Legend's rating system
 

I wanted to create this thread for 2 reasons. 1 give a deeper understanding of my rating system and 2. Have a thread I can put a link to in my signature so those who don't know can check it out if they care (which most won't buy there might be a few)I do a simple impression of the cigar what I liked or disliked and have a 5 point scale.

1 dog rocket. This is a crappy cigar. Of course better than a machine rolled. But harsh. Fast and hot burn. Bad flavor or no flavor.

2. Yard gar. This is a descent smoke but its okay to smoke it if your are working in the yard. Or don't have time to finish.

3. Good smoke. Better than a yard gar. Hate to not finish it.(update: because so many smokes fall in this category and there are legitimate levels within it I have added the 3.x to the 3s. 3.0 being a step above yard gar 3.9 being a great smoke but not quite top 25 and of course everything in between)

4. Premiums. these are great smokes. You will want to take your time. Have it with friends really enjoy it. They will be in your top 25.

5. Super premiums. These are your top 5 cigars. They are well constructed. Burn well. Taste awesome.

Now to explain the reasoning. I only do a simple impression because for the most part everybody's tastes are different and most will pick up different flavors. Gnats-assing all the hints of this an that will only distract from your own thoughts on the stick and face it those really long reviews get boring IMO.

The 5 point scale is setup to categorize the smokes into what we really already do. Crap. Ok. Good. Really good and our favorites. Take the CA model. 1 to 100 and categories 2 through 5 all land typically in the 80 to 100 range. So you have 80 points to rate a cigar you will not like. And only 20 to rate the majority of the smokes you smoke. For the most part we know what is crap (or dog rocket) and won't smoke it so why waste 80% of our rating system on them. Most of the cigars out there that we smoke (unless we are fortunate enough to be very wealthy or only smoke our very favorites infrequently) fall into the 3 rating. Good smoke. In the CA ratings these will typically fall within 85 to 95. (if CA ratings were accurate and not influenced by advertizing) do I really care that one smoke is a little better than the other? Not really. Its a good smoke so is the other.(update: I've added this back into the system with the 3.x because after doing a bunch of reviews I realized that there are legitimate levels within this rating) Another thing is how many cigars have gotten 90+ ratings? Just devalues the rating. Using the 4 and 5 for the very best 20 to 30 cigars gives it meaning. A 5 is one of about 5 cigars. That says something. A 4 also. By making the top something elite it gives meaning to the rating. I don't know about you but when I hear of another 90+ rating from CA I no longer take notice. So simple. Meaningful. And useful. My 2 cents

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Regarding the CA point system, its actually a 50 point scale, same as for their wine reviews. It starts at 50 points. And yes, I've seen low 70s scores from time to time. I have also seen low scores for manufacturers with plenty of ads in CA, contradicting the "ad dollars theory" as well.

And since its actually a 50 point scale, it is same as yours, isn't it? You now have subdivisions, same as they do within each 10 point "step".

Also, just from a personal experience, ad dollars do not influence scores and reviews in CA. Its time to put this myth to rest and not use it as an excuse every time you (or I or whoever else) do not agree with a CA review. As the saying goes, there are no great wines (cigar lines), just great BOTTLES (cigars). As in THAT particular wine or cigar, on THAT particular day. You and I have no idea how a particular cigar was smoked by a CA staffer: ambient temp, surroundings, emotional state that day (hey, I just wrecked my Ferrari running from my girlfriend's husband!), etc. There are many factors that always affect one's enjoinment of something and unless you and I can duplicate those factors to the minute detail we shouldn't question a particular review, we can either agree with it or not.

If anything, what happens at CA is their ad dept calls everyone before a particular issue goes into print, that's what ANY magazine's marketing dept is all about. Manufacturers can then either place an ad in the CA issue with the review to capitalize on the score and hopefully make inroads in the marketplace, or decline to place an ad. Their choice and no one else's, even if they decide not to place an ad that review will still be published.

Ever see advertisements for such wines as Marcassin, Kosta Browne, Sine Qua Non, Aubert, Screaming Eagle in Wine Spectator? Latour, Haut Brion? And plenty of others. And you won't. That doesn't stop Wine Spectator from issuing incredible reviews and scores for these wines year in and year out. Same with cigars, there are NO ad dollars in play.

