So I was one of the two people chosen in the contest that Shilala held here: http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showthread.php?t=47324

There were 5 cigars sent, and this is a review of cigar #1.

Smoking: The pre-light draw tasted a bit of oats. I usually associate this with Dominican cigars. After lighting up and taking a few puffs there was no oat taste. This cigar had one main flavor throughout the cigar. At first I thought it might be wet cotton, but there was a metallic nature to it, and I am going to describe it tasting like modeling clay. If you have not ever smelt modeling clay then grab a terra cotta pot and take a whiff, that is what the taste was like for the majority of the cigar. A few times (5 or 6) there was a sweetness that I would associate to maduro's. But the very next puff it would go back to modeling clay. Near the middle of the cigar I got some cinnamon type spice for about 3 puffs. After that it never came back. The cigar also got bitter a couple of times.

Construction: 25/25 (burned like a champ)
Flavor: 40/75

Total: 65/100

It wasn't a horrible cigar, but not one I would go out and buy more of either. The clay taste would not go away. Also, there seemed to be other flavors wanting to come out, but they seemed muted. Like they were there at one time, but now had been diminished. I did not grade the cigar on appearance because I wanted to go on taste as much as I could.

I don't know if Scott wants us to take a guess at what it is, but here is mine:

Rocky Patel Vintage 1990
[Reply]

Nice review, Wayne. :-)
Nope, not a Rocky Patel Vintage 1990. Good guess, though. As soon as Eric gets done, I'll tell everyone.
[Reply]

Great Review Wayner!
[Reply]

Subscribed. :-)
[Reply]

Subscribed as well.
[Reply]

Scott said that it was a Tampa Sweethearts 280 Maduro. I got the Dominican part correct, just wrong marca.

Hopefully get number 2 in tonight.
[Reply]

Between you and Eric, you both hit my sentiments exactly on these. Hemingway anything does not age well at all. They just fade away. (Sweethearts are Hemingway blend rolled by apprentices.)
My hope in jar-storing was to halt the inevitable downfall of these cigars. I managed to hold their demise back from a year to about two years in jars, then they just went to hell just like they do in the humi in 8 months.
Where the essence goes, I have no idea. That's a whole nother discussion.
If this single experiment yielded anything, it's "If you like your Sweethearts, buy them and smoke them up". Same goes for the rest of the Hemingways.
I've gone through lots of Hemingways over the years and watched them fall off if I don't get to them right away. This just wraps that up.
Off topic, but if you want to smoke the worst cigar you've ever smoked in your life, try a three or four year old Curly Head. Be careful though, it's liable to make you abandon the hobby. :-)
[Reply]

Funny that these don't age well. :-) The Tampa Sweetheart #500 Maduros age quite well IMHO. :-)
[Reply]

This is the review for cigar #2:

Smoking: The pre-light draw once again tasted like oats, but not quite as pungent as cigar #1. There was also a faint hay like taste as well. After lighting up I was immediately met with the same clay taste that cigar number 1 had. I thought that Scott had sent me the same cigar, but in a different vitola. It also did something I have never had happen in a cigar before. There was virtually no taste when the smoke was in the mouth. Only after the exhale and my mouth was free of smoke did any flavor exhibit itself. It was truly weird. It was like smoking for the sake of smoking but not getting flavor till you were done.

But, the good news is that around the start of the 2nd third, it changed into a totally different cigar. It was a very profound change. Instantly there was spice. I had a hard time figuring it out how to describe it. I think the best way to describe it would be that it tasted like sarsaparilla or sassafras. It was a spicy, sweet, root vegetal taste. I liked it. At this point I abandoned any thought that Scott had sent me the same cigar. From this point till the end of the cigar it remained a great tasting cigar. There was this sassafras, with hints of coffee and nuts. All blended well with what tasted like a good maduro leaf tobacco.

Construction: 20/25 (I had to touch it up a few times)
Flavor: 60/75

Total: 80/100

If the first third had tasted like the last 2/3rd's then this cigar would have gotten a 90 easily. There was also a slight nic buzz around halfway through the cigar. I can usually hold my own when nicotine is involved, so it may have just been a phenomena.

My Guess: I am going to stick with my assertions that it was Dominican cigar. I am going to say a La Flor Dominica
[Reply]

Scott informed me that this was an El Mejor Espresso. I definitely got the coffee undertones.
[Reply]

I bought a fiver of these a couple years ago and liked em. Curious if i still would.
[Reply]

They still have them, Greg. The green, or "Emerald" ones are poo. The Espresso are good, but you have to dry them out cause they come to you soggy. 6 or 8 months in the humi, then they smoke good for about a year till they go to nothingness.
The jars held them better than I thought they would, for sure.

Thanks again for forging ahead, Wayne. I'm really enjoying this, a lot more than you, I think. :-)
[Reply]

Nah, I am truly enjoying it. I always like doing BTT. It helps me to smoke cigars I would most likely never buy otherwise. I am really trying to give my best effort on these. I make sure my palate is clean and I only drink water when smoking.
[Reply]

This is the review for cigar #3:

Smoking: The pre-light draw had the taste of slight ammonia and hay. I usually associate this with a Nicaraguan cigar. After the first few puffs, I immediately thought of Padron. But as I got into the cigar more I wasn't so sure. Within the first 3rd, there was the same clay like taste the other two cigars had. However after the first 3rd it did not come back. There were times where it got bitter. And other times where it was only spice. Then other times where a woodsy taste showed up. However, none of these tastes/flavors were very strong. It was thick heavy smoke and the cigar smoked like a robust cigar, it was just that the accompanying flavors did not break through. I kept thinking of a way to describe it and I came up with "subdued". Even if I hadn't known about these being aged I would have guessed it by the way the flavors seemed subdued. They were there, but just wouldn't break through.

