Cigar reviews by members

[Chibearsv]

17 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

no obligation on anyone to do any review in any specific form. do them as suit yourselves. others may appreciate them or not. up to them. a simple score may not be as helpful as a page of thoughts but it does provide an indication. i have no problem with reviews however detailed or not they are. 

Agree totally here!  Everyone on the forum should feel free to share their thoughts in any way they choose in their cigar reviews.  The readers can decide for themselves which reviewer's style and/or content suits their tastes.  

[PigFish]

Are cigar reviews about the author or the audience? For me, what I write, is about what I think. I don't exclude the audience as writing to ones self is a diary, not a forum entry. It is a blend, but it is mostly about me, how I see a cigar, not really about my listing my cigar as an object 'puffed' (forgive the pun) for public sale.

I am afraid that I have already concluded that the smoking public is largely affected more by the box, the band and the price than the cigar itself. Sorry to be so cynical, but that is my review of the larger smoking public.

I am going to side with the cigar reviews are about the author crowd.

Cheers! -Piggy

 

[Chas.Alpha]

The last review I wrote was for the Absurd Review Week, where I was much more focused on how to turn a Sports Illustrated swimsuit model into Honey Boo-Boo's mom in under 4 paragraphs than I was describing the dreadful Nicaraguan test stick I was smoking! 😀

[Chibearsv]

2 hours ago, Chas.Alpha said:

The last review I wrote was for the Absurd Review Week, where I was much more focused on how to turn a Sports Illustrated swimsuit model into Honey Boo-Boo's mom in under 4 paragraphs than I was describing the dreadful Nicaraguan test stick I was smoking! 😀

Best review I’ve read 😁  And you won the contest if I recall correctly 

[Chas.Alpha]

15 minutes ago, Chibearsv said:

Best review I’ve read 😁  And you won the contest if I recall correctly 

I wish I knew how to insert the text between the pictures. Would have made for a much more enjoyable reading experience. Ah, well. I guess those talents will forever be the realm of the younger generation... 😔

[SCgarman]

9 hours ago, Shrimpchips said:

I’m guessing a number of these would be “reviews” posted for Review week competitions? Posts with minimal effort to actually review the cigar vs ability to review the cigar are two pretty different things. If members genuinely have nothing to add about a cigar besides pictures and a rating just for an entry in the weeks’ generous drawing, you’re probably getting a good indication of their level of depth and investment into the cigar appreciation aspect of the hobby.  I usually ignore those as useless data points since there’s no indication as to why the rating was deserved.  If there’s some attempt to qualify their rating, even if not particularly informative for a seasoned smoker or more refined/sensitive palate, I’m good with that.

Spot on mate. If you are going to review a cigar to have your name entered for a "free" cigar gift from the forum host, at the very least put some effort into it! Otherwise, what's the point? 

[ChangBang]

5 minutes ago, NYgarman said:

Spot on mate. If you are going to review a cigar to have your name entered for a "free" cigar gift from the forum host, at the very least put some effort into it! Otherwise, what's the point? 

Agreed, there are themes/contests for a reason!  I've only been really back into cigars for about a year now and all the reviews usually do help as I try to find cigars to load up on.  If it's a contest I don't particularly care for(like the music one a couple contests back) then I just don't participate.

That being said, I think everyone can add value to reviews and people who've said they don't...give it a shot and just try your best!  

[Hammer Smokin']

10 hours ago, Shrimpchips said:

I’m guessing a number of these would be “reviews” posted for Review week competitions? Posts with minimal effort to actually review the cigar vs ability to review the cigar are two pretty different things. If members genuinely have nothing to add about a cigar besides pictures and a rating just for an entry in the weeks’ generous drawing, you’re probably getting a good indication of their level of depth and investment into the cigar appreciation aspect of the hobby.  I usually ignore those as useless data points since there’s no indication as to why the rating was deserved.  If there’s some attempt to qualify their rating, even if not particularly informative for a seasoned smoker or more refined/sensitive palate, I’m good with that.

what a dump load of horse shit. 

[SCgarman]

26 minutes ago, Hammer Smokin' said:

what a dump load of horse shit. 

You disagree? Why? Do members here really deserve a free box of cigars for some half-arsed review that they basically did nothing for? Is this the "entitlement" generation that thinks everything should be free without any work or effort? I'm 55 and sure as hell hope my fellow generation doesn't feel that way. If you have no "passion" for cigars then why review them, or even more importantly why even smoke them?!

[Chas.Alpha]

29 minutes ago, Hammer Smokin' said:

what a dump load of horse shit. 

I am formulating my response, one that doesn’t get me suspended or banned...

post will follow...

[Hammer Smokin']

7 minutes ago, NYgarman said:

You disagree? Why? Do members here really deserve a free box of cigars for some half-arsed review that they basically did nothing for? Is this the "entitlement" generation that thinks everything should be free without any work or effort? I'm 55 and sure as hell hope my fellow generation doesn't feel that way. If you have no "passion" for cigars then why review them, or even more importantly why even smoke them?!

The post said if the member didn't have anything to add (beside a picture and a rating) then it is a good indication of their level of depth and investment into the cigar appreciation aspect of the hobby. 

that is a steaming hot pile of pig manure. 

a member including, or not including descriptions of flavours has nothing to do with their level of depth and investment in the hobby. 

I also wasn't aware of the passion requirement in order to smoke cigars. 