Here's my rating system, just as valid as yours and anyone else's:

Wouldn't gift to an enemy, sould be used in chemical warfare
Backyard fertilizer material
Will smoke if there is nothing else to do that week
Not bad, but won't go out of my way to find one
Really good, would recommend to friends
Great, will use my kid's college money (or second mortgage) to buy more of
Incredible, should be my last smoke in this world

In regard to your "5 best cigars" reference in your rating system, is it actually just 5 cigars? Would like to see which ones just to calibrate my palate and hopefully find cigars I may have missed out on.

TIA.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

CA's reviews should be taken with a grain of salt (esp since you have no idea how they smoked it), but that should apply to a lot of reviews unless you know that reviewer's preference/style/method/palette/etc. Taking multiple reviews into account is a better gauge, but trying it yourself is the best way, and trying it multiple times.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I just review cigars on flavor, construction, etc by describing them. Never saw any need to attach a number scale. :2

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Notice my system also leaving out the numbers...

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I agree Tom

Re: Legend's rating system
 

If you are personally opposed to numbers my scale can be.

Dog rocket
Yard gar
Good smoke (with varying emphasis on how good)
Great smoke
Best

And yes it will only be 5 smokes. For the best and it does change over time. As with all guys.

It has stayed pretty steady for me. The most recent addition was about a year ago the dragonfire by Gurkha.

And sorry for the really late response but I have to strongly disagree with you on the 50 to 1 being the same as mine. For the exact reason I gave. A 90+ is meaningless. How many? In the hundreds.

And as for ad dollars having no effect on CA? I have no proof. But its like saying lobbyists money have no influence on congressmen.

An opinion.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Are you talking about Cigar Aficionado or Cigar Asylum?

MCS

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Its still a 50 point scale whether you agree or not, it simply is. Same as yours, by any measure. Some CA scores fall into 70s, actually making their range much narrower than yours. Most CA scores fall into 80s, a few into 90s and although there is a decent number of 90+ scores issued, in the grand scheme of things a never ending stream of better made cigars these days is hitting the market and I am not surprised at the number of high scores we do see. 10, 15 years ago we simply did not see the likes of DPG (lines), Illusione, LFD and others. The standard is pretty high these days and RISING rapidly and if 15-18 years ago I thought HdM Rothschild XX was a very nice smoke, these days it pales in comparison to, say, Illusione 88. I had the two side by side last night and if that HdM is in mid to high 80s (by most accounts) what do you propose CA guys score an Illusione at? Inquiring minds want to know.

As for ad dollars, please read my post again as it relates to Wine Spectator and wine reviews. I can absolutely GUARANTEE that no money is EVER involved with Spectator high scores and reviews for small boutique labels, I know first hand as do all the wineries I listed in my post, and many others as well. I am sure I can say same thing about CA, same people, same outfit, same thought process. Neither are said wineries even contacted to place ads. "Ad dollars myth" is just that, a MYTH, while lobbying, an example you provided, is actually PROVEN as a money supported and driven scheme, two very different things from where I stand no matter how you want to slice it.

When you say that you have no proof, can you at least point to at least ONE person who does? I thought so. I am not affiliated with CA in any way nor am I a CA apologist, couldn't care less what they say or do, they are a lifestyle mag for the most part with some cigar coverage as a bonus, but let's get a sense of reality here. I do not agree with a number of their reviews and scores, but that doesn't mean I post "scores are bought" comments to "prove" my palate is superior to theirs. Its MY palate and it only works for ME no matter if a great review came from CA or someone on this board, I still want to try a cigar with MY palate before I commit to a box, no excuses if I get it wrong.

Thanks for listing your top cigar, I am now able to calibrate my palate to yours.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

At the risk of adding fuel to the fire, can you point to one person who can prove that it isn't true?

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Fair question.

I can tell you from FIRST HAND experience, MINE, that it is not true. I'm in wine business and drink quite often with a good number of winemakers most people only read about, pretty much who's who of the wine world, many of the "high point" winemakers up and down the coast. Take it from me that as much as we all disagree with Spectator and CA scores, and I do so often in both cases, trust me on that, I have nothing but respect for the Shanken Empire when it comes to class of organization and how they run it (I wish I can say the same about other reviewers). You drop off (or ship) your wines to be reviewed and the next time you see your score is when it is printed or posted in their online review database, not a second before. No calls to solicit money, nothing. NADA.

