With the Cigar Aficionado lists out, there are numerous statement about how these lists have always been determined by advertising money. Then there is the added the rumor that they only smoke the first inch of a stick for their reviews.

I cannot say if those speculations are true or not. I have never tasted cumin in a cigar, but Cigar Aficionado says it is there. I am personally not a big fan of their reviews as they don't say much of anything. A couple other magazine's also don't do much - they never say anything negative (Cigar Press & Cigar Magazine come to mind). I am inclined to think they're afraid to say something negative because some negativity in a review might lose them advertising $$. We never hear anything about that.

I think we might be surprised to learn that the truth is far from that. If an honest assessment is taken of what does well and what doesn't in CA, you will see that many times it has nothing to do with how much $$ was spent. I have seen ads in that mag where the company's cigar earns a 84 rating, and a 94 rated cigars has no ad in the whole magazine. At least they are willing to be negative, which says a lot, at least from my perspective

What the issue boils down to, is that our grousing about their ranking comes because we already have our own prejudices. We think things must be that way because our tastes (prejudices) run differently. Let's face reality, there is a certain amount of prejudice on Cigar Asylum too. (both have the same initials, is that coincidence?)
There are cigars which all (OK, an overgeneralization) here have agreed suck - Cuba Aliados, Puros Indios, Gurkhas, etc...
There are cigars which all (OK, another overgeneralization) here have agreed are the cat's meow - Viaje, Tatuaje, LPs, Cubans, etc...
{you get the idea?}

To my eyes, it often looks like hype and the $$ do more than the actual quality of the stick here in the Asylum too. It often appears that the more expensive a cigar, the better they are. Or, if a couple people clamour loudly about them {the right people, of course}, the better they must be. And everybody climbs aboard that wagon.

On the other hand, if they're cheap, or if the the right people poo poo them, then everybody thinks they suck. And, they pile on that wagon as well.

I think that if most people did a blind taste test, their thoughts on cigars would be much different than they are. I don't have many of the HTFs in either CCs or NCs, but I am guessing that they wouldn't rank as high as some people put them. I also think that some of the cigars which many people think are terrible would score a bit higher were they to be tried blind.

How can I say this? I smoked nearly 75 different cigars for SMOKE magazine in 1999 as one of their reviewer. Every single cigar I had was a blind sample, and each sample contained 3-4 of that particular cigar. I'd get baggies with cigars, and the outside of the baggie would be labeled like this; Robusto #4, Torpedo #50, Churchill #7, Petite Corona #1, etc... After smoking them, sending in my reviews, and the publishing of the magazine, I'd be told what I smoked. When I found out what I had sampled, I was amazed.

There were some that I had thought highly of which didn't do so well without the band.
There were some that I wouldn't have bought with the band on, which I picked up after smoking blind.
There were a few that performed well, and when told what they were, I was glad.
There were some that performed poorly, and when told what they were, I was confirmed in my previous estimation.

I think our own prejudices get in the way of our tastebuds sometimes. I for one know that it is hard to do. We hear something negative about someone, we find it hard to let that color our opinion of them. The same is true of our expectations in cigars as well.

Had I the financial wherewithal to do so, I'd love to give a half dozen or more people some "great" cigars, some "middle of the road" cigars, and some "bad" cigars to try in blind samples. I wouldn't tell anybody the brands of what they might be smoking, it would be completely blind. But, I'd need to get some of those cigars which people have hyped and some others that my own prejudice would say, "I'm not spending my $$ on that."

I can say, from my own personal experience (and conversations with others who reviewed blind samples) that people would be surprised about the results.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

It's a good point. Most folks (me included) like to feel they're "in with the in crowd." And, most of us can't afford to be in with the CA crowd. So, it suits us to find something wrong with it.
[Reply]

I don't post a whole lot, but I enjoy reading the forums. I would say that the Asylum sets up my expectations of certain cigars, but the "smoke what you like" mantra has a strong following and I feel fine saying I liked/disliked cigars that are popular/unpopluar around here. For example, I have no problem saying that I had a Pirate's Gold the other day and I enjoyed it.

