thoughts on the H. Upmann Anejado Robusto?

[jerrybrowne]

45 minutes ago, bwgan said:

Strong strong strong is my vote. Both in flavor and body, a bit too strong. Good God, if these have been aged I hate to think of them fresh

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

+1.  So it wasn't the alcohol.....

[Nikolaos]

11 minutes ago, Wailbait said:

New Partagas factory I believe.  The new ETP if you will.  

 

[Ken Gargett]

On 2/16/2018 at 4:27 AM, Kbb said:

Rob mentioned he was going to smoke one with Ken.  Not sure if that was going to be a video review or anything, but I can not find reference to Rob's impression of this stick.  Did I miss it?

came around today with a guest reviewer.

no spoilers (let's just be thankful that neither rob nor myself need to apply for a visa to cuba any time soon) on the cigar or guest. but a great afternoon. 

i gave up lunch with an 02 bolly and an 02 dom for ??????

 

[alloy]

I find them quite strong, but a lot of flavor.

[Gamehawker]

On 1/17/2018 at 4:52 PM, El Presidente said:

Those that have smoked them ...weigh in 

I intend to smoke them with ken in about a week but they are dryboxing/acclimatising currently. 

What can we expect? 

Many thanks for your input 

When are you going to post the video review of Ken and you smoking these???

[Gamehawker]

On 3/12/2018 at 9:48 AM, Gamehawker said:

When are you going to post the video review of Ken and you smoking these???

I guess no one cares about a video review of these from El Prez and Ken.  

[GWG]

I for one can't wait for the review, love the cutting edge clothing lines they bring into our awareness!

[sikfrayme]

Smoked one ROTT which I got from 24:24, since then have smoked half the box.  I have a soft spot for anything Upmann.  I know they were probably rolled as something other Marca but damn these are probably the best of the last 5 or 6 Anejado releases.  I see more boxes in my future.

[5thStarChicago]

I guess I need to give these another shot.  I smoked one in Havana.  I was so impressed that I didn't acquire any more.  Totally unbalanced, and not what I would want in a young cigar, let alone in an "aged" one.  Guess I need to find someone with a graded box and try a few more.

[PuffDaddie]

Got six from Rob. Will try one next month. 

[Corylax18]

I'm confounded. I just smoked my first from a "quarter box" purchase made early this year. The appearance, construction, and burn were all spectacular. The flavors, not so much. The flavors seemed to bounce around between pure Upmann and pure Jose Piedra. Two or three beautiful puffs of bread, baking spices and some light sweetness. Then three or four puffs of young Jose Piedra, very earthy, bitter and a slight metallic bite. This lasted, mostly unchanged for the entire cigar.

Its almost like they tried to sneak some Vuelta Arriba tobacco into the filler hoping nobody would notice. They rolled them in previously unreleased vitolas so there would be no comparison points, then sampled them every few months to check the progress. When they decided it clearly hadn't worked, they came up with the "Anejados" program. I would agree that there is some age on these sticks, but I have JLPs going back to 08 and they are still JLPs. I would buy boxes more cigars rolled by this roller, but unless the next 5 are significantly better I wont be buying anymore of these. 

[Gamehawker]

I am glad I cancelled my quarter box of these last month.

[havanaclub]

I am glad I cancelled my quarter box of these last month.

Were you put on a few month vacation from 24:24?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ciscojohansson]

I smoked one the other day, not my favourite smoke. I found it strong and lacking in flavour. The look of the cigar is great, beautiful reddish wrapper, well rolled and a good draw but the taste was just bad. No distinct flavours except harshness and some spice, the overall impression was just sour to me. Not pleased. Does anyone think they will get better with more time? Or will they start to decline in taste?

 

[jerrybrowne]

I smoked one the other day, not my favourite smoke. I found it strong and lacking in flavour. The look of the cigar is great, beautiful reddish wrapper, well rolled and a good draw but the taste was just bad. No distinct flavours except harshness and some spice, the overall impression was just sour to me. Not pleased. Does anyone think they will get better with more time? Or will they start to decline in taste?
 