Funny thing is that wine geeks also make "myth" claims and you can find plenty who will tell you out loud and as often as you are willing to listen that their palates are much better than those of the Spectator crew. I have tasted with plenty of wine geeks for a good number of years now in all sorts of environments (public tastings, barrel tastings, targeted consumer tastings, winemaker dinners, etc.) and I can assure you that with some rare exceptions "wine geeks" really need to have a reality check, most of them can't even point out simple and in your face faults in wine (brett, VA, TCA, low pH, reduction, RS, mercaptans, etc.), let alone figure out what's really in their glass. (I can also say that about many so called sommeliers, don't get me started on that).

Its much easier with cigars, of course, there is much less that can be at fault or ruin the experience, but in general if I disagree with a point score of a cigar in CA I chalk it up to a difference in cigar (different box/batch, storage conditions prior), tasting environment second and smoker's palate difference or rather preference, third. How many times have you had a great wine while on vacation, in a beautiful restaurant on a beach looking out at great sunset to then buy that same wine at home for dinner and all of a sudden say, "Oh, wait, this is a different wine than the one we had". Nope, same wine, different day and environment. Same with cigars, its the overall experience that either makes you fall in love with a cigar or not.

And palate preference is another significant factor as well. If you like big bodied cigars (I do), you will tend to score mild ones lower (I do). Like big, bold flavors? Score these high and score subtle cigars lower. Etc, etc, etc. No reason to claim any disagreement between your cigar experience and that of the CA as some "myth".

Like I said, its time to put this "myth" to bed and move on.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Your first statement I listed above would indicate that their scale is 70s to 100 meaning its a 3 point scale not a 5. Either way. Mine is much more meaningful to the average Joe smoker.

Second quote. The dragonfire is in my top 5 but not the top. The padron 80th is number 1. 2 through 5 in whatever order.

Dragonfire
Perdomo edicion De Silva
Gurkha grand age Churchill
Gurkha beast

Yes there are 3 gurkhas in the top 5. For me.

I think that's the major point of my rating system. Its for us. For each smokers personal rating. Which is why I only give a general impression and not a detailed review so each guy can try it themselves and rank it. Easy to remember.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Many of us have adopted verbal scales over the years. Some are 4 some 5 some 6. Same guy just different number of stops. :) Really depends on how much we have been drinking.

Unless you know and have smoked with the reviewer it's hard to place too much weight on their thoughts and comments regarding a cigar regardless of their scale, 1-999 or good to bad other than the extremes. Which may be the point of the O.P.

There are things that can help folks understand the cigar better to see if they might like to try it based upon words presented.

We all value different things though and so much of the experience is subjective.

The actual cigar has a broad range of considerations that may be important to some and not to others, things like:

Size
Age
Brand
Wrapper
Packaging method
Storage conditions
Flavor profile
Depth of flavors
Evolution of flavors
Nuance
Finish
Draw
Feel
Duration of smoking experience
Relative smoothness/harshness
Volume of smoke
etc.

Then there is the whole variation between boxes and within boxes thing to consider. Have smoked 1492's that were ehh. Doesnt mean they are not one of the top 5 cigars .. for me. But if the reviewer was smoking that one... People smoke cigars differently. For example nose exhale vs not. These differences can yield radically different impressions of the same cigar.

Giving someone one of your top 5 cigars and they, after smokng one, having similar opinion.. now that's cool.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I have 3 simple categories I put all cigars I smoke into.

1) It sucked ass.
2) It was alright.
3) I really liked it.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I'm pretty close to you on that. I have found when a cigar is one of the best I've had and really puts me in the zone, I have a ton of trouble describing it at all. I'm in such a euphoric state that descriptors escape me.

MCS

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I appreciate the thoughtful response, and you make some excellent points. I would still argue that it is your personal opinion and experience rather than actual "proof", but I do understand why you feel the way you do.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I like Legend's rating system and have found myself agreeing with a good number of his reviews. (for what that's worth)

Re: Legend's rating system
 

This is the point!!! It can be very helpful to find someone who has similar tastes regardless of the review method. So many different options and informed guidance is cool.

