How much stock do you really put into the CA reviews and top 25?

[ApexAZ]

Just playing devils advocate here and not necessarily endorsing the CA top 25, but they are just that, the top 25. This implies that there are dozens, or hundreds below these, so a range of 85-96 seems appropriate. One would assume that those below the top 25 should automatically score lower.

For those who said that the reviews here on this CA are more valuable, I would have to agree with. Cigar reviews in terms of taste are entirely subjective though, which is why many reviewers break the scores down into categories, such as build, draw, etc.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

Just playing devils advocate here and not necessarily endorsing the CA top 25, but they are just that, the top 25. This implies that there are dozens, or hundreds below these, so a range of 85-96 seems appropriate. One would assume that those below the top 25 should automatically score lower.

Yet look at their regular reviews, I can't remember seeing more than a handful of reviews under 84 in all the years I've read their magazine.

[ApexAZ]

Originally Posted by icehog3

Yet look at their regular reviews, I can't remember seeing more than a handful of reviews under 84 in all the years I've read their magazine.

This is true, but I can't imagine that it's advantageous for them to take up valuable print real estate for dog rockets. I see how it can skew the image of the scale though. My thought is that they don't necessarily give high grades to every cigar, rather, they focus one those that they deem deserving. Maybe it would lend them extra credibility to throw in some low rated, truly awful budget cigars as a benchmark for comparison.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

This is true, but I can't imagine that it's advantageous for them to take up valuable print real estate for dog rockets. I see how it can skew the image of the scale though. My thought is that they don't necessarily give high grades to every cigar, rather, they focus one those that they deem deserving. Maybe it would lend them extra credibility to throw in some low rated, truly awful budget cigars as a benchmark for comparison.

Or even some expensive dog rockets....How about a 42 for theTatuaje Lil Drac?

[forgop]

Originally Posted by icehog3

Yet look at their regular reviews, I can't remember seeing more than a handful of reviews under 84 in all the years I've read their magazine.

Do they avoid smoking Gurkhas?

I did have a patient Friday in the ER mention he smoked cigars-he exclusively smokes Gurkhas from Cigars International. It didn't end up being much of a cigar discussion after that.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by forgop

Do they avoid smoking Gurkhas?

I did have a patient Friday in the ER mention he smoked cigars-he exclusively smokes Gurkhas from Cigars International. It didn't end up being much of a cigar discussion after that.

[oldforge]

Originally Posted by forgop

I did have a patient Friday in the ER mention he smoked cigars-he exclusively smokes Gurkhas from Cigars International. It didn't end up being much of a cigar discussion after that.

You missed a great opportunity to ask him how kept the wrappers from exploding after the cap was cut.

[FUEL]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

Just playing devils advocate here and not necessarily endorsing the CA top 25, but they are just that, the top 25. This implies that there are dozens, or hundreds below these, so a range of 85-96 seems appropriate. One would assume that those below the top 25 should automatically score lower.

For those who said that the reviews here on this CA are more valuable, I would have to agree with. Cigar reviews in terms of taste are entirely subjective though, which is why many reviewers break the scores down into categories, such as build, draw, etc.

Sorry for post whoring today but moms day is a tough day for me and trying to not be stuck in my head about it.

I agree but also thought about other comments in that article about what the differences in a few bucks for a cigar with similar ratings to the top 25 landed them on the "best budget or value" sticks in the same issue. That does not make sense to me.

Not to mention taking the full advice of just a handful of guys as "experts" just does not make sense in this industry. Whether or not you love or loathe him I love Brian at Cigar Obsession and his vid reviews (which I normally do not like) as I find his opinion more in line with the "average joe" not to mention he is quite humors IMO. I'd take his reviews or Seth's Humidor, Cigar Coop and forums like these over CA any day.

This years #1 one after trying a few and reading about how they are judged blew me away. Its a very good cigar IMO but knowing they smoked only 20-30 mins of it they did not even allow that cigar to show its full potential as it starts out very good and IMO, and not that I am trying to validate it, I've smoked it differently and mentioned to people about smoking it a bit differently and got a overwhelming positive consensus on it, it blooms into a excellent stick. I guess what I'm saying is any cigar can start off with a bang and turn to sh!t and many many can start off good and turn to excellent in just 20 mins which they could never account for due to their ratings.

A recent example is the over priced hyped RP 50. What a dud. And I'd like to try the new RP birthday stick but sorry not paying $18 for one from a company that puts out cigars like Walmart does stores.