The Squiggler

Members
  • Content Count

    561
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

About The Squiggler

  • Rank
    Prominentes
  • Birthday 10/06/1982

Profile Information

  • Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
  • Interests
    chew, chew, chewin' gum &
    twid, twid, twiddlin' thumbs

Recent Profile Visitors

313 profile views
  1. errrrm... 'Champagne for my real friends, real pain for my sham friends'? (-Francis Bacon, Tom Waits, 'Fall Out Boy', etc.)
  2. It could simply be a that/which situation (ie. not 'RyJ Piramides that are aged' but 'RyJ Piramides, which are aged'), but this would only make sense if they unearthed some dusty, unbanded torpedoes and decided to name them 'RyJ Piramides'. This, of course, creates more questions than it answers, especially since the program includes multiple examples of brand-new vitolas assigned to cigars that are supposedly 'aged'.
  3. !!! Hooray! A very pleasant surprise to cap off a long, arduous day. Thanks to @MoeFOH and @Elpresidente for keeping weekend these comps rolling. Cheers all!
  4. thanks guys, but it was actually a 91.632791546002... I just rounded down to 99.5 for the sake of convenience 🙃
  5. The Godfather Cigar Review Weekend!! Feat: Le Hoyo Des Dieux (BUM ENE '14) For this weekend's review I decided to reach for the godfather of vitolas--a sleek and elegant lonsdale. The Le Hoyo Des Dieux by Hoyo de Monterrey, technically a 'long corona' or 'corona grande', never seems to disappoint, gaining rank among my favorite cigars of all time. Suffice it to say (if smoking in bed weren't such a flagrant fire hazard) I would certainly be 'taking this one to the mattresses' 🤪 Straight out of the SLB, this cigar is a sight to behold--oily, toothy, and beautifully constructed. Cold draw is perfect with a small punch cut, offering aromas of mild tobacco, honey, and barnyard. This one comes out of the gate strong with a warm nuttiness, light baking spice, and vanilla extract. There is a bit of white pepper on the retrohale and an interesting tanginess on the tongue reminiscing of sassafras. Throughout the first third the burn remains mostly even, if a little crooked. Nonetheless, no touch ups are required and the draw remains close to perfect. The flavors are mild up to this point but variable and quite interesting: Graham cracker and a touch of cayenne, followed by whole milk and coconut cookies. Strength is med-, body is med+. Toward the beginning of the second third the burn becomes a bit wonky, but the ash just won't drop, so I decide to brush it off for a quick touch-up. The flavors continue to dance around, hinting of various semi-sweet baked goods and mild spices. A bit of tunneling occurs around the halfway point but quickly corrects itself. The flavors seem to become a bit more savory at this point, reminiscing of buttered rye toast and fresh herbs, leaving a bit of salt on the lips. These zesty, toasted flavors predominate throughout the second third, making for another welcome transition in an already pleasantly variable experience. Into the final third flavors of town-house cracker (butter crackers) and zesty cracked pepper predominate with a light, toasty and nutty finish. Strength remains on the low side of medium throughout while the body hovers between med and full. The draw seems to go downhill after smoking past the band, however, requiring some zealous double-puffing to produce sufficient smoke. As a result, this little guy starts to get pretty hot around the 1-inch mark and I eventually, reluctantly decide to toss it and call it a night. Final thoughts: I f'ing love these cigars! This was not the best one I've smoked by a stretch, but man was it good--complex yet understated, bold yet elegant, trusty yet variable, bliggity bliggity blah. All in all I'd give this one a solid 91.5/100, placing it squarely in the (low-ish) middle of the spectrum for this box. Cheers all! -Squigg
  6. Fold arms and roll aggressively to the right. If your first attempt fails, eat a lemon from your snack-bowl and try again 😏
  7. A conspiracy theory of sorts? Altadis didn't start those NC brands with Cuban names, they acquired them prior to acquiring half of HSA, so I'm thinking there's still very little interconnectivity between the NC brands and the CC brands of the same name, despite now falling under the same umbrella to some extent. And, assuming Habanos SA (whose bread and butter has always been Cuban puros) has retained relative autonomy even though half the company was acquired, I doubt they'd allow it to happen. And even if Altadis' original management retained some autonomy themselves after being acquired by Imperial Brands, I wonder if it's still them in the HSA boardroom or if Imperial has assumed the role of voting with that 50% share. Regardless of who's pulling the strings, it seems like a risky move to try sneaking NC wrappers on cigars touted as 'Cuban puros'. Surely that info would leak out somewhere eventually and a veritable s*#tstorm would ensue.
