Options
ratings. reviews. salt.
kuzi16
Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
from another thread
the problem with a rating is that it is trying to quantify a subjective matter. what does a taste rating of "9" mean? In my reviews i know what it means to me. but how does that translate to you? does it mean that the flavor is strong? pronounced? round? Good? what does a burn rating of "8" mean? 8 out of ten puffs the burn was even? it was more even than 8 out of 10 cigars? what IS the difference between a 90 and a 91 rated cigar? really? this is the problem with ratings.
reviews on the other hand are a bit different. saying that a taste of nuts or coffee or cola is there is something a little less fuzzy. we all know what cola tastes like (or can find out); we can relate --we can translate. there is however still a problem with this. Cigar smoke is, in general, on the alkaline side. What does this mean? well.... our mouth has a ph of about 7. (about neutral) anything that we eat or drink will change this. Coffee is more acidic. milk is more neutral. Bananas are more alkaline. how your mouth is on ay given day compared to the cigar you are about to smoke may make a big difference in your smoking experiance. when a cigar tastes bad sometimes it isnt the cigar's fault, the tobaccos fault, an rh problem or other outside issues. Sometimes your mouth is just to basic or to acidic. this makes the subjective matter of taste even more complex. Not only are you trying to examine tobacco nuances that sometimes differ only slightly from cigar to cigar or year to year or country to country but now you have to do so in an ever changing environment within your own mouth. I try to comensate for this by having a very strict cigar routine before i do a review. it involves eating cheese on white bread, drinking water, and drinking a bit of milk. with luck this brings my mouth back to a pH of 7ish. Even this may not help. this is the problem with reviews.
this brings us to the salt...
many ratings and reviews (especially of rare cigars) are done with one cigar, by one man, on one day. depending on what the man has done int he last 24 hours, what food has been consumed, even what time of day it is, a range of flavors may or may not be noted. the potential outcome has a huge margin of error, even in MY reviews, and therefor must be taken with a grain of salt.
I agree. I often find myself reccomending a cigar that I "love" when it only got an 8.2 or so in my catalog. this is hardly the best rating i have handed out. its also lower than cigars that i have said were "o.k."bwalk:I dont know the preferred rating method for this forum, but I'm not the biggest fan of number ratings (I feel they can sometimes be misleading).
the problem with a rating is that it is trying to quantify a subjective matter. what does a taste rating of "9" mean? In my reviews i know what it means to me. but how does that translate to you? does it mean that the flavor is strong? pronounced? round? Good? what does a burn rating of "8" mean? 8 out of ten puffs the burn was even? it was more even than 8 out of 10 cigars? what IS the difference between a 90 and a 91 rated cigar? really? this is the problem with ratings.
reviews on the other hand are a bit different. saying that a taste of nuts or coffee or cola is there is something a little less fuzzy. we all know what cola tastes like (or can find out); we can relate --we can translate. there is however still a problem with this. Cigar smoke is, in general, on the alkaline side. What does this mean? well.... our mouth has a ph of about 7. (about neutral) anything that we eat or drink will change this. Coffee is more acidic. milk is more neutral. Bananas are more alkaline. how your mouth is on ay given day compared to the cigar you are about to smoke may make a big difference in your smoking experiance. when a cigar tastes bad sometimes it isnt the cigar's fault, the tobaccos fault, an rh problem or other outside issues. Sometimes your mouth is just to basic or to acidic. this makes the subjective matter of taste even more complex. Not only are you trying to examine tobacco nuances that sometimes differ only slightly from cigar to cigar or year to year or country to country but now you have to do so in an ever changing environment within your own mouth. I try to comensate for this by having a very strict cigar routine before i do a review. it involves eating cheese on white bread, drinking water, and drinking a bit of milk. with luck this brings my mouth back to a pH of 7ish. Even this may not help. this is the problem with reviews.
this brings us to the salt...
many ratings and reviews (especially of rare cigars) are done with one cigar, by one man, on one day. depending on what the man has done int he last 24 hours, what food has been consumed, even what time of day it is, a range of flavors may or may not be noted. the potential outcome has a huge margin of error, even in MY reviews, and therefor must be taken with a grain of salt.
0
Comments
Construction
Rated from 1-10. This is the quality of the construction including everything from how it looks/feels to how it lights to how it burns. A rating of 5 indicates an average cigar, with minor corrections to the burn necessary (rotating against a breeze, maybe a dab or two with a wet finger, etc) but no major flaws. Higher ratings are for a better burn, and lower ratings, obviously, will reveal flaws (canoeing, burn-through, puts itself out, cracks, etc).
