Did anyone ever read a lousy review?

Printable View

07-30-2006, 09:09 PM
CgarDan

Did anyone ever read a lousy review?

I have subscription to CA, CM and Smoke. I love reading in general so I find interesting info in these mags. What drives me nuts though is the review section. I don't think I have read even one review that would say that a cigar is a dog rocket. I understand that what might be a gemto me might be garbage to some one else but common there bound to be some that all agree are lousy smokes. Since I haven't seen any reviews saying that I am starting to highly question all of those ratings.

Anyone know of a source that is really objective in their reviews ?
07-30-2006, 09:13 PM
mauied1101

I take everything I read with a grain of salt. CA seems to love Macanoodle Hyde Parks which I don't have an interest to try neermind the beating I'd get from Sid. There are sites out there - but the best thing to do is to try the stick and go with the saying "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
07-30-2006, 10:06 PM
BigMacFU

european cigar cult journal is the one to get. The others are mostly lifestyle/cigar companies' review padding place. Look at the ads that follow the reviews, if that doesn't tell you the reviews are bought, well they are.
07-30-2006, 10:09 PM
bigpoppapuff

Quote:

Originally Posted by mauied1101

I take everything I read with a grain of salt. CA seems to love Macanoodle Hyde Parks which I don't have an interest to try neermind the beating I'd get from Sid. There are sites out there - but the best thing to do is to try the stick and go with the saying "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

huh??....what???.....
07-30-2006, 10:11 PM
bigpoppapuff

i know more than a few guys who've reviewed for smoke....a few that have reviewed for CA....CA seems more ad driven......i would,though,love for someone to explain the ratings in cigar magazine...i can't figure them out...
07-30-2006, 10:24 PM
BigMacFU

They're owned by General Cigar Co. so that should help explain the ratings.

Some interesting articles, but the reviews are certainly biased.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigpoppapuff

i know more than a few guys who've reviewed for smoke....a few that have reviewed for CA....CA seems more ad driven......i would,though,love for someone to explain the ratings in cigar magazine...i can't figure them out...
07-30-2006, 10:32 PM
bigpoppapuff

not general.....altadis.....but explain the scoring...please
07-30-2006, 10:41 PM
Shelby07

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigpoppapuff

not general.....altadis.....but explain the scoring...please

Chocolate is worth 30 points, vanilla is 25, oak is 28, grass is a -2, charcoal is 7...

Add another 20 points if you feel like you just had butterscotch, 15 for a glass of milk, take 10 away if you think you might have licked the ashtray, etc.

Geez, Sid. Now you're gettin' ejucated by a newbie?? :smiley8:
07-30-2006, 10:46 PM
WhiteWidow

Every review I read sounds like a bunch of highbrow BS. I just do my own reviewing by smoking.
07-31-2006, 09:30 AM
CgarDan

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigpoppapuff

not general.....altadis.....but explain the scoring...please

I for some reason thought that CM is part of Lew Rothman's JR empire. The mag always shows up at his stores first, offices are like next door, he writes articles for every issue and JR stores were the only ones promoting Cigar Mania go figure
07-31-2006, 10:33 AM
bigpoppapuff

CM is lew's/altadis...but you're all missing my question....wtf are the numbers??....
07-31-2006, 10:54 AM
CgarDan

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigpoppapuff

CM is lew's/altadis...but you're all missing my question....wtf are the numbers??....

Not sure if you are being sarcastic, I find the numbers quite easy to understand
Categories are:
Appearance -- low is 50 points high is 100
Taste -- low is 50 points high is 100
Construction --- low is 50 points high is 100

Quality = Appearnce points + Taste Points + Construction Points ( doubled)

Example == 87 + 88 + 88 ( X2) = 351

They also now have points for strength with 50 at the low and 100 at the high end of the scale These are just to describe strength and are not used in any other calculations.