I agree with your thoughts on these and I don’t think they’ll get any better with additional age.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[ayepatz]

Tried my first (and last!) yesterday. Construction was fine, and prelight draw hinted at liquorice, but the flavours once lit were harsh and bitter.

It tasted like an NC to me, and I pitched it after enduring the first third. 

[NSXCIGAR]

I thought I had posted my impressions in this thread but it must have been another...

I concur with pretty much everything above. This cigar was just "off". No real Upmann DNA, odd murky flavors. Burn and construction were very good however. 

Whoever is still buying boxes of any Anejados release is absolutely certifiable. This line is fishy to the core. Yes, some of them aren't bad (I actually scored one of the RyJ Piramides a 91-92 points, but I also scored most Monte 2s I've had this year the same. And the Monte 2s tasted like Monte 2s. The RyJs were, well, I'm still not sure. 

[Kbb]

49 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

And the Monte 2s tasted like Monte 2s. The RyJs were, well, I'm still not sure. 

The irony being most miss on the FOH blind sampler test too!  I get what you are saying.  A bad smoke is a bad smoke.  But if you took off the band and gave it to another person, would they rate them as poor?  Is the expectation there of a certain standard because of the Upmann name?

[NSXCIGAR]

3 hours ago, Kbb said:

But if you took off the band and gave it to another person, would they rate them as poor?

Possibly not--as I said, I scored the RyJ Piramides pretty well. The Hoyo Hermosos No. 4 was probably the worst received and might not score high for anyone. The Monte Churchills and Party CG were probably the best of the bunch from my recollection of feedback. I've had two Party CGs and they weren't bad and I haven't had the Monte, but wouldn't be surprised if they were good as well. 

However, when a 91-92 pointer is being sold at a 50% premium over easily obtainable regular production cigars I have a serious problem with that. I have no problem with the idea of selling a 96+ point cigar at $40, 50 or $60. This is a different concept than value per se. "Value" is always relative. There aren't many 96+ point cigars available so I can understand a high price and people willing to pay it. Yes, the argument can be made that a 94-pointer can be had for $20 so the $60 96+ pointer is a poor value, but I don't make that argument. 96 is substantially better than a 94, and people are willing to pay exponentially higher prices for cigars that good and I'm not one to challenge that. I myself might pay $100 for a high-90s cigar as opposed to $20-30 for a 95-96 pointer. Value isn't the consideration in these cases, even for a tightwad like me. 

 

[Fugu]

10 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I thought I had posted my impressions in this thread but it must have been another...

I think you did....

Got two of them rolling around, bought the other day just for the excercise, might give'm a try this weekend.

[NSXCIGAR]

18 hours ago, Fugu said:

I think you did....

Got two of them rolling around, bought the other day just for the excercise, might give'm a try this weekend.

Forgot to mention the oddest thing with these--the first half-inch or so was very promising. I was really thinking this model might be different. Then wham--the murkiness just set in and there was absolutely no change of any kind from there. I've heard this from other as well. Interested to see if it happens to you too. 

[Fugu]

So I smoked my first H. Upmann Robo Añejados out of two singles bought a few weeks back. Interesting smoke....

Let me just start with an observation on age, for this is sometimes questioned: These were from a box dated 2007 (didn't make a mental note of the full box code), picked by myself from the box. These sticks are - suspiciously - looking remarkably pristine and truly beautiful. Nice, shiny, almost vein-less wrappers. The bands also appear like new, completely un-oxidized, and there is almost no indentation to be seen on the wrapper from the band, like you usually get in aged dressbox-cigars. However, the tobacco doesn't smell fresh or young whatsoever. So, I'd say, and despite their immaculate looks, these sticks certainly have some decent age on them. I'd rather think the cigars of this production have been well kept and banded only subsequent to their decade-long storage life.