Flavor
Rated from 1-10. This is my opinion of the flavor of the cigar. Not its complexity or an assessment of quality, etc. It's strictly a measurement of how much the taste appealed to me. These are my ratings, and I'm doing them for me. A rating of 5 indicates an average cigar taste. A cigar with this flavor is something I would certainly smoke again, but it didn't dazzle me. Lower ratings will indicate varying degrees of flavors that I don't like, and higher ratings reveal tastes that suit my palate.
Body
Rated from 1-10. This is a rating of the cigar's strength. Once again, 5 indicates an average body -- pure medium. Higher ratings will indicate a more full-bodied cigar and lower ratings will indicate a milder cigar. These ratings are not a per-draw but overall experience. As such, a lancero would get a lower body rating than a churchill in the same brand. This rating is useful to me in determining what I would give to a guest, or what I would choose for myself in a given situation.
Overall
Rated from 1-5. (Note the change). The descriptions for these ratings given below.
1. I won't smoke this cigar again, even if it's free.
2. I would smoke this if my options were limited
3. I would enjoy it again, but I won't seek it out, or buy it under anything but limited selection.
4. Great smoke. I will buy this again, and recommend it to others.
5. I will smoke this any chance I get, at any price
A couple other notes about the ratings. Price is not reflected anywhere in this. I rate a cigar on a level playing field, irrespective of its cost. In other words, a mediocre expensive cigar won't have a lower rating (because it's a lower value) than a mediocre cheap cigar. I do record the approximate retail price of the cigar in my journal as well, which allows me to do value comparisons. Also noted in the journal is the brand (obviously), country of origin, wrapper type, shape (as named by the manufacturer), length, ring, price, date in my humi, date smoked, burn tim (in minutes rounded to 5) and brief comments.
The journal is still very young (14 cigars), but I am already seeing some interesting trends. For example, every cigar which has received an overall rating below 3 has been a Connecticut wrapper. Also, every Connecticut wrapper cigar I've smoked (4) has received a rating below 3. Yes, those are two different statements.
The ratings that go from 1-10 are meant to be centered on 5, and the idea is that if you were to chart all cigars, you'd get a bell-curve distribution on the ratings. I find this to be much more useful than the 100-point system that seems to be pretty standard (when is the last time you saw a rating below 75? above 97?). Most cigars fall in the 85-94 range... which, coincidentally, is a 10-point scale. I just don't think these things need to be parsed out so finely. Rather, having multiple ratings is much more informative. For example, the best flavor I've gotten out of a cigar with a fairly mild body (rated 3 or less in Body) has been the Royal Jamaica Gold (rated 6 in Flavor). I'd smoke this again with someone who's never tried a cigar before. It's also cheap ($5).
So there you have it. That's the ratings. I'm a big nerd, I can't help it.
Kuzi you ever thought of litmus testing your mouth? Another thing to keep in mind those of us with acid reflux actually have an acidic saliva bc it is constantly mixed with stomach acids, gross but true.
Dutyje,
I'm curious given your statistical analogies in your rating scale how you convert your 3 different 1-10 scales to the overall 1-5 scale. Is that also a subjective conversion? I do like the fact that you point out that CA scale typically uses a 10 pt scale even though they use a 100pt scale. Aslo I see ratings from Smoke that are a 10pt scale, but in reality is a 100pt scale because they use decimal points. (9.1, 9.0, 8.8 etc.)
Same here, found the cojonu 03 and 06. Have you came across any others like them. I haven't found any that are consistent with the spice from stick to stick like the tats.
THose are two of my top 5 sticks EVER! According to Tat the 06 is more full bodied than the 03 but I think the 03 is the spicier of the two. Just my Opinion. I've also found the 601 Green(Oscuro) to be quite nice as well.
I agree with you on the 03 picked up some after the last converstation we had. I've found the green label though hit and miss with the spice.
Yea I know what you mean about the tats. Whenever someone recommends a cigar that has spice its always seems to be a secondary flavor not the primary one if that makes any sense.
To answer your question, yes. Here's the breakdown, by rating:
1 - 1 cigar (Bolivar Churchill)
2 - 6 cigars
3 - 11 cigars
4 - 14 cigars
5 - 6 cigars
My intent wasn't to have a bell-shaped distribution, but if you exclude the "1" rating, that's very much what it's looking like so far.
ccom Cuban Label
Playboy by Altadis
RP Vintage 1992
5 Vegas Gold
Outland Dominican (locally-rolled stick with an EcSu wrapper)
4 Ecuadorian Sumatra wrappers, 1 Connecticut, 1 Honduran Criollo
I agree with kas, though, that it's a good cigar. Good flavor and lots of it.