When are you going to pull the trigger on the Cremosas? :D
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10270

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Consider them in the mail.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I use my own rating system as well. I find it to be a much more accurate score than CA's score. The CA score is almost always between 80 and 100. The problem with CA's system is that they give the same importance to the way a cigar tastes and the way it looks. Anyone who has ever had a RyJ cazadore or a por larranaga petit corona will tell you that looks aren't everything. I believe they should be considered but not at equal importance to the flavor. Same goes with smoking characteristics.

So my system is a weighted average. If a cigar was average it should rate a 50. Here are the particulars. Incidentally, we have been using it on blowinsmoke.net for some time and it works very well.

appearance 10 possible points
flavor 20 possible points
smoking characteristics 10 possible points
price 5 possible points

Total up the points, divide by 45 and multiply by 100. This gives you the score.


Example:

appearance: 9
flavor: 12
smoking characteristic: 9
price: 4

34/45 X 100 = 76%

On CAs system this cigar would have scored quite high because the appearance, price,a nd smoking characteristics were almost perfect. With this system it is fairly represented and now everyone knows to stay away from it.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Excellent point.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

IMHO,

The purpose of any review is to provide a baseline for other people to compare and contrast their own tastes with another. If I agree with two or three reviews of the same person, it's likely that I'll like something else that they like. And if I find that I don't like the same cigar in the fourth review, then I'll chalk it up to a bad stick, difference in palate, or that big glass of milk that I drank right before I smoked it. Whatever.

I'm really not a fan of number systems. Some make sense and and some don't. IMO, Legend's makes sense to me.

But personally, I want to know what the entire experience was like. How did you enjoy it? Explain it to me.

I've only written two reviews, and in both I've tried to describe the smoking experience from start to finish. Use the senses of sight, smell, taste, and touch. If I could describe hoe the cigar sounds, I would try to do that as well. But I can tell you if I hear birds or trucks or music playing and how that enhances or detracts from my experience.

But no review (or reviewer) is perfect. We all know that. It's all a matter of perspective.

Cheers,
Michael

Oh, and that bit about cA and their point scale? I'll take it seriously when I read a review where they smoke something and give it a 32 or a 14. We've all smoked 'that' cigar (maybe half of it before it was tossed). Whether or not ad revenues have anything to do with it, I think is a moot point.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I don't think CAs system will ever see a cigar that low. With the adjustment I have made to their system you will definitely get cigars that low if you bother to review swishers and white owls. The lowest score I have ever given was a non cuban bolivar right after they were released. It recieved somewhere in the 40s. This denotes a slightly below average cigar. That was perhaps generous for that cigar but in its defense it was perfect in all categories except flavor. That said if you are the one actually having to endure the flavor of one of those, mid 40s still sounds too high but its probably pretty fair.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Here you go again. Making suppositions, not sure based on what though. Can you tell me where and when did I JUDGE your palate or your Top 5? Or Top 1? I simply THANKED you for listing your top scoring cigar(s), nothing else, which allowed me to calibrate my palate to your your rating system as well as my palate preference. Nothing more. Yet you went on the tangent once more to mis-judge me, same thing you've been doing to CA reviews I should point out. Don't sound defensive about your choices, I and everyone else here respect your decision making and you should not be apologetic to anyone or sound lie it.

Let's just agree to disagree on your and CA's point rating systems, they are still numbers to me and numbers are completely meaningless since what is a 5 to you and me can be a 10 to CA staffer, and visa versa. Whether one chooses a smaller scale or larger one, it is still a scale.

I can point out a good number of TEXT reviews in those same CA and Spectator mags where the review itself does not "match up" to the numeric score, either way, up or down. Give me your description and that should be more than enough, the number is a subjective measurement, not objective. Or rather objective to only one person, whoever is assigning it.

As I pointed out and Dave also listed the key ingredient, box to box (and batch to batch) variation is real and I am sure that a vast number of reviews out there, whether on this board or elsewhere are also dependent on that.

As in wine business, cigar making process is quite similar and I can assure you that even the best and most gifted makers out there, cigars or wine, are still dependent on what mother nature gives them from year to year. Same field, same seeds, same growing team and techniques, yet vastly different results that are driven by weather patterns in each particular year. You can only influence the final product to a certain degree and yes, best cigar makers can come as close to the "benchmark" each and every year weather independent. But even they cannot be 100% on the money, so to speak, and there ARE variations in the final blend for each and every cigar batch no matter what you do. Thus, a cigar you like from box X and score highly can be and will be scored differently if the other smoker had a cigar from box X+150, or even a different batch/year altogehter. Also, same materials while rolling, but 2 different rollers making same cigar will result in a slight difference by the time cigars make it inside a box for shipment (roller grade, attention to detail, amount of he leaf used varies to some extent, bunching technique, etc.) are all variations on the theme.