I just think the community becomes more critical when outside organizations post these top 25 lists. It's just our culture today to suspect that people/organizations we don't know to have some ulterior motives.
[Reply]

I am definitely not "affording" the Cigar Aficionado life. There wasn't much in the magazine that spoke to me. It was kind of like the Sears Christmas Catalog when I was a kid - lots of stuff to look at, oogle, dream over, wish for - but I was getting socks, underwear, and a couple Matchbox cars from Santa. The CA mag is much the same.
[Reply]

i agree Rev. just look at the Gurkha. a lot of people here dont like them and thats fine with me. i personally like a few of them and will admit some, to me are dog turds. if i happen to smoke one that day i will post it on under the thread "what did you smoke" without a care. i have seen multiple posts about some "great" NC cigars and i will admit i will go and buy a fiver and try them out (Viaje, Tats, LP, etc. etc.) not to fit in but to try them out and see if i like them. if i do i will buy more and if not i wont. but if i didnt listen to what people thought about certain cigars i wouldnt have found a few that i really like... but all in all it still boils down to "like what you smoke and smoke what you like".
[Reply]

Everyone has prejudices. We call most of them "life experiences". We all view everything through the filters that our brain has created to make sense of the world. Nothing wrong with that.

Boards like CA are very diverse and people are not afraid to express an opinion. I think, as has been mentioned, that people are more likely to attack a non-CA source than a CA one. That's human nature - strike at that which cannot defend itself or strike back. When a board gets big enough, the members themselves become more or less anonymous to most, which further enables the attack mentality - no one is likely to meet you in person and call you on what you said.

It is also a CA trait for a certain percentage to "pile on" in certain types of threads. Historically, at CA and CS, cigar aficionado rankings have been taken with a grain of salt. For some reason, this has emerged as an "attack them" mentality instead of a "who cares, let's talk about something else" mentality.

Just my observations colored by my prejudices.
[Reply]

We all have what we like and dont like. I read the reviews and will try some on recommendations. I have tried some that I would not normally pick up because someone, whom has similar tastes to mine, suggested it. I have also avoided some for the same reasons. I have some $ cigars that taste like $$$$ to me. I have stopped chasing the HTF botique cigars and focus on what I like. It has taken me three years to get to this point, but I am happy with it. As for CA and other mags I take reading them with a grain of salt. I totally believe their list are affected by ad dollars.
[Reply]

I agree with your overall point. What we think and what we know about our taste preferences go out the window when the blindfolds are on. The blind taste test is a great way to humble your palate. I've been part of and administered blind tests with cigars (Cuban and NC) and with drinks. The tasters ranged from newbies to highly educated palates. It's not as easy as one might think. I guarantee for sure that no one could pick out 5/5 Cuban robustos for example. Most people have a hard time identifying Cubans and NC within a batch of 10 cigars. Add in the pressure of publicly stating your opinion, things get even harder. So it's not surprising that lower tiered brands get a high score once the bands are off.
[Reply]

Really anymore I only trust one individual reviewer as he's the only reviewer from any source that has almost perfectly matched my palate. Everyone else I take with a grain of salt, and certain ones its more like a boulder of salt
[Reply]

We used to do a lot of blind tests in the other forum days and some here when CA got up and going. Not a big draw now, though, not like it used to be. I read a lot of those taste tests and I knew what people liked that were doing the reviews. Without bands, they (and I) would often pick a cigar I know we wouldn't buy and would be very surprised by what it offered. Then sometimes the high end smoke would get a 'me' nod unbanded. Those days were real eye openers. I know what I like now but I know diving back in a BTT would probably offer up some surprises. The power of suggestion does play tricks.
[Reply]

Jack on

Sorry for the thread jack, Rev, but this thread may spark some interest in folks making their own blind tests.

http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...?t=927&page=48

Jack off - carry on.
[Reply]

I concur with your assessment. I just like to admit my pre-conceived opinions about something. I am personally not concerned so much about piling on Cigar Aficionado, I think it is a ridiculous magazine. Lets face it, who can afford have the stuff they talk about in there.

My point wasn't so much against the attack on Cigar Aficionado, it was more about what we all think are good/excellent/bad cigars. I'd like people to rethink what they are allowing to influence what they believe are good/excellent/bad cigars - whether it is their own tastes or the opinions of others.

Hey, when someone who's tastes I know are similar to mine says he/she likes a cigar, chances are I will like it. So, I am inclined to try it. By the same token, I have a couple friends whose tastes I know are almost polar opposite of mine - if they 'hate' a cigar, I will probably enjoy it. So, I am inclined to try it.

Hey, if we can rethink our prejudices and set them aside, just like in real life, maybe we can try some new things. Who know, we might find a new favorite.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

Much like DaBear, I find that a few people have tastes very similar to mine, and I am more likely to give their recommendatons ( and their "non" rcommendations") more weight, as I know we often enjoy (or don't) very similar cigars. I tend not to go with the current "hype", be in NC or the "limited release" CCs.....though sometimes I will try a hyped cigar just to make up my own mind (i.e., the "Lil Monsters").

