Blind Tasting Reviews Cigar Number 3 : FOH INT 2017 Blind Tasting Comp

[First Lady]

Cigar Number 3

For those who have smoked their tasting cigar or will be soon this is the thread to place your thoughts about what you think the flavour profile is and how it smoked ...... PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE WHAT YOU THINK IT IS .. just email Lisa   [email protected]

Once we have everyone's responses we will reveal the cigar.

The final date for your result is Tuesday June 6th

Happy Smoking 

[backbone]

On to #3!

My example is a beautiful pyramid 52 and 6.1, I believe.

Aroma at cold was nice and the construction was flawless.

My newly acquired draw tool in the background was not used on this cigar, the draw was perfect.

The first burn was odd to me,  not really tasting like any cigar I have ever had.  Dum Dum Dummmm.

Then it settled in to a wonderful tasting smoke that wavered between light coffee and hazelnut with a medium body.

I really enjoyed this cigar.  A very high 95 imo.

So, I am sending in my clear guess as I have never had an example of this cigar so good.

 

Cheers!

 

[TomF]

I dropped this cigar right out of the humidor and it cracked the wrapper at the head which eventually led to the cigar exploding once I got down to the last third. But I kept the band on as long as I could and it held together for the first 2 thirds.

A 52 x 6.1" pyramid, the cold draw was uninspiring, a little salt, wood, toasted tobacco.

The draw was great, as was the burn until it began to come apart.

The flavors came to life after the first few puffs, woody, nutty, medium/full body, some nice spice, and it soon developed a deep twang which remained throughout the cigar. Very nice.

I think I know what it is even though I've never had what I think it is, but the flavor profile was right in line with other cigars from this marca. Most likely I'll be proven wrong, but what the hay...

I truly enjoyed this cigar.

 

[Dijit]

So far a rather mild for me cigar. I would say flavor medium and strenght is a mikd to medium. Prelight I got leather and sweet tobacco.

First third starts really mild I had to retrohale to get any flavors. Toast and a little earth. This progressed into a sweet grass flavor that was a pleasant surprise. The smoke has developed into a medium thick creamy texture that lingers on the palate.

2/3 had gained a little strength as I am getting that familiar tickle on the back of the palate. The finish is lingering a little longer between puffs and now I am getting a little toasted nutty flavor. The wood has gotten more prominent and the sweet has died off.

3/3 brings back a little of the leather notes and the woody almost cedar flavors are still there and getting stronger.

So as apparent based on the last 2 cigars we have tried and my incorrect guesses I have no idea what this is. So I will let the fickle finger of fate decide this one.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[weirdneighbor]

Number 3 has a beautiful oily and mottled wrapper. Visually quite the opposite of cigar #2.

Perfect draw and construction. 

[tonyd58]

Really pissed off! This is the 3rd cigar in a row that is plugged. I have not been able to enjoy 1 of them. Been jamming my pipe tool trying to get some air threw.


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[tonyd58]

And tossed this pos. After 10mins of frustration

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[cardinalfan85]

smoked mine today, thoroughly enjoyed it. I have know idea what it is but I think I have about a 20% chance of getting this one right!  Going to smoke some other piramides this week to compare this one to.   It'll probably just make me more confused lol

[MahDooRow]

Each of the first two cigars in the blind tasting contest could be narrowed down to two current production vitolas based on measurements and physical characteristics.  By my mental count there are six current production pyramids, and cigar #3 could be any one of those six.  

The stick I received has a smooth, even colored dark brown wrapper with no large veins.  Construction appears to be very good with the proper level of fill.  I don't see any physical characteristics that provide hints of its identity.  My sense of smell is average at best, so the scent of "cigar #3" doesn't yield any significant clues either.

Based on the few reviews that have been posted thus far and the flavors that each of the reviewers has noted, there are three of the six pyramids that seem like unlikely candidates.  Of the three that remain, I think there are two highly probable candidates and one that is a "maybe".  

I plan to smoke cigar #3 this evening and it'll be interesting to see if my expectations align with the actual smoking experience.  To my unsophisticated palate "cigar #1" didn't really taste like a Punch Punch and "cigar #2" tasted nothing like a Fonseca #1.  If this pattern continues I'll likely be totally confused after smoking "cigar #3".    

