Home› Ratings & Reviews

CA Ratings

FourtotheflushFourtotheflush Posts: 2,555 ✭
in Ratings & Reviews
Anyone waiting and anxious to see these?
Although I used to put much more stock into this annual report,
I still get somewhat excited to see whos on top.


Comments

  • ug danug dan Posts: 375 ✭
    I like to look at them and see how they lined up. I don't go out and buy sticks just because they're on the list, but it might influence me further down the line if I see one at a B&M.
  • VulchorVulchor Posts: 4,848 ✭✭✭✭
    I love reading the reviews, and they do influence me to try some new stuff when I see it------but this being said-----the bias toward Cuban cigars gets me a little bit sometimes. As does how they can say the cigar was acidic, musty, like burnt paper, with a poor ash and burn-----THEN RATE IT AN 84!......Although I feel quite vindicated when a 6 dollar stick (Casa Magna, AB Family) beats the 30 dollar Zino's and 20 dollar Davidoffs with regularity..............in short-----fun reading, not very reliable.
  • KriegKrieg Posts: 5,188 ✭✭✭
    i like to see what the top 3 cigars of the year are, but that's just cause im planning on going to the Big Smoke next year and they give out the top 3 cigars.

    "Long ashes my friends."

  • KriegKrieg Posts: 5,188 ✭✭✭
    speaking of Top 3...I bet you one of the top 3 is gonna be another Padron.

    "Long ashes my friends."

  • ug danug dan Posts: 375 ✭
    no bet!
  • VulchorVulchor Posts: 4,848 ✭✭✭✭
    You know it Kreig------every issue has to rate AT LEAST 6 Padrons and 2 opus X's............... and one AVO usually near the bottom with a Griffins if not, lol
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    i like CA less and less the more i look at them.

    i think ive hit the stage of "i dont give a ***" when it comes to them.

    Kuzi's Forum Links Page
  • cleakecleake Posts: 21 ✭✭
    When was the last time they rated a stick sub 80 pts? according to their scoring chart 80-90 is considered great if I remember correctly.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    cleake:
    When was the last time they rated a stick sub 80 pts? according to their scoring chart 80-90 is considered great if I remember correctly.
    its been a while since ive seen one. i think they rat a TON of cigars and pick some of the top X% to post in the magazine. im sure they also go out of their way to not rate the crappy cigars.
    Kuzi's Forum Links Page
  • docbp87docbp87 Posts: 3,521 ✭
    cleake:
    When was the last time they rated a stick sub 80 pts? according to their scoring chart 80-90 is considered great if I remember correctly.
    Yeah, but if you look at the cigars they publish ratings for, they really DON'T smoke crappy cigars. That's probably the reason a score less than 80 is so rare.
  • ug danug dan Posts: 375 ✭
    I don't go out of my way to smoke crappy cigars either!
  • Nick2021Nick2021 Posts: 938 ✭✭
    Haven't read up on the new ratings yet but am excited to see what comes out in the top 5
  • Jetmech_63Jetmech_63 Posts: 3,451 ✭✭✭
    Ratings are so subjective. I mean, whats stopping us from coming up with our own magazine and rating cigars with reviews and selling it. Same thing. Of the CA's i've seen(something to do while puffing at the b&m) ive never seen a "boutique" brand reviewed. Some stuf they say is 90+ point, i think tastes like ass. Something i like Kuzi may think tastes like ass, and something Kuzi likes Jozer make think is a dog rocket. I take CA with a bit less than a grain of salt, but i take forum reviews a little more to heart. We seem to be the guys more in touch with the realm of cigars..... If that makes any sense... Then again....if there is money to be made in doing it...there is money made to be made reviewing it.....
  • docbp87docbp87 Posts: 3,521 ✭
    Jetmech_63:
    Ratings are so subjective. I mean, whats stopping us from coming up with our own magazine and rating cigars with reviews and selling it. Same thing. Of the CA's i've seen(something to do while puffing at the b&m) ive never seen a "boutique" brand reviewed. Some stuf they say is 90+ point, i think tastes like ass. Something i like Kuzi may think tastes like ass, and something Kuzi likes Jozer make think is a dog rocket. I take CA with a bit less than a grain of salt, but i take forum reviews a little more to heart. We seem to be the guys more in touch with the realm of cigars..... If that makes any sense... Then again....if there is money to be made in doing it...there is money made to be made reviewing it.....


