Assessing Cigars to Age

[CanuckSARTech]

Piggy, I agree with you on the congeners/tannins issue. While I haven't gotten into the realm of smoking 30, 40, 50 plus year old cigars with a strong congener starting point, I do find a similar attribute to my slowly aging cigars.

Also, I remember a whole section in MRN's encyclopaedia about the exact same congeners/tannins hypothesis. He's got a whole bunch of listed scientific terms and compounds shown in there, talking about these issues with chemists and aging experts, etc.

So, you have a huge proponent there in that line of thinking.

[CanuckSARTech]

Regarding the tubos, like Piggy said about some of the congener stuff, a lot of it is unprovable, etc.

Certain cigars do indeed seem to age better in tubos. Others, better in bunches or cabinets/boxes. Again, MRN has a great section on aging in his encyclopaedia, and there's also a great section about packaging, with some notes in there about tubos (and also the recent revamp of glass/porcelain jars).

It has to do with the "wine in a bottle" aging effect. Basically, in tubos, cigars have the ability to be somewhat isolated from all outside interference and effects on aging (air movement, humidity fluctuations, other cigars, paper/glues from dress boxes, etc.). The aging and flavours develop as a sole effect of the tobacco within the cigar (and sometimes with the aid of the super-thin cedar insert that some tubos contain). This is in comparison to aging in a box, where all of the cigars effect each other, and there's also the added airflow from an imperfectly sealed box, the impact of the box materials, etc., etc. Now, with this, it all depends on the individual cigars/marcas/vitolas - some may age/develop more advanced and be ready/aged more quickly, others may be slowed down and better for longer term.

Me myself, I still prefer a good quality varnished or cabinet box to age a full box in (I prefer a bundle/898 layering [think CoRo SLB or LGC MdO box] rather than a two-layered layout as in a dress-box [R&J Coronitas en Cedro, or RASS], but unfortunately, that's just not an option with some cigars). But, if there are any singles or three packs, and if I have an option, I myself prefer to get the tubos, so as to retain and "isolate" the individual cigar from any outside interference. For example, I've had some extremely great results from the 2008 Mag 46's that were available in 15-packages (5 boxes of 3-packs). Those have been phenoms for me (May 2008 "OBE" box codes).

Just my thoughts on the tubos aging thing. Not sure if it helps, by it's my thoughts on that.

[dicko]

Awesome thread everyone, cheers!!

lol I have nothing to add but a lot to learn :-p

[CBL]

One of the most interesting topic's I've read in a long time! Very usefull for future reference and happy to say I followed some rules myself already when putting away boxes.

[Colt45]

Rob, and everyone else, any thoughts on aging in tubes?

I have no problem leaving cigars in tubes to age, but I've also some unanswered (and perhaps unanswerable) questions.....

Will a sealed tube accelerate the aging process because the tube retains a microclimate (humidity) for a longer period of time -

general consensus being a warmer more humid climate speeds up the process.

Or, will a sealed tube retard the aging process because of restricted air movement within the tube? Does either really matter?

But this begs another question: how much of the process is a matter of chemical changes / break down in the tobacco, and how

much of the process is dependent on air?

Before his untimely passing, Tampa was conducting just such an experiment - taking a cigar from a regular box and placing it a tube

along side it's mates to see if there would be a difference.

[CBL]

I have no problem leaving cigars in tubes to age, but I've also some unanswered (and perhaps unanswerable) questions.....

Will a sealed tube accelerate the aging process because the tube retains a microclimate (humidity) for a longer period of time -

general consensus being a warmer more humid climate speeds up the process.

Or, will a sealed tube retard the aging process because of restricted air movement within the tube? Does either really matter?

But this begs another question: how much of the process is a matter of chemical changes / break down in the tobacco, and how

much of the process is dependent on air?

Before his untimely passing, Tampa was conducting just such an experiment - taking a cigar from a regular box and placing it a tube

along side it's mates to see if there would be a difference.