Exactly.

I try to keep a fairly open mind, and do find some suprising cigars sometimes (the Curivari you just sent me being a recent example). But my "prejudices" have steered me away from some of the hyped cigars, and certain lines I have grown prejudicial towards because of past experiences with their other cigars (i.e., Gurkha or Torano). I may miss a gem from time to time, but hold true to "smoking what I like". :-)
[Reply]

I've noticed one thing.. I generally try to smoke at least a few cigars of one type, because sometimes the hype of the cigar makes my first experience glorious.. And the following sessions not so good. It's happened again and again.. Sadly enough for me, I really do enjoy the LPs and the Tats and the Illusiones.. And because of that, my cigar budget always exceeds my cigar budget.
[Reply]

I agree that there is a trendiness to cigars. Your point is well taken that my top 10 list would just be unique to myself and I'm sure many would like a few cigars on my list and might even agree that one of mine made their top 10.

I've read a lot of top 10 lists from bloggers to CA and only 1 or two even got picked twice.

I prefer to look at these lists as guides to cigars to try. My cigar ADD forces me to try new things so I'll check out a list or two for ideas. On that note, I've a box of Ortega Serie D Maduros on there way!!! Hoo yaa!

Oh, and Cuba Aliados Miami's are good cigars so leave them for me biatches!!!
Image
[Reply]

I like to give a cigar more than one chance, as a cigar may not perform well - they are handmade items and therefore not perfect. As for taste disappointment, in my case, often the hype makes the first experience less than stellar, the cigar doesn't live up to expectations. A second allows me to clear my mind and try it again on its own merits.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

I agree with this, to an extent. While sometimes the opinions of others may sway me into trying a stick (specifically for those that enjoy a lot of what I enjoy), but for the most part I enjoy trying new sticks. I also use the two stick rule, as I may have received a "dud" before placing judgment on any cigar. I am a really huge fan of the Viaje line, but they have plenty of sticks in their line-up that I don't think are worth a hill of beans. I'm sure I have a few sticks in my "All Time Top 10" that plenty of others would never smoke and I am alright with that, because it's what I enjoy. :-)
[Reply]

Keeping and open mind and trying new things is the best attitude. Exactly what I am trying to get at.

I also understand that after a few experiences, a person gets gun shy. There are brands that I also steer clear of for the most part, they have bit me on more than one occasion and I won't go back. I have had a couple decent Gurkhas, so I don't write them off immediately, but I also don't buy them anymore. Torano on the other hand, I concur with your assessment. And I avoid Victor Sinclair like the plague - they have majorly failed on too many occasions.

On the other side of the coin, there are some which used to really excite me (in the day), but which I now approach with trepidation: Arturo Fuente stuff being one that quickly comes to mind.

And still other have remained amazingly consistent, El Rey del Mundo Robustos and some others being prime examples.

I have had a couple cigars which absolutely blew me away. Upon returning to buy the same cigar only a couple months later, major disappointment is all I find. I'll usually have a few of the originals in my first purchase, they are fine - the new stuff is almost unrecognizable as from the same maker. Tatuaje has done that to me with 2 cigars.

Of course, I also know that my tastes have morphed/changed. Some of what I liked, I do not any longer. The cigars remain the same, but I no longer get the enjoyment I did out of certain cigars.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

I wish I could try more new sticks, but smoking time often gets in the way. What I mean is, I only smoke so often and only so much - I do not smoke a cigar everyday. So, while I like to try new sticks, I'm not going to waste all my limited smoke time on new stuff. Sometimes I want to have something that I know will be in the specific zone I am craving from a specific cigar, at that time, an unknown won't do.

Personally, trying new cigars also has to happen in a certain setting. Everybody is different in that regard, but I like trying new stuff around other cigar smokers. Not always true, but often. So, this approach also limits new cigar intake.

Most often, I smoke what I like because it makes my tastebuds happy.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

The thing is, that these "Top 10" lists give the semblance of objectivity to something that is, without doubt, subjective and thus are of no use to anyone, beyond entertainment. I don't read Cigar Aficionado so I don't see the hype or the ads, so I'm not affected by them. I get 99% of my cigar information right here, and if you ask me, we probably have more accumulated cigar knowledge, right here, than all the magazines combined.
[Reply]