So are you born with passion? or is developed after smoking cigars? And at what point does it become ok to smoke them? 

 

 

[Shrimpchips]

36 minutes ago, Hammer Smokin' said:

The post said if the member didn't have anything to add (beside a picture and a rating) then it is a good indication of their level of depth and investment into the cigar appreciation aspect of the hobby. 

that is a steaming hot pile of pig manure. 

a member including, or not including descriptions of flavours has nothing to do with their level of depth and investment in the hobby. 

I also wasn't aware of the passion requirement in order to smoke cigars. 

So are you born with passion? or is developed after smoking cigars? And at what point does it become ok to smoke them? 

 

 

It’s a generalization - if you can’t be assed enough to include a few notes in a review, you probably don’t care that much about things that usually are included in a review.    PROBABLY.  Not always, but probably. I am sure that there are exceptions, but its an assumption I make, and It would seem others would agree, so calm down man. Maybe you’re lazy, don’t want to share your experience, or don’t wish to contribute to the forum and hobby in any meaningful way.  If one is going to leave a “review”, one could put a little effort into it, share some notes and contribute to the hobby.  Don’t need to be a super taster, smoke 10 cigars a day or have a burning passion for cigars - but some meaningful contribution would be nice is all I’m saying.

[Hammer Smokin']

meaningful contributions is what each member makes of it. 

burn quality, smoking time, draw, are all more important than a flavour note. They are less subjective. You say you tasted toasted marshmallow. Great. 

you can put effort into a review without making up tasting notes. 

I guess like any hobby there are pretentious arseholes who want to pretend they are a better hobbyist than another. Cigars are no different. 

Ever wonder why the 'prize' goes to a random draw, and not the "best" review? Because each one is beneficial to someone. This isn't a contest to see who can provide the best reviews...rather a draw for a random review, treating them all equally. 

 

[Woody Hayes]

On 7/12/2021 at 5:12 PM, Hammer Smokin' said:

it's the reason I don't post any cigar reviews. 

I can't explain flavours very well. 

 

Same with me and it also applies to wine.

[Shrimpchips]

Maybe something was misconstrued in my post, but I wasn’t specifically saying everyone needed detailed tasting notes.  We’re on the same page - any meaningful review of any characteristic of the cigar would be useful, but without linking particular member’s posts, there are those among the weekly reviews that are largely bereft of a meaningful review of the cigar, flavor profile or otherwise.  If you’re not leaving anything much useful, it’s kind of a shame for those members who like to read reviews and get other members takes on cigars they like, have yet to try, or might want to be convinced to give another try.  
 

21 minutes ago, Hammer Smokin' said:

meaningful contributions is what each member makes of it. 

burn quality, smoking time, draw, are all more important than a flavour note. They are less subjective. You say you tasted toasted marshmallow. Great. 

you can put effort into a review without making up tasting notes. 

I guess like any hobby there are pretentious arseholes who want to pretend they are a better hobbyist than another. Cigars are no different

 

Thanks for letting me know what’s more important when reviewing a cigar. I’m glad you weren’t being a pretentious asshole too 😁

[Fuzz]

I'm going to park myself in here for a while. Remember a little decorum, gentlemen. I shouldn't have to explain the reason why....

[dominattorney]

One time I smoked a cougar and, boy, what a night! Anyway. Now I'm married to her. 

[Bijan]

When I do reviews I try to capture how the cigar went so that I can look back on it later. A little capsule of time. I assume that might be useful to others too.

I learned to identify the flavours pretty much by trying to do it for reviews for the forum. It takes some effort and I don't do it to the same extent when just smoking in general.

I mean I think the Cubans or Spanish don't even identify flavours but use abstract descriptors so it's definitely not a must to call out a bunch of specific flavours.

At the same time I think most have some notion of if a cigar is strong or light or sweet or bitter or spicy. There has to be some reason to prefer one Marca over another or one vitola over another.

That's how I judge wine as I don't have the same palate due to lack of experience and exposure, I just try to see if one is sweeter, more acidic or more bitter than another and if I can detect any identifiable flavours.

Again most have a preference as to Marca even if you can't name the flavours you can say if a particular Monte is a typical Monte for you and why you like it over another or not.

[Chas.Alpha]

Here are my thoughts; Review any way you like. I, for one, don't smoke my cigars in "3rds", and a typical pc lasts me for an hour. Most people are done in half the time. Doesn't mean I'm smoking mine more correctly, I just smoke at a leisurely pace. Also, I don't consider a Cuban cigar as a status symbol or some elevated "hobby." I smoke them because I am addicted to nicotine and I generally prefer the Cuban blends to others. 

As to my reviews, I try to apply humor as much as possible, but if I am in a rush to enter the weekly contest I quickly become Detective Joe Friday. "Just the facts, ma'am..." 

[Carrie Nation]

For casual reviews, try concentrating on the basic four S’s: spicy, salty, sweet, sour. Those flavors are elemental and the most relatable. After awhile, see if you can get more specific than that.

As for people saying things like “classic Montecristo taste,” that’s useless commentary. Too many variables for that statement to have any consistent definition. Your idea of a classic marca profile will depend on which decade you started smoking. Marca profiles change drastically about every 10 years and are never anything like their previous profile. Better to say something like "tastes like a a Monty from the 80s" or something along those lines, so there's at least a more specific reference.