    You've never seen a boutique brand reviewed in CA? Huh? They pretty consistently review Padilla, Viaje, Illusione (and Dion's other lines), etc. which all could be considered boutique brands...

    And absolutely nothing is stopping you from writing your own cigar magazine, and publishing reviews and scores... hell, there are hundreds of websites that do it daily, and are plenty of other, good cigar mags out there.

    (just playing devil's advocate here, but I think CA gets undue criticism sometimes from people who look at it, and are offended that it's target audience is not themselves. CA obviously targets the guys who buy the watches, and the cars, and the gadgets, and the clothes, and all of the high end luxury stuff they advertise, and write about... they make no pretensions about being a magazine for the everyman...)
  • Jetmech_63Jetmech_63 Posts: 3,451 ✭✭✭
    I see your side Doc, and you make a good point. I think mine got a little blurry though...
    Boutique being Paradigm(yes they are a new company though), DPG, AJ and Torano to name a few. I dont think a lot of cigars/blenders get their fair shot. Which is a shame because CA(like em or not) does have the power to drive and steer a decent chunk of this market. That being said i think CA is an extension of marketing, rather than a basis for unbiased review. I'm not their target audience, far from it lol, but wherever there is money to be made, there will be bias. I'm sure CA has worked hard to build their successful magazine, great....rock on. It's just not my cup of ligero....
  • JCizzleJCizzle Posts: 1,913 ✭✭✭
    I thoroughly enjoy reading these discussions and top 10 lists, but my ignorance saves me from any kind of bias, at least for now. My top 10 list is the list of my favorite sticks I've had so far, however few they may be.
    Light 'em up.
  • VulchorVulchor Posts: 4,848 ✭✭✭✭
    Jetmech_63:
    Which is a shame because CA(like em or not) does have the power to drive and steer a decent chunk of this market. That being said i think CA is an extension of marketing, rather than a basis for unbiased review. I'm not their target audience, far from it lol, but wherever there is money to be made, there will be bias.
    This was said PERFECTLY
  • KriegKrieg Posts: 5,188 ✭✭✭
    If you ask me, I think the way Cigar Magazine does ratings is spot on. They select their subscribers at random, then send them a bunch of cigars with rating sheets. I was selected for a review last year, it was a ton of fun and would love to do it again (not just for the free cigars).

    "Long ashes my friends."

  • DynaguyDynaguy Posts: 51 ✭
    I have been a CA subscriber for years, dating back to when it was CIGAR Afficianado, not cigar AFFICIANADO. The magazine is totally supported by advertisers and you will not see CA rating house blends like Diesel, Old Henry or JR Ultimate. In short, their ratings can hardly be called unbiased. The fact is that a lot of the cigars they rate highly, I have found to be absolute drek (Casa Magna comes to mind). I am sympathetic to how hard it must be to come up with cigar related contend when so much of the industry is so secretive about how about they go about what they do. On the other hand, while I make a pretty good buck, the lifestyle portrayed my CA is way out of my league. I'm just not interested in reading about this stuff. Why not have articles of more general interest. For these reasons, I have finally let my subscription lapse and I will not review. Besides, with the advent of forums like these, there is a much better, unvarnished source of opinions regarding cigars. So, as to CA's Top 25, meh.....
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
    Well said Dyna.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,347 ✭✭✭
    madurofan:
    Well said Dyna.
    holly ***, I thought we kicked you out!!! hehe...

    Well last year it was the padron family reserve 45, and I personally think that the 46 is way better. But like everyone said they are super biasd. I don't think their reviews are crap due to the way the magazine is targeted, I just think that as much as they say they are not leaning to one cigar company or another and then they come up with the reviews and ratings they do, it makes me wonder.
  • docbp87docbp87 Posts: 3,521 ✭
    phobicsquirrel:
    madurofan:
    Well said Dyna.
    holly ***, I thought we kicked you out!!! hehe...