  8. I think I'm going to have to get one. I've had reasonably decent luck with the trusty drill-bit when I need to remove a little tobacco, but unfortunately I don't have any 4.5 inch drill bits with ergonomic handles.
  9. "The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is equally hard on the "Alcohol" and the “Tobacco” part of its name as well as the "Firearms" part." Some of the solidarity among cigar smokers and gun lovers must surely come from the oppositional organization that lumps these hobbies together. If there were a 'Bureau of Fast Driving and Cliff Diving" to collectively regulate and politically manage racing and extreme sports, it would probably create some solidarity between those two groups as well... not that the cliff divers would necessarily start racing or vice versa
  10. One thing to keep in mind is that when B&Ms (or websites, for that matter) reference a Cigar Aficionado score for a cigar, they always quote the highest score that marca/vitola has ever received. If you go to the CA website, however, there are usually numerous ratings for each cigar (1-2 per year in a lot of cases). In the case of CCs, the date is marked on each box as standard practice, but for NCs this is typically not the case. Take the following as an example: If you walk into your local B&M tomorrow, you might find a box of Oliva V Melanio Figurados with a tag below that says "96 points - Cigar Aficionado". The 96 score was received in 2016, but the box on hand will likely be from 2019/2020 (a year when C.A. gave those cigars a score of 92). It's all marketing... and Gurkha is as or more guilty of this type of manipulative marketing than any other cigar brand (I would have to dig for a source, but I've heard many accusations ranging from relatively benign MSRP markups and subsequent discounts to make prices seem like a steal to first production runs of certain cigars being produced in high-end factories to produce high C.A. scores and then those same cigars being kicked down to trash factories for mass production, after which B&M shops can cite the initial scores for sub-par versions of the same cigar). It all sounds s bit like conspiracy theory but I'd be willing to be there is at least a nugget of truth there
  11. I probably light up 1 NC for every 5 CCs I smoke these days anyway, so I'm very rarely tempted to take a chance on a brand like Gurkha. Generally, if a cigar is 90+ for me it is pretty damn good. Most of the CC boxes I own produce 90+ point cigars (once they have rested/aged properly), but--and this tends to be the case with a lot of CCs in my experience--there also tend to be a handful of poorly constructed cigars in those same boxes that rate much lower. My NC boxes (the better brands, anyway) tend to be a lot more consistent construction-wise, but somehow I just don't seem to stumble across that mythical, magical smoke nearly as often as I do when I smoke from my CC collection. I don't think I've ever smoked a 97+ point NC, but I've smoked multiple CCs that rate in that range (though I would never necessarily expect to grab another from the same box and have the same experience). Anyway, I'm rambling on, but in general my rating scale is as follows: 80 = inoffensive; 85 = not half bad; 90 = great; 95 = amazing; 99 = as close to perfect as possible; 100 = unattainable standard of perfection. I try not to spend money on anything I expect to rate less than 90, but sometimes, as I'm sure you know, a $30 cigar can be an 85 while a $5 cigar can be a 95... part of what makes the whole hobby so variable and exciting
  12. I tend to agree with @Habana Mike... my experience with Gurkha has been absolutely sub-par, but this one was way better than expected. I know that for you an 84 point cigar is pretty bad, but on my scale it's somewhere between average and the low-end of good, so keep that in mind. Some Gurkhas are better than others. I expected this one to be absolute garbage, but instead it was a decent, if middling, cigar.
  13. Tacos did overlap a year, but this could almost be attributed to a slow 'continuous' trickle of production. The Talisman was obviously done for and then resurrected, which seems to be unprecedented

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.