Draw of the exemplar chosen was ok, a bit too open for my preference, with a cold aroma that was certainly that of well-aged tobacco. Nice! Still, the first inch, well actually almost the full first third was quite tannic and didn't have to give a lot away. Pretty muted aroma, while on the palate not much more going on than astringent, coarse tannins and some roasted woodiness. Underwhelmed! But the cigar then started to develop quite nicely, and was slowly gaining momentum. In particular so after the ash fell the first time at about mid-smoke. Truly late starter! Unfortunately, there was a permanent and quite annoying hollow burn at one spot running in advance close under the surface of the stick accompanying nearly the whole smoke (most likely due to a pronounced crease in the binder).

I was trying to maintain an open-mind towards the cigar, as open as I possibly could. But there was really nothing telling me that this couldn't be a genuine H. Upmann. With the taste-profile being very well reminiscent of aged Upmann tobacco.... and - Mag46 was the closest that I could think of out of the Upmann-range. In fact, it appeared pretty similar to how the few Mag 46 from a 2006 box I am still keeping are smoking today. In its slow start perhaps also reminding of an Upmann No.2. The last third finally unfolded actually really nice, becoming truly enjoyable then, and all of a sudden there was 'Upmann' in spades: Beany flavours, shortbread, raisins, toasted tobacco, and even on and off a nice faint citrusy note (or was it even orange zest?) in that creamy, palate-coating smoke. Really coming along nicely, continually gaining in intensity in that last third. Body was starting well under medium (were it not for the astrigency masking a fair bit of the cigar's taste) to slightly under full in the final draws. The cigar went somewhat hot towards the very end but became never harsh or acrid. Long-lasting, pleasant aftertaste on the palate to boot. 75 min smoking time.

My personal verdict, from this particular stick: While the construction was slightly subpar, the blend could very well be, and I think was indeed intended to be Upmann. There is nothing that would let me suspect this stick to originally having seen the light of day under a different brand. If pursuing the route of conspiracy, then that final third was closer to a Short Churchill than to a D4. Aged cigar? - Certainly yes! Is it good value? - Certainly no! Actually, the first third left a lot to be desired and one could have rather skipped it completely. Waste of time. But from the second half (mid 2/3) onward, the cigar was evolving nicely. The final then was truly very good, even reminiscent of the ConA I dare to say. So, if taking it positively, the cigar was displaying a very pronounced evolution   in particular given the Robusto format. Expressed negatively - you get a Short Robusto for a Robo Extra price.

So, not exceptional, even not great by any means, but not bad either. But what else to expect really? Let's just take it for what it is, it's simply standard production in an out-of-the-range format, set aside for longer aging, with likely the same variability as in regular production. Had the cigar been there right off the start I would have said - very good cigar. At least this here seems to be closer to the Monte or Party Añejados than to the Hoyo. But - the same or better you can have from aged Mag46 (gets you two bands also... ). Not worth its upcharge if you ask me. For the same price you [better] get a ConA. But if you are new to the game and immediately want aged tobacco - then this HURA might be worth giving a try.

I for one will smoke my second single somewhere down the road and that will likely be it for me.

 

Taking off the Añejados band will help in keeping me unbiased ... haha

went inside and smoked for a while indoors to see where the heck the aroma keeps hiding....

 

[Fugu]

12 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Forgot to mention the oddest thing with these--the first half-inch or so was very promising. I was really thinking this model might be different. Then wham--the murkiness just set in and there was absolutely no change of any kind from there. I've heard this from other as well. Interested to see if it happens to you too. 

So it seems, this here has been quite the opposite of what you report - slow, really slow start with a crescendo final. Perhaps - and this is not too unlikely given the wide range of different vintages (I have heard of even up till 2011 box codes?) - there will be vast differences found in this release, depending on years and factory codes. But still, I guess it's not really worth chasing them.

[Tollickd]

Do you think with some more aging these series will benefit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ayepatz]

2 hours ago, Tollickd said:

Do you think with some more aging these series will benefit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No.

I originally typed an essay explaining why, but it basically boils down to “No.”

So, no.

Unless you particularly love that “dirty ashtray” flavour. ?