Like I said above, there are no great wines, just great bottles. I've had wines from same case taste different, side by side, and no, I am not surprised. Cigars do not differ as widely, but they still do. Making point scores meaningless.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Not meaningless just things that need to be taken in context with all the other factors involved.

Example 1:

Someone rating a Habanos 1994 a 99+ to me, makes sense. It's in my frame of reference one of "the" classic cigars out there. Have smoked many of them and they without exception have rocked, rocked, rocked. But these types of cigars are easy. For the $$$ they better be fcking phenomenal.

Example 2:

Someone (possibly me in the past) rating a Gurkha Regent Toro a 93. OK so maybe in their (my) frame of reference it is a 93 relative to other cigars smoked at the time. To anyone a bit further along in the process possibly a few knowing smiles and head nodding might be involved.

Example 3:

Padron 1926 or 1964, Opus X, pick your favorite and size. Arguably for many NC smokers, a high on the list cigar experience. That "many" being predominately mouth smokers as it seems to be the nature of the beast. If you don't nose a cigar on the exhale these are some of the pinnacle of NC sticks for many. Calling them 90 sumtins in that frame of reference makes contextual sense. When you change the context of island of origin and method of smoking.. your mileage may vary.

Example 4:

First Cuban cigar smoking experience/combined with a nasal exhale. For many the historical perspective becomes a bit out of wack.

The point being that the audience varies for any particular cigar review. Honestly, I think cigars should be viewed Cuban and Non Cuban and in price brackets within each to make any contextual sense of things. Numbers vs words being of secondary concern.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Interesting thought. I can see that logic but I think its slightly flawed. You are essentially saying that the review is framed by the experience of the reviewer. So to compensate for scoring crappy nc cigars on the same level as ediction limitadas you would split them into categories. That is a fine idea IF the person doing the review has smoked enough cigars in that category to be able to review it with confidence, which will eliminate most smokers as reviewers. Also, wouldn't that be really narrowing your results(much like CA) for instance, your category is cuban cigars under 10 bucks. Take the epi2, psd4, rass, choix, and coro. If you use a number system, which one of those or any other cuban marca is scoring 50%? How about below 50%? I think I would be hard pressed to give any of those less than 80 unless they just sucked. Does that mean that cuba doesn't make an average robusto or that the scoring should include all cigars to highlight the exceptional nature of cuban cigars in the scope of a single person's experience? I mean you said it yourself, if split a review into categories such as vintage cuban cigars and all the vintage cuban cigars were scored relative to each other, which one of the phenomenal(99 point on a classic scale) cigars are you rating at the bottom and what score will that have?

I think the latter. Include all cigars, score them subjectively but require the reviewers top 5 cigars to see where they are coming from.

Also, you are absolutely correct I think that verbally describing something as "great" or "classic" is really not much different than giving it a 80 or 90 point score. I much prefer the numeric scoring system because it gives a better metric as to how far away from average or amazing a certain cigar was. Obviously every review is +/- a few points for little things like the mood of the reviewer, drink, time of day, etc.... but I think its still more precise than the "great/good/poor" scale.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I think as to not over complicate the system, a simple version would be..


1) Yummy
2) Meh
3) Yukky




:r

Re: Legend's rating system
 

This one makes the most sense to me by far!!:ss

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Re: Legend's rating system
 

We are both circling the issue in a similar (clockwise) fashion.

The reviewer is an issue. Having their top 5 cigars gives you a good way to interpret a particular cigar rating. In some cases the top 5 list may cause a reader to radically adjust the numeric or word based presented rating. So numbers lose specificity without a common context. Doesn't work at all when the rating is incorportated into a list without the supporting detail like the rankings in CAF. One example of the conundrum faced by folks trying to make lists.

Maybe eliminate segregation by C and NC and make the list more by smoking technique.

Top 25 cigars for nose exhalers.
Top 25 cigars for mouth breathers. :D

Breaking them into price bracketed rankings would then have more contextual meaning.