    Well last year it was the padron family reserve 45, and I personally think that the 46 is way better. But like everyone said they are super biasd. I don't think their reviews are crap due to the way the magazine is targeted, I just think that as much as they say they are not leaning to one cigar company or another and then they come up with the reviews and ratings they do, it makes me wonder.


    I will be VERY surprised if the Padron 46 gets the win. I have read very few reviews that would consider it better than the 45. The cigar is, first of all, too large in ring for it's blend, and it loses a lot of potency and boldness as a result.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    Dynaguy:
    I have been a CA subscriber for years, dating back to when it was CIGAR Afficianado, not cigar AFFICIANADO. The magazine is totally supported by advertisers and you will not see CA rating house blends like Diesel, Old Henry or JR Ultimate. In short, their ratings can hardly be called unbiased. The fact is that a lot of the cigars they rate highly, I have found to be absolute drek (Casa Magna comes to mind).

    I am sympathetic to how hard it must be to come up with cigar related contend when so much of the industry is so secretive about how about they go about what they do. On the other hand, while I make a pretty good buck, the lifestyle portrayed my CA is way out of my league. I'm just not interested in reading about this stuff. Why not have articles of more general interest.

    For these reasons, I have finally let my subscription lapse and I will not review. Besides, with the advent of forums like these, there is a much better, unvarnished source of opinions regarding cigars.
    So, as to CA's Top 25, meh.....
    fixed that for ya...
    search for "formatting your posts" and you will not have the format issues.


    i let my subscription lapse for the same reason. i only read the cigar stuff and the other 85% of the magazine was trash.


    as far as the unbiased thing goes...
    the rep for a cigar company came in to my B&M today and i overheard him talking with the owner that he was upset that the brand he works for does not show up in the CA top 10. he wasnt upset because the cigars werent good enough, but rather that he thought that since they are "one of their biggest advertisers" they should be there.

    he saw i was listening in and changed the subject.
    Kuzi's Forum Links Page
  • FourtotheflushFourtotheflush Posts: 2,555 ✭
    kuzi16:

    the rep for a cigar company came in to my B&M today and i overheard him talking with the owner that he was upset that the brand he works for does not show up in the CA top 10. he wasnt upset because the cigars werent good enough, but rather that he thought that since they are "one of their biggest advertisers" they should be there.

    he saw i was listening in and changed the subject.


    Was that by any chance a RP rep?


  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    Fourtotheflush:
    kuzi16:

    the rep for a cigar company came in to my B&M today and i overheard him talking with the owner that he was upset that the brand he works for does not show up in the CA top 10. he wasnt upset because the cigars werent good enough, but rather that he thought that since they are "one of their biggest advertisers" they should be there.

    he saw i was listening in and changed the subject.


    Was that by any chance a RP rep?


    nope.

    im not looking to "out" any brands here.
    Kuzi's Forum Links Page
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
    Fourtotheflush:
    kuzi16:

    the rep for a cigar company came in to my B&M today and i overheard him talking with the owner that he was upset that the brand he works for does not show up in the CA top 10. he wasnt upset because the cigars werent good enough, but rather that he thought that since they are "one of their biggest advertisers" they should be there.

    he saw i was listening in and changed the subject.


    Was that by any chance a RP rep?


    That would have to be a general rep. Even with all the money thrown at CA by General not even CA can pretend that their cigars are in the Top 10.

    Another funny thing, when's the last time you saw a Davidoff product in a CA list?
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    nope.... not a general rep either.

    my B&M does almost NO business with general.
    Kuzi's Forum Links Page
  • DynaguyDynaguy Posts: 51 ✭
    Thanks for the formatting help. Also, got to type better, lots of misspellings. Same point though.
  • FourtotheflushFourtotheflush Posts: 2,555 ✭
    kuzi16:
    nope.... not a general rep either.

    my B&M does almost NO business with general.
    Gotta be a fuente guy as you said your B&M has them.
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402 ✭
    Fourtotheflush:
    kuzi16:
    nope.... not a general rep either.

    my B&M does almost NO business with general.
    Gotta be a fuente guy as you said your B&M has them.
    We oughtta turn this into a contest. I'm guessing Gurkha.
Sign In or Register to comment.