Construction: 10/25 (I was constantly correcting it)
Flavor: 50/75

Total: 60/100

The flavors that were present tasted fine. Other than the occasional bitterness it was an ok cigar. In conclusion that is probably my best way to describe it, just a plain cigar in flavor. Or as some say a yard gar.

My Guess: I am really at a loss on this one. I hate to say Padron, as I usually like the X000 series, but that's my only guess really.
[Reply]

Cigar #3 was a Indian Tabac Super Fuerte.
[Reply]

This is a review of cigar #4:

Smoking: The pre-light draw tasted like hay and sweet tobacco. That usually makes me think Nicaraguan. After the first few puffs I felt that this might the best cigar suited to my tastes so far. A little bit of spice came through at first, much like a green pepper spice and it mixed well with other flavors of leather and tobacco. The cigar was not dynamic nor was it complex. But these 3 flavors seemed to be right up my alley. Leather, tobacco and a bit of spice that got sweet every now and again. These flavors continued throughout the entire cigar.

Construction: 15/25 (burned very funky and needed to be fixed quite often)
Flavor: 70/75

Total: 85/100

I really liked this cigar. If it is not a Nicaraguan, I need to re-examine some things. This wasn't the best tasting cigar ever, but it did hit the spot for me last night. It just needed to burn a lot better.

My Guess: I am going to guess some sort of Oliva.
[Reply]

Cigar #4 was a Indian Tabac Maduro. I am truly shocked. I guess time really did these well.
[Reply]

This is a review of cigar #5:

Smoking: Pre-light draw tasted solely of hay. But it wasn't a sweet hay taste. More like wet hay. Clean, but wet. Anyways, I started in and the first few puffs were great! There was a chocolate taste that really shone through. It was held up back a backbone of spice and a sweet hay taste. This myriad of flavors kept for the first half of the cigar. At times one would over power the other, but in all chocolate was the predominant flavor. Then.... something went wrong. At the almost halfway mark, the hay turned into a wet hay taste. Like moldy hay. The chocolate taste disappeared and the spice went to a weird black pepper taste. I held out throughout the rest of the cigar hoping that it would revert back to what it had been before. But sadly, it did not.

Construction: 22/25 ( I only had to touch it up once)
Flavor: 35/75

Total: 57/100

This sadly turned out to be the worst cigar of the bunch. The flavors in the second half made me want to pitch it. And I can't recall the last time I pitched any cigar (ask the EPIC crew how far down I smoke my cigars).

My Guess: I am at a loss once again. I have never had a cigar go badly so promptly. I am going to say some sort of Gurkha.
[Reply]

I wanted to say Thanks to Shilala (Scott) for holding this contest and providing the cigars. I always have fun doing these. I did enjoy challenging myself to pick out flavors.

I think the consensus for me, is that aging cigars in the way he did might have been more hurtful than helpful. Thanks again!
[Reply]

I just got caught up with your reviews, Wayne. You did an awesome job, and your prize smokes are on the way. :-)
I posted my thoughts on the jar process over in Eric's thread, and I'm going to post them here because it answers to the aging comment you made. These particular cigars turn to crap in a year to 18 months in the humi, they just completely die and turn to flavorless nothingness. I think the jars slowed that death by a good year or two. These smokes, from my experience, should have been tasteless by November of '09. So I think the jars help, but I was looking for something that absolutely halted the downfall of these cheapo cigars and kept them good forever. To that goal, they failed. They still worked much better than my winador and cabinet humi, for sure. We're working with bottom-line crap tobacco, so the jars could very well still be a huge help with good weed. Time will tell.

Here's the post I made over in Eric's thread. Your prize smokes have been sent as well, and I thank you VERY much for suffering through this!!! :-)

...
The Arizona Cardinals remark made me LOL. :-)
Well done, Eric. I don't think I could have been blessed with two better reviewers than you and Wayne.
I'm not sure if the jar/review experiment showed me anything that was really quantitive. If anything, it supported my personal thoughts that aging cigars sucks for my intents and purposes. After a time, they just go blah, and that's that. I do feel that the jars slowed the aging on this value tobacco, as they'd have gone south and been completely dull in a year to 18 months time in the humi. I can say that because I've tested and watched it happen many, many times. I just wanted to find a way to keep a nice, strong, flavorful, full-bodied cigar from suffering the sands of time. The jars help, but they aren't the fountain of youth I was looking for. Unfortunately, they may be the only option.
I know cc's have special magical powers that make them super better with age, but in my experience, just as many of them suffer from the aging blahs as do nc's. I'll always respect "smoke what you like...", and being an objective/subjective argument, it's all unwinnable and senseless. I wouldn't want to tear down anything that gives anyone joy, that's for sure.
I absolutely believe that the quality of the tobacco that's used to roll any cigar, cc or nc, makes all the difference in the world as to how it will age. A good plant grown in stellar soil, then prepared with great care is going to yield that nuance that a good nc or cc will gain with age. By the same token, they'll lose the strength and flavors they began with while they travel to nuance-ville.
It's hard to make the call. Do I smoke it now while it's awesome, or do I wait ten years and see what happens on the chance it may even be a better but very different cigar?
If I like a cigar but it's too strong and overpowering, time is going to soften it and make it "better" for me. I just have never found a cigar that needed calmed down strength-wise. It's a great tool for guys who would enjoy a milder cigar, for sure.
The longer I go and the older I get and the more I fuss and study, the more I am on board with the old cc and nc producers/rollers who say "these are best RIGHT NOW". I'm not so sure they even mean right now as opposed to letting them sit around for a long time. I think they simply mean it's best to be smoking any cigar RIGHT NOW than not smoking a cigar.
I can live with that. :-)
[Reply]