Very good question! I've wondered this myself after putting a PD4 in a Short Churchill tubo for a couple of months and smoking it after a wedding. It was much smoother and evened out then the other PD4's from the same box (10 count '08), but I must add that it was the last one I smoked from the batch and there was a couple of months between no. 9 and no. 10 so that could also make a difference. But for my feeling, aging in a tubo speeds up the process or at least makes the cigar age more intensely.

Something I've always wanted to know regarding aging is;

Is it better to age a full box or does any empty space in the box improve the microclimate?

If a box is full I can imagine the cigars kind of marinate in their own flavors and age intensely, but on the other hand, if you'd give the cigars some breating room inside their own boxes will they age more evenly and more complex because the air will speed up the fermentation process (air is needed for propper aging I should think)

Hopefully someone can shed some light on this.

[MontrealRon]

Something I've always wanted to know regarding aging is;

Is it better to age a full box or does any empty space in the box improve the microclimate?

If a box is full I can imagine the cigars kind of marinate in their own flavors and age intensely, but on the other hand, if you'd give the cigars some breating room inside their own boxes will they age more evenly and more complex because the air will speed up the fermentation process (air is needed for propper aging I should think)

Hopefully someone can shed some light on this.

My gut feeling - nothing scientific here - is that full boxes age more slowly,

but better, than partial boxes.

The more cigars are removed from a box, the quicker the remainder will develop.

Anyone with multiple boxes of identical code, especially after some years of aging,

can compare one of the last cigars from box A to the first cigar from box B.

If box A has been smoked slowly, over a few years,

then the last cigars will have had considerable exposure to air.

I believe you will find the first smoke from box B will seem both younger and richer.

What I do if I want to sample B before A is done, is to replace the B smoke with one from A,

turned upside down; or, in a SLB, keep the A outside the ribbon.

To me, this is analagous to the slower, and better, aging of wine in a cool celler.

It all depends on one's intents and expectations when aging cigars.

For best results, long term (5-10+ years), it is probably best to leave a box intact, or full.

On the other hand, if one simply wants to take the edge off young smokes,

or allow some complexity to develop,

and the intention is to smoke up the box in its first five years,

smoking or removing a few cigars will hasten the process,

and get the box to where you want it sooner.

As to tubos, I believe that their low air exchange environment, if they are kept sealed,

also allows for slower and better aging. If you want to smoke them young,

then some time out of the tubes will probably do them good.

[CanuckSARTech]

Agreed with what Ron said, completely.

And, regarding Colt's post, while I haven't gone to the extents that it appears Tampa was, I have done something similar myself in the past. I've taken used/empty tubes from SDN4's, and refilled them with SDN4's from a standard 25-box. So, same type of cigar in the tubos originally to try to negate as many variables as possible, and then same cigars from a single box.

The most I've let them sit like that is a year and a half. And, it appeared that the cigar in the tubos appeared less ready to smoke (younger/harsher/stronger tasting) than it's brethren from the box, which in the same time began to mellow out and blend nicely. But, the flavours and aromas were stronger, leading me to think that they'd be greater when aged longer in tubos.

Completely unscientific, etc. But, I'd agree with the idea that a tubos lets them mature more slowly (say 3-to-1 compared to a full box of 25 of similar cigars in a wooden box, or 5-to-1 to a partial/opened/less-full box, as in Ron's example). That is to say that, from what my palate has picked up on, is that all things being the exact same (blends, cigars, box codes, etc.), that a cigar in a full box would age/mature in say 4 years, while a partial box would be more exposed to air and thus advanced to be ready at 2 years, and then tubos would be of similar maturity at say 6 years.

These numbers are all pie-in-the-sky throwouts there, just to be used for explanation purposes. And, completely unscientific or unverifiable on my part. But, it's just what I've noticed.

And, the caveat for me, is that the Magnum 46 tubos that I have completely throw this out the window a bit, at least for me. They are May 2008, and are COMPLETELY ready and wonderful in the past year for me. Now, I don't know if it's just because they were a great blend or what - I don't know how ready they were right from the get-go, and whether them being in the tubos really "slowed" them down at all. But they are phenomenal. I'd love to get a cabinet box of the exact same date code and factory code, to try to see how great those would be in comparison. But, again, in comparing the tubos, who knows if they'd do much better long-term compared to their boxed brethren, and be okay outside of 5 or 7 years for example, if the boxes are best to be enjoyed maybe within 5.