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

REVIEW...

Cigar #3 was absolutely fantastic!  Much stronger than I expected, with very concentrated flavors.  IMO, this stick was heads and shoulders above cigars #1 and #2 in all respects.  94/100.  I'll take two boxes please! 

^ That's the easy part... now the details, and yes, the confusion that I knew would come with the smoking experience.  

Pre-Light Draw:  Slightly firm draw, which matched with the firm feel of the cigar.  The flavor was sweet and rich with a subtle underlying savory spice that I could not identify.  Not what I was expecting.  Based on the previously posted reviews I had two torpedoes in mind (and one in particular).  The flavor of the pre-light draw eliminated my primary suspect right off the bat.  

1st Third:  Leather, earth, raisins and some subtle hints of what I think tastes like paprika.  Strength is medium and there is ample smoke production.  The aroma is slightly floral.  Very nice.  At this point I'm thinking that cigar #3 is my 2nd suspected torpedo and I form an expectation as to how the flavors are likely to develop.  

Middle Third:  By the middle third I'm starting to notice a slight saltiness on the lips, and the floral aroma of the smoke is intensifying.  The leather is fading, the earthiness is getting stronger and I'm getting a deep flavor of unsweetened Italian espresso.  The overall strength of cigar #3 has definitely kicked up a notch.  I'm also picking up notes of what I can only describe as umami/mushroom.  The combination of flavors and aromas reminds me of being deep in the redwood forest of northern California after a long rain.  

The middle third presents many twists and turns that (based on the first third) were not on the flight plan.  Cigar #3 is almost certainly not my 2nd suspect.  The flavors and aromas of the middle third point to a likely third suspect, however, there are elements of that third suspect that are noticeably absent.  

   

Final Third:  Early in the final third there is some noticeable creaminess that emerges, shifting the espresso towards a cappuccino flavor.  Unfortunately the cappuccino is fleeting, as the unsweetened espresso soon reasserts itself.  The umami/mushroom is still there, and the leather makes an encore appearance that remains to the finish.

At the end of this wonderful journey I am thoroughly satisfied, but also conflicted about the identity of cigar #3.  Nevertheless, I'm going with "suspect #3"... which I'm almost certain will be WRONG!    Yeah baby!                              

[BuzzArd]

Had No 3 Sunday. Upon light up I Immediately noted loads of leather. Oily, heavy leather. And a touch of salt. Earth, and something else I couldn't put my finger on.  Definitely not what my palate was used to. Burn was razor sharp. Draw was firm, just the way I like it. Was a surprising cigar, and I've never had one like it. 

 

[ShortFatHokie]

13 hours ago, tonyd58 said:

Really pissed off! This is the 3rd cigar in a row that is plugged. I have not been able to enjoy 1 of them. Been jamming my pipe tool trying to get some air threw.


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

Lower your humidity!!!!

[GavLew79]

Bugger. My first duffer. Nearly oscuro wrapper it was *so* maduro. Very thick and oily and would not stay lit. Tasted like what I imagine a turd covered in burnt hair to taste like. Vile, astringent, chemically notes. Stubbed out less than half way through. I will guess based on the Pyramides I've seen with very maduro wrappers and most likely be wrong!  

[First Lady]

Guys I will need your educated guesses in soon 

[spivey6690]

We have a week, correct?  June 6?  

[nighttech]

Guys I will need your educated guesses in soon 

That's where I've been going wrong. "Educated guesses". I think I need more lessons.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[dominattorney]

I smoked this one last night on the terrace after golf.  Great construction, even burn, nice draw.  However, I just didn't love the flavor profile.  I found it to be flat, almost mono dimensional but for the occasional shift in focus between the two predominant flavors to my palate, which were earth and light leather.  I'm interested to see what it is, but I do not believe I will be buying a box.  That is to say, as long as my guess is correct that this is not a cigar I have previously tried. 

[boopdeep]

I tend to agree with dominattorney on this one.  Beautiful cigar.  great construction.  dark oily wrapper. nice even burn. was just unidimensional and flat for me. 

[tomaszgeorge]

Blind tasting Cigar 3

Box press, light brown wrapper. Perfect draw

Chocolaty aroma and fruity notes on the preflight.

