James Suckling retires

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by cgarphotogallery

I'm looking one of the CA videos about Limitada/Regionales cigars. He was talking about the Cuaba EL 2008 which he thinks is "tha Bomb"........ well that cigar is really disappointed and not worth the EL label. It wasn't tastefull at all. Very mild comparred with other pieces of the limitadas I smoked. EL and Regionales must be special with some heavy tast.(like the Partagas, Bolivar and MC cigars.) It's not comming back in my humidor for sure..

Just one question. How do you know that the cigar you smoked is the same he did?

[mosesbotbol]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

Just one question. How do you know that the cigar you smoked is the same he did?

Cigars do come down the box on hand, and he probably smoked it quite fresh, before it got sick. All of the cigars at the Festival are going to be fantastic representations of the cigar.

There are many things I disagree with Suckling on, most glaringly is his drinking windows for port. His window is quite small and he has had plenty of vintages from the 50’s older to know how long port can age. Suckling is not a critic that makes waves when it comes to rating Habanos, and realistically what he says is good doesn’t make much of a difference. Habanos consumers are loyal to their marcas and vitolas. Collectors and avid consumers like us are just going to buy without regard to any published review. Beyond his actual reviews, he is a good writer and captures the essence of his experience quite well.

One can say MRN is a "bigger expert", and he may well be, but he is not as poetic writer as Suckling. I bet if you asked MRN, he would respect Suckling. He would single out factual errors Suckling has made, but point to the cannon of his work as being collectable and a future reference.

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by mosesbotbol

Cigars do come down the box on hand, and he probably smoked it quite fresh, before it got sick. All of the cigars at the Festival are going to be fantastic representations of the cigar.

There are many things I disagree with Suckling on, most glaringly is his drinking windows for port. His window is quite small and he has had plenty of vintages from the 50’s older to know how long port can age. Suckling is not a critic that makes waves when it comes to rating Habanos, and realistically what he says is good doesn’t make much of a difference. Habanos consumers are loyal to their marcas and vitolas. Collectors and avid consumers like us are just going to buy without regard to any published review. Beyond his actual reviews, he is a good writer and captures the essence of his experience quite well.

One can say MRN is a "bigger expert", and he may well be, but he is not as poetic writer as Suckling. I bet if you asked MRN, he would respect Suckling. He would single out factual errors Suckling has made, but point to the cannon of his work as being collectable and a future reference.

Moses, not to split hairs, and I already pointed out that I was not really a Suckling follower having worked in wine retail and being able to taste as much as I want without relying on reviewers, but this is a theme that runs throughout Spectator reviews and I think it may be their "policy". What they do, and I know this is true for California reviews, their published windows tend to be a "young" side since they are reasonably assuring consumers that within that drinking window the wines will show similar to the reviews. For example, most "experts" out there will tell you that CA Pinot doesn't age, yet almost all well made ones improve with 6-8 years in cellar ("experts" claim they are dead by then). I just did a tasting of '96-98 Pinots a few months back and one would be hard pressed to tell they are older than 2-3 years color and taste wise (still dark and rich and plenty of tannin to go another 5-6 years). Yet these same wines were listed with 2-3 year drinking window by Spectator, per their "policy".

As for cigars, you may be right about Suckling catching that EL just before the "sick period". But I would still place my bet on the provenance knowing this board's buying habits.

You and I may not agree with Suckling reviews and writings, but to belittle his long contribution to both wine and cigar writings is simply amateurish, that's all I am pointing out.