Again, just speculation on my part. But, hopefully it adds to the conversation.

Cheers.

[CBL]

Thanks Ron!

But what if you have 2 boxes of the same brand, size and factory code. You open both up once to check the cigars and take out half from one box and none from the other. The boxes are varnished so hardly any air will go in or out after the initial opening.

Which one would age better and faster?

The full box will have an intense surrounding because it's packed full of tasty cigars, but the half box will have some space to breath and develop a bigger microclimate.

I'd love to know your thoughts on this scenario

[PigFish]

Piggy, I agree with you on the congeners/tannins issue. While I haven't gotten into the realm of smoking 30, 40, 50 plus year old cigars with a strong congener starting point, I do find a similar attribute to my slowly aging cigars.

Also, I remember a whole section in MRN's encyclopaedia about the exact same congeners/tannins hypothesis. He's got a whole bunch of listed scientific terms and compounds shown in there, talking about these issues with chemists and aging experts, etc.

So, you have a huge proponent there in that line of thinking.

Dr. MRN and I have little in common actually. While I love his book I believe his conclusions based on personal taste are completely arbitrary. I think most of his claims and assertions are wild and imaginary and cannot be proved.

We tend to agree on two things. An opinion on slender ring cigars, not as much in the form of tasting notes which cannot be spread across a range of vintages (as I believe) but in that they are the best of Cuban cigars, and the link of tannins (or congeners to aging potential). Another speculation that cannot be proven. -Piggy

[CBL]

Dr. MRN and I have little in common actually. While I love his book I believe his conclusions based on personal taste are completely arbitrary. I think most of his claims and assertions are wild and imaginary and cannot be proved.

Bless you!

I'm getting sick of people following his words like it's the gospel....

[cigaraholic]

I used to never think about assessing a cigars age ability because I was going to smoke 'em when I got them. Living in the land of darkness I was just happy to get them. In the last six years I've amassed a pretty large collection so everything I buy is going to get aged.

What I'm looking for are cigars that have that iridescent glow of oil on the wrappers and as Rob said "the nose knows". When you open a box and are transported to the Cuban soil they grew in you know you might have a winner. If the last third of a cigar has me hanging on I know they need more time.

I do almost everything wrong. I get a box, inspect it, then it's off to bed for who knows how long. If I had a walk-in then I could sample along the way, but sadly I don't and am to lazy to dig thru my coolers to try things. I have is very little will power, if I open a great box I'm going to smoke it. Might be able to set 3 aside for extended aging....might. My problem is I know I'm going to love the cigars so why try them. I have a friend who said if you don't try one how do you know if you want more, I always want more.

What's unique to Cuban cigars is the magical mystery that happens during aging, great cigars can go flat, flat cigars can become great and they can flip flop many times. I work in the wine business and I can give you a pretty good idea when a wine will peak, but Cuban cigars can surprise you.

Leave them in the tubes.

[El Presidente]

Tracking my own cigars over the past years I have concluded (no way to prove or disprove my beliefs) that a high level of congeners is what makes a great cigar to age. Cigars that are tannic to me today seem to develop the aromatic compound taste that I like in the aged cigar of the future. When I have experienced tannic cigars, regardless of looks or construction, those are the ones that I believe will develop better than others. Since I can smoke a cigar only once, I kill both the proof and the subjective evedece with each sample. All I can do is hope that the sibling cigar has enough of the same content to prove my theory.

I have linked a relationship with congeners and the potential for a better cigar tomorrow. I am convinced though my own experience that my theory is true. I have to admit however, that based on aforementioned, the fact that each cigar is an individual and may have little in common with its siblings in the same box, I am only guessing!

Cheers. -Piggy

I use to agree with this 100% pigster but a few things shool my confidence.

The post 2006 revolution where cigars so many cigars taste as if they have been aged a decade. Has anyone tried a 2006 cigar of late? The mumblings that "they won't age" you can throw out the window.

A tasting in Havana last year of a 1998 Partagas 898 V and a 2008 Partagas 898 V. The 2008 898 V was to many of us unsmokeable do to its sheer strength, oiliness, bitterness and the 2008 898V vastly superior.