 

Initial draws are bitter chocolate and wood, with a hint of sourdough and citrus.

 

1st 3rd

Sourdough bread dominating now with hints of chocolate behind. A very smooth and relaxing smoke.

 

 

2nd 3rd

There are some espresso notes coming in now alongside the bread and chocolate. there is also a light spiciness in the background.

 

Last 3rd

The sourdough returns to being the dominant flavour, with the others taking a fleeting presence in the background. Hint of dark fruit comes in towards the end.

 

 

This was a wonderful cigar with huge depth of flavour. To me it tasted very similar to a box I have in my collection. I hope I’ve made the right choice.

[ChiTownHuck]

Wrapper: darker chocolate colorado, chocolate aroma. sweet, fermented hay after snip

Beginning: earthy. spice begins, hint of sour, transforming into a cedar spice. Aroma has a sweetness.

Middle: body became a fermented wood flavor, raisins, stone fruit? Still some spice on the nose. Maybe honey.

End: spice picks up, white pepper now, bigger cedar. Near perfect burn the whole way through. Finished with a toasty, nuttiness

Overall: very good cigar, interesting and some complexity. Last third had that fullness to it that I feel in my gut.

[PigFish]

I have to wonder, reading these reviews, if what I read represents... 1) inadequate 'down' time to acclimatize to smokers preference. 2) too much time to acclimatize to smokers' preference -LOL 3) another statement about Cuban cigar quality control AND what it means to have a 'brand' profile!

Interesting reading! -the Pig

[dominattorney]

47 minutes ago, PigFish said:

I have to wonder, reading these reviews, if what I read represents... 1) inadequate 'down' time to acclimatize to smokers preference. 2) too much time to acclimatize to smokers' preference -LOL 3) another statement about Cuban cigar quality control AND what it means to have a 'brand' profile!

Interesting reading! -the Pig

I try not to read anyone else's review before guessing.  I think it would throw me off--almost did throw me off my guess on number 2.  A lot of it, I'm sure, is subjectivity of the human experience.  I have a slight physics background and I've always been fascinated by the science of perception--light, after all, is objectively an invisible electromagnetic field; we only "see" color based upon our brain's interpretation of that field.  I assume other senses are likewise extremely relative.

[Colt45]

2 hours ago, PigFish said:

I have to wonder, reading these reviews, if what I read represents... 1) inadequate 'down' time to acclimatize to smokers preference. 2) too much time to acclimatize to smokers' preference -LOL 3) another statement about Cuban cigar quality control AND what it means to have a 'brand' profile!

It might be any or all of the above or more. If I've learned anything, it's that cigars are not necessarily blended to taste like the descriptors we, as cigar smokers, apply to them. And as usual, I'm of the belief that Cuban cigars share more core similarities than they have differences.

[PigFish]

2 hours ago, Colt45 said:

It might be any or all of the above or more. If I've learned anything, it's that cigars are not necessarily blended to taste like the descriptors we, as cigar smokers, apply to them. And as usual, I'm of the belief that Cuban cigars share more core similarities than they have differences.

I see your point...

Yet...

 

14 hours ago, tomaszgeorge said:

This was a wonderful cigar with huge depth of flavour.

... and

On ‎5‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 3:15 AM, GavLew79 said:

Tasted like what I imagine a turd covered in burnt hair to taste like. Vile, astringent, chemically notes.

...makes me wonder even further! I cannot see how this type of spread is based in language or personal taste!

-Piggy

[BuzzArd]

10 hours ago, PigFish said:

I have to wonder, reading these reviews, if what I read represents... 1) inadequate 'down' time to acclimatize to smokers preference. 2) too much time to acclimatize to smokers' preference -LOL 3) another statement about Cuban cigar quality control AND what it means to have a 'brand' profile!

Interesting reading! -the Pig

It could be complete BS.  

Not that I'd do that...  

?

[fabes]

5 hours ago, PigFish said:

I see your point...

Yet...

 

... and

...makes me wonder even further! I cannot see how this type of spread is based in language or personal taste!

-Piggy

Perhaps one man's turd is another man's wonderful cigar with huge depth of flavour.

I'm inclined to agree with @Colt45 on the core similarities.