Cigar Aficionado..top 10 of 2010...

[DennisP]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

I am also aware of some wineries submitting "special" bottles for reviews, in other words not the regular release bottles, but specifically filled from the barrel by hand, a CHOSEN barrel (read best in the bunch). Given that, I would not put it past cigar manufacturers to do the same, "special" blend to be submitted to reviewers. After all, how can one tell if size and band are the same as what's sitting on the shelf? So, don't blame the messenger...

I don't disagree with most of what you said, but if you read the link wayner provided about how CA does their tastings they buy the cigars from local B&Ms, not from the manufacturer.

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by DennisP

I don't disagree with most of what you said, but if you read the link wayner provided about how CA does their tastings they buy the cigars from local B&Ms, not from the manufacturer.

Sure, same thing Spectator claims

Yet, I am not aware of ANY wine they actually buy save in some extreme cases (and to be honest can't think of one right now). I am also not aware of ANY wine not submitted and getting a review, basically if someone doesn't want to be reviewed they simply don't provide wine, Spectator does not go out and buy that wine (same for Advocate, BTW, no matter what Parker claims, personal experience as well). Spectator sends their tasting schedule out at the end of the year for next year's dates, to ensure wineries send the wines in on time.

I am 99.9% sure this is how Aficionado operates as well, the model has been established by Spectator for them.

[Noodles]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

Sure, same thing Spectator claims

Yet, I am not aware of ANY wine they actually buy save in some extreme cases (and to be honest can't think of one right now). I am also not aware of ANY wine not submitted and getting a review, basically if someone doesn't want to be reviewed they simply don't provide wine, Spectator does not go out and buy that wine (same for Advocate, BTW, no matter what Parker claims, personal experience as well). Spectator sends their tasting schedule out at the end of the year for next year's dates, to ensure wineries send the wines in on time.

I am 99.9% sure this is how Aficionado operates as well, the model has been established by Spectator for them.

WayneR provided a link where one of the reviewers in, Mott Gordon, might be the head of the panel, took offense to all the accusations about them being influenced by big dollar advertisements. You should take a look. He explained in details how they buy the cigars themselves, smoke unbanded, and in the same environment as much as possible.

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by bonggoy

WayneR provided a link where one of the reviewers in, Mott Gordon, might be the head of the panel, took offense to all the accusations about them being influenced by big dollar advertisements. You should take a look. He explained in details how they buy the cigars themselves, smoke unbanded, and in the same environment as much as possible.

They MAY be buying some cigars since price wise it may allow them the luxury to do so IF THEY BUY SINGLES. Wine wise, there is no way in hell they can purchase 2 bottles of each (their minimum requirement) and stay in business. No one can. Parker and his similar claims included...

I can check, but I am sure that cigar manufacturers send them boxes of cigars instead of singles for easier and safer shipping (damage wise). Look at their back pages' "old stock" reviews. Do you really think they buy singles? It would create a nightmare for them just to store singles and keep track of and if they store boxes (as I bet they do to keep the whole thing sane, alpha system of storage, easier handling with no damage to cigars when they re-stock/buy new cigars, etc.), then same as with wine they cannot afford to buy cigars they test.

No, I do not produce cigars and no, I have no proof of their cigar review process, but based on my PERSONAL experience with their wine side (which cigars' side is based upon), I can assure you that their claims are questionable, at best, no matter what they say in public.

For example, their claim of "unbanded" cigars. As I already pointed out somewhere above, there is a good number of cigars that don't need a band to be easily recognized (Padron anyone?, some perfectos, there are other shapes and wrappers that easily give out the cigar), so their claims are half valid to begin with even for unbanded cigars. Cigars are not like wine, when they pour some in glass and place it in front of you, and you only see the color of wine and that's it (and vintage as well, which is usually given up front). For someone looking at cigars daily as a job, band is not much needed to recognize a stick in many cases.

I've observed their main wine guy in a blind tasting. Not impressed at all and his TRUE blind scores (since I controlled the tasting set up and made really blind with each and every wine decanted into same shape/size bottle prior) were pretty much opposite to what was printed in the magazine for same wines and producers. He later admitted to that in his wine blog, kudos to him for coming clean, that took guts.

[Noodles]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

[about comparing wine and cigars blind tasting]

You seem to know a lot about wine tasting process and very convinced about it's similarity with cigar tasting process. I have no experience with both (blind tasting) so I won't debate you about it. However, I have no reason to disprove of what Mott Gordon said either besides the "they give high marks to advertisers" theory.