:-)

I actually do like Ca's interviews with celebrities and will look over their top of the year list, but that's about where it stops.
[Reply]

Do they avoid smoking Gurkhas?

I did have a patient Friday in the ER mention he smoked cigars-he exclusively smokes Gurkhas from Cigars International. It didn't end up being much of a cigar discussion after that.
[Reply]

:-)
[Reply]

I trust the reviews here more than anything else. I don't read CA.
[Reply]

I'm not a huge fan of CA. I trust other people I smoke with and know cigars, and also reviews and comments from members here. I find CA to be a bit biased in their findings. It's a nice reference but I routinely am not a fan of some of the sticks they rate highly. It all goes back to smoking what YOU find delicious.
[Reply]

I trust this place and halfwheel...Before I smoke a new (to me) cigar I search here for help on what to expect. I've also realized I have the palate of a dead goat and can't taste mulberry, cinnamon or Virgin Cuban thighs...Helps point out what to look for even if I can't find/taste it...
[Reply]

:-)
zero as i find that their taste preference is wayyyy.. different than mine...
[Reply]

I appreciate the vote for halfwheel, however I'd put as much stock in our Top 25 as many other unbiased blogs (I don't consider ca unbiased, but that's just my opinion).

The main problem with ours is that's the Top 25 from what we've reviewed - not everything that was released that year. And of course, though it's averaged out from four of us, it's still our opinion.

Our Consensus Top 25 however...that's a much different story. Charlie painstakingly takes all the cigar blogs he can get his hands on (over 50 for 2012), takes their top lists, formulates everything into an averaged list, and then gets a Top 25 list from that. I honestly can't find a list that I agree with more of the top cigars than that one.
[Reply]

I look at CA for the ads of all the stuff I can't afford :-)

I was impressed with their choice of FDLA this year though. It's my favorite $5 stick.
[Reply]

Being they get advertisement revenue and probably a wink, wink, nod, nod for favorable reviews, I don't put much in their reviews. I don't know their review process, but if one guy is doing the robusto group, he's working his azz off trying to categorize 20 or more cigars monthly. If more than one is reviewing said group, they probably have different tastes and it skews things.

I do like product reviews, but I hate movie reviews. I like recipe reviews. Don't care much for beer reviews. I like to judge my own flicks and brews. For cigars, I like Cigar Asylum reviews best of all. I feel we all are unbiased and aren't afraid to call a spade a spade, plus being a member for a while, I kinda know what folks like and dislike. That being said, I do like to make my own opinion about a smoke.
[Reply]

[quote=kelmac07;1833349]I take absolutely ZERO stock in any of Cigar Aficionados reviews. When your scale is from 96 (best I've seen) to an 86 (worst I've seen)...doesn't leave much room for in between. If I smoked a cigar and thought it was an 86 (based on a scale of 100), I'd say it was a pretty damn good stick. Now if it was a 96, I'd say it was fantastic. If it sucks...why not give it a score of 6? ------Rant off------ :-)

Like you said...zero credibility. Many cigars that absolutely suck are given high reviews. The cigar equivalent to politics! :-)
RR
[Reply]

I agree with the "Mac System".... :-)

I think Cigar Aficionado takes good pictures...:-) I think they either have a larger pallet or some funny tastes in their mouth... :-) other then that I think it is useful to see what some people are buzzing about, but otherwise I think its nothing more then a big list of the year's top sellers... :-)
[Reply]

What, to stack things on? :-)
[Reply]

cA is cA...I agree with everyone here about their flawed review system.

I remember this also...

in '97 when I first got internet...they were already there/here.
one of the first forums I ever joined.
one of the first sources of factual info for cigar smokers.
it was cA that made me realize that there was other people that smoked cigars.

for all of the above I am grateful...still I only ever bought 1/2 a dozen issues...never ever placed a lot of stock in their reviews.

never placed a lot of stock in mrn's tasting notes either.

derrek
[Reply]

I don't really take their reviews too seriously because they do not smoke the whole cigar. Smoking a couple inches does not give you enough to be able to rate the cigar as a whole. I laugh when they talk about evolution of flavour in the cigar when they are only smoking the first 3rd. Also as much as they deny it, I'm sure advertising revenu plays a part in their top 25. I still read it occasionally but I don't put much stock in the reviews.

For reviews I go elsewhere like on YouTube or cigars blogs.
[Reply]

I don't read that stuff at all. I also don't go out for many, if any, of the "new rage cigars", so that stands to reason.
If one of the brothers here says "You absolutely have to smoke this", then I'll try it if he's someone I know is going to give me good info, and that's a whole lot of guys here.
[Reply]

Very little.
[Reply]

CA list is a joke. They have obvious prejudices (Liga Privada) and there are others that buy their way onto the list.
[Reply]

I pick it up to read sometimes at the B&M, the smokes reviewed generally aren't bad. I look at it as more of a list of decent smokes to try if it's convenient, and ignore the reviews.
[Reply]

If I could go back in time and take the money I spent on CA when I subscribed and then pay someone with that money to kick me in the nuts I would be better off. The last 6 or so issues I got went straight to recycle bin.

Although, in fairness to that waste of trees, I did get decent value out of it when I started smoking.
[Reply]