your boss wants the stack of TPS reports on his desk by 8:00am tomorrow, if your grandmother just died, if the chili you had for lunch is running through your colon like a freight train, etc. etc. etc.
And yeah, it's possible that advertising dollars can cloud the judgment of a publisher (they are running a business after all) but I like to think that most magazines try to separate the advertising and editorial departments as much as possible.*
Just remember that cigar reviews aren't a science. You just gotta take them as a rough guide and understand where they come from.
* sidenote: I used to be an Art Director of a magazine, and our publisher was, without a doubt, heavily influenced by advertising dollars. So yeah, it happens. Not saying that's the case at CA, just saying that in the industry, it DOES happen.
Mitch
BOM 2/09-Keeper BOTtLe
I agree with you, I believe for just the reasons you stated, the ratings are all over the place and just because they rate a stick high or low, it is of no value to me at all in deciding if it has potential. They are just that far off of what I (and at times most people) like.
You got to admit some of the cigars they have listed in their top 25 or didn't make the list have left people scratching their heads. Not knocking their integrity, just the frequency at which they miss the target completely.
You got to admit some of the cigars they have listed in their top 25 or didn't make the list have left people scratching their heads. Not knocking their integrity, just the frequency at which they miss the target completely.
In terms of reviews...yeah they are subjective. At least with Smoke, they change the panelists...cA still has the same guys smoking their stuff. While they may be consistent in terms of who is smoking them, they all like strong blends. Cigar Magazine also does good ratings especially with the many faces which lets you guys smoke and rate.
When I did the Smoke ratings, a cigar to really get rated poorly has to have bad construction etc...I rated mine fairly I think, but also realized that what I like may not be to the taste of someone who prefers lighter stuff...so I rated the lighter cigars appropriately. I only had one that was a crappy cigar...forget what it was...but I also remember the words of Bill Finck Sr who said you can make a cigar that tastes like crap and as long as you are consistent, someone will buy it.
When I did the Smoke ratings, a cigar to really get rated poorly has to have bad construction etc...I rated mine fairly I think, but also realized that what I like may not be to the taste of someone who prefers lighter stuff...so I rated the lighter cigars appropriately. I only had one that was a crappy cigar...forget what it was...but I also remember the words of Bill Finck Sr who said you can make a cigar that tastes like crap and as long as you are consistent, someone will buy it.
the vision is a good cigar by its own merit... nevermind cao's marketing...
I disagree that cA is the worse... Cigar magazine it the worse.... yeah it "might" be reader based reviews... but they spin the crap out of them...
I disagree that cA is the worse... Cigar magazine it the worse.... yeah it "might" be reader based reviews... but they spin the crap out of them...
I was at a cigar tasting event at my local B&M and there was a rep from Montecristo there. He was telling me when he went to Cuba and toured a factory, they put different bands on the same cigars. Not all of them do but some.:frown:
I would be weary of anything that any cigar rep says. I also had a general rep tell me that they were stocking up on cuban cigars for the embargo drop.
If O F A C will not allow Lloyds TSB to provide money to Hunters & Frankau, how they hell is general buying illegal products without notice?
Ok, I've read through all the posts and as I understand Pete's statement, they are grading (sorting) the SAME cigar by wrapper color shades and not mixing sig ii's with monte 4's.
Is that what you are saying Pete?
This has always been my understanding, they do it so they have a better "presentation" when you open the box. I also agree with Kevin, slight color variation has nil affect on flavor.
Is that what you are saying Pete?
This has always been my understanding, they do it so they have a better "presentation" when you open the box. I also agree with Kevin, slight color variation has nil affect on flavor.
I re-read everything, it seems to me he is saying that they are taking the same cigar, same blend same wrapper, sorting by color, then putting some in a monte box and some in a cohiba box. So basically monte no 4 and cohiba sig II are the same exact cigar with a slightly different shade wrapper.
And that is barely an example, by the looks of it. I still am hesitant as to believe all this. Gonna have to get meself more of each of these 2 soon.
If that's the case, I won't say that it doesn't happen on occasion but I've never had a P2 that taste like a BBF or a Monte 2 that tasted like a Unico or a Sig II that tasted like a Monte 4.
There is no way that's anything more than a rare occurrence IMHO (based on 16+ years).
Just my $.02 though
~Mark
indyrob
BoM Feb '06 & Sept. '08
It's impossible to sort a cigar by color into a new marca that has a unique flavor all of it's own. The industry would have collapsed by now if that were the case. I still think it's based off a generic bunch (maybe labeled X,XX,XXX) and then it would have to have it's proprietary binder/wrapper to become the finished product. There are way too many strains out there, each with a unique flavor, not to mention the levels of primings that can be obtained for a different flavor again. Think of it as X*X*(X,XX or XXX).
I am inclined to believe you, based on my personal experiance.
My comment was just my attempt to clarify what Pete is saying based on my understanding of it.
I can't believe they do that all the time, because a monte #4 just does not taste like a sig II, IMHO. But according to Pete's comments, if I undrestood what he was saying, he is indicating that they take the same cigar, grade it by color and put a cohiba band on one and a monte band on the other.
tubaman
3 Time BoM
This is how I interpret what he said also. Maybe I'm wrong on this but that's what I think he is saying. Same blend cigar just sorted by color and then banded Monte or Cohiba.
Has this happened, maybe. But I don't think this is the norm, or even common. It would be pretty rare imho.
He was talking about the "big guys" marketing the same blend of cigar under multiple brand names. For me this isn't really a big deal, because I don't smoke any of these cigars. But I guess if you like a Cohiba Black which sells for $10+ at the B&M and they turn out to be a the same blend as a Sancho Panza Dbl Maduro which is sub $5 (btw, this is hypothetical)... I guess that would be important to you.