Neither right or wrong just expressing opinions. FWIW - Typical cigars I smoke and review are $ 3-$10 a stick. There are exceptions, but those are part of the frame of reference. It's like wine, easy to find great bottles @ $ 300. The quest and fun part is in finding great ones at $ 30. :D

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Since this thread has already gone off topic, I'll add my own opinion on reviews:

Smoking cigars is fun. Talking about cigars is fun. Mathematically quantifying cigars or forcing them into arguably arbitrary categories is not fun. :)

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Re: Legend's rating system
 

There is a real danger with point scores. As already mentioned, they are objective to only one person and no one else. While in essence, taste preference is actually a very subjective thing. Thus we attempt to correlate two very different things and that never works.

What's the difference between a 91 point rated cigar and a 92 rated one?

Re: Legend's rating system
 

1 point...:confused:


ha ha ha...sorry, somebody had to say it.


croatan, i disagree. I love quantifying my like or dislike for things based on point systems. Its like the ultimate in nerdiness. Graphs are cool. For example my current wife scores a 90. She gets high marks for her tidy housekeeping skills, bedroom wiles, and tolerance of me spending copious amounts of money on cigars. She loses marks however in the nagging me about stuff department. Now when I get divorced and remarried I will know just where she stood in the rankings....btw this is totally in jest. My wife would kill me if she read this. :D

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Isn't any rating system subjective, whether numerical or otherwise?

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Subjective only in that any rating system is based on the taste of the particular person who is rating the cigar. At least that's what my momma always said.

MCS

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Exactly....and taste is subjective. :)

I like you.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Did you see me say they are subjective? Taste is subjective, almost nothing save for math and physics is objective and even there we are dealing with some exceptions to rules.

I pointed out a number of times that any rating/review/observation is only valid for one and only one person.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I typed horribly or you misunderstood me. I was trying to give you a better understanding of my pallate by giving you my top 5. Not apologizing for it just making the obvious note that I'm a Gurkha ho.

I know all palates are different which is kinda why I put out this system for people to understand my reviews and use themselves

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Many thanks to the guys who gave props to the legend rating system. It is really meant as a subjective tool for me to give my impressions of a cigar for the benefit of my botl here. It is meant to be easy and memorable. To me its basically how we all rate cigars in our head. Even though a lot of guys here have said basically. Yuk. Good. great. We all still have those cigars which aren't exactly good (like the cremosa mentioned above) that are still ok because of the low cost as well as those smokes we really love. Therein lies the 5 points in number or word.

So if you find it helpful and/or useful great. If not. Then you know what I'm talking about when I review a stick. Win/win.

Legend will attempt to be more diligent in posting reviews. I've been lazy lately. Upcoming. El may whore (this names comes from how hard CI pimps them). Gurkha doble maduro. Gurkha blue steel. Gurkha beauty. Padilla obsidian. And la flor Dominica factory press III. And there is no dog rockets in that bunch one surprised me that it wasn't.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

68TriShield thanks Legend for sharing his rating system though he will continue to use his "suck-does not suck" rating system :D

Re: Legend's rating system
 

THREADJACK




borndead1's rating system:


Fantastic -- must stockpile as many as I can
Very good -- nice smoke, will keep some on hand
Meh -- hold onto them and see if they get better
YUCK -- throw them away


:ss

Re: Legend's rating system
 

I said it here....

Tobii rating

it doesn't get any easier

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Legend,

I have no issues with your system or anyone else's. I did and do have an issue with anyone who claims "his system" is better than someone else's and then coming up with a "myth" to prop up the argument. Its never "better", simply different. That's all.

Rate cigars you smoke and enjoy in any which way, all I care to see is the actual description of the experience, score independent.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

:tpd: I thought I stole my system from someone reliable ... but I guess it was just Dave.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Sorry to hear you have issues. We all do.
Best to just deal with it and move on.

Re: Legend's rating system
 

:r

Da Klugs also sends his thanks for the sharing and he feels that there is no one perfect system just us imperfect smokers. As such, he will continue to use his rambling dialog format for cigar review and rankings.

FWIW - Da Klugs also has a rarely used 5 point scale....

http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showpo...91&postcount=1

:)

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Dave was very hurt by Marks post :(


:D

Re: Legend's rating system
 

vstrommark had no intentions of making fun of anyone ... wait a sec ... he did!

Re: Legend's rating system
 

Someone need a hug? :)