As the mag states the review is done by random choice of their subscibers I guess similar to Smoke
07-31-2006, 11:05 AM
SuperChuck

I kind of like the CM ratings... I can scan for taste and (to a lesser degree) construction, without losing points for looking ugly. (yay ugly!)
07-31-2006, 12:42 PM
cigar no baka

I cant' really trust cigar review ratings. Your mileage may vary. For example, I do not like the taste of Padron cigars other than the 1964 and the 1926, but I know that many people love them. So if one of them gave a Padron a 92, and I tried it, I would be going WTF were they thinking?
07-31-2006, 02:01 PM
Desert Rat

Lousy review, great review, doesn't matter, gotta smoke em to make my own mind up!
08-05-2006, 02:44 AM
varmas

Hey

I kinda like reading a reviews:smiley14:
If my taste in cigars is different from the reviwers, I might just see what he thinks of one or other product. Besides, I can pick up some words or frazes - I allways liked people who can smoothly describe something as etheral as the taste os smoke:smiley36:

I once read a review on Montecristos (can't remember which one was it) and sat there thinking - "man, did the guy smoke the same thing as I did?". I also like RyJs better, but man - he said that the stick had "no taste" was "ashy ... earthy ... soft as water" and so on and so on.

I didn't like the review, but for eg. I understood what king of smoke he called water flavoured. It's when you have a bad taste in your moutn and try to wash it of with water. The water doesnt help all you get is a taste of bitter water that reminds a next-day-after-taste of a bad cigar. So something like that. Well, you know - watery smoke.

Well - my point is - I like reviews evin if it's the opposite of what I think about a sertain stick.
08-05-2006, 10:28 AM
cigarsarge

I reviewed for Smoke Magazine a few times. I gave several less than favorable reviews on some cigars. Well...They changed the wording on them to shed a better light on them.

Guess what...I found some of the ones I gave a less than favorable rating to had purchased ad space in the magazine. It's all about money in the magazine ratings IMHO.

I really enjoyed rating cigars for them...I just wish they would have used my origioinal wording.
08-06-2006, 08:08 AM
Cabaiguan Juan

I like reading others reviews of cigars, but I tend to focus on how they describe the flavor. Flavor is more important to me then construction or appearance since I'm smoking it for the taste, and not to simply watch the appearance change into near white ash. I take the reviews with a grain of salt as I do with any review. Like so many said, I will ultimately decide for my own if I like or dislike a certain cigar. However to complicate that, I may hate a cigar, and decide never to smoke it again, only to smoke it again under different circumstances and enjoy it. That kind sucks cuz now I'm at a toss up about how I feel about it, and at this point it gets viciously complicated and so begins the downward spiral only to be fueled by the Devil site.
08-06-2006, 06:54 PM
CgarDan

Quote:

Originally Posted by cigarsarge

I reviewed for Smoke Magazine a few times. I gave several less than favorable reviews on some cigars. Well...They changed the wording on them to shed a better light on them.

Guess what...I found some of the ones I gave a less than favorable rating to had purchased ad space in the magazine. It's all about money in the magazine ratings IMHO.

I really enjoyed rating cigars for them...I just wish they would have used my origioinal wording.

do you remmember which issues I would look them up out of curiosity
08-06-2006, 07:29 PM
cigarsarge

Quote:

Originally Posted by CgarDan

do you remmember which issues I would look them up out of curiosity

Let me dig around and find em...

Found em...I'm in the Winter 2003-2004 with Jimmy Smits on the cover and Spring 2004 with Melinda Clarke on the cover.

On the reviewers page I'm the charming looking guy in the Cohiba T-shirt.
08-07-2006, 07:34 PM
JHarri31

Generally I don't have any faith in the objectiveness of reviewers, but they tend to be semi-accurate with regards to the construction and "flavor" of the cigar. The problem I find is that they can't seem to give a cigar a bad score. I just find descriptions that align with my tastes and if it's a POS then I just won't be a repeat customer.
08-15-2006, 11:06 PM
brian

Not sure if this link has been posted anywhere else on the board, but here it is if you haven't been there.
Unbiased reviews on MANY cigars.

http://www.top25cigar.com/reviewdata...rod=yes&pkID=7
10-19-2006, 03:44 PM
Dru Lee Parsec

I wonder if part of the issue is just that print space is so rare and expensive that maybe CA doesn't want to waste it on a review of a poor cigar?

Also, I think that with all reviews you just have to search until you find a reviewer that has the same taste as you and then go with that. In San Diego there's a film reviewer named Duncan Shepard. He pretty much hates everything that's being put out on film today. People are constantly writing in complaning about his reviews. But then again, let's admit it, how much social contribution can a movie like X-Men 2 really make? It's mindless fluff and Duncan says so.

In any case, I tend to agree with Duncan. I think most movies lately are a waste of film stock. So when I read his reviews I tend to like what he likes. I bet it's the same thing with cigar reviewers. You find one sho likes the same type of things that you do and then let him guide you to new things.