It just crossed my mind at the time. The 898 V from 98 "needs more time". It really needed another 10-15 years.

So in 2025 we would hope it would transform into a brilliant rich, smooth cigar thus completing the third maturation cycle. Pray be to God!

So we have waited 35 years to age a cigar to a level of possible brilliance. I smoked this week 09 Partagas 898 V which are solid 92-94 cigars every day of the week (sweet/savoury/roast coffee beans/marmite/nutela). I have no doubt it will age brilliantly in the next 5-10 years and be a possible 98 cigar. This is where you put a few boxes down to find out and continue to smoke them fresh.

I have come to the conclusion that the Partagas 898 from 98 was a poor cigar and that there is no excuse for a cigar to be unsmokeable at 10 years of age. It may become a brilliant cigar but it is not worth the wait.

The current theories on ageing cigars are under challenge due to what has occured since 06. I don't have the answers but I have reassessed my beliefs on the matter.

[PigFish]

I use to agree with this 100% pigster but a few things shool my confidence.

The post 2006 revolution where cigars so many cigars taste as if they have been aged a decade. Has anyone tried a 2006 cigar of late? The mumblings that "they won't age" you can throw out the window.

A tasting in Havana last year of a 1998 Partagas 898 V and a 2008 Partagas 898 V. The 2008 898 V was to many of us unsmokeable do to its sheer strength, oiliness, bitterness and the 2008 898V vastly superior.

It just crossed my mind at the time. The 898 V from 98 "needs more time". It really needed another 10-15 years.

So in 2025 we would hope it would transform into a brilliant rich, smooth cigar thus completing the third maturation cycle. Pray be to God!

So we have waited 35 years to age a cigar to a level of possible brilliance. I smoked this week 09 Partagas 898 V which are solid 92-94 cigars every day of the week (sweet/savoury/roast coffee beans/marmite/nutela). I have no doubt it will age brilliantly in the next 5-10 years and be a possible 98 cigar. This is where you put a few boxes down to find out and continue to smoke them fresh.

I have come to the conclusion that the Partagas 898 from 98 was a poor cigar and that there is no excuse for a cigar to be unsmokeable at 10 years of age. It may become a brilliant cigar but it is not worth the wait.

The current theories on ageing cigars are under challenge due to what has occured since 06. I don't have the answers but I have reassessed my beliefs on the matter.

I suppost that it is logical to believe that by saying that the one group of cigars that I have emphasized as tannic today, should be good to smoke tomorrow, I inferred that others were inferior and would not. That was not my intent.

I don't now, nor have I ever believed that the lifeless cigar will be anything other than lifeless.... ever! The stronger cigar should carry its strength into the future. It is logical but unprovable yet I believe it. I did not really rate cigars by vintage, but it was also logical to assume that I might have inferred vintage by the generalization. While I don't smoke many newer cigars, I hardly ever notice them overly tannic now. That is likely due to the fact that the tannic stage has been aged out of them already! That would be a good thing in my mind. Tannic cigars then, may in fact be under aged or under processed, or poorly processed. You choose! I am from the Habanos generation that saw this as the norm.

I don't believe in cigar collectors common interest phrase, "Today's cigars won't age." I think that is self-serving, estate cigar mindset hogwash!!! No one knows! The phrase adds importance and value to their collections, mine too. I still think it is self-serving bullshit!!!

My views are consistent with by beliefs that the "vacuum period, sick period" theory is nonsense! Cigars may change over time. It cannot be proved, but I agree with it. Cigars may go through stages, if you believe that they change over time, and cycle. I don't believe that theory. I see cigar maturation as a form of decay; logical but not proven. I don't see decay as an elastic process, where a certain rebound occurs. I see in more scientifically, more logically. I admit I may be totally wrong. Do you see decaying leaves in your yard rebuild themselves; I don't mean as fertilizer for new plants?

Lastly I will expand on why I don't believe in vacuum periods. Collecting anything is trendy, and often political. Cigar beliefs are rife with tall tales and promotions of those who wish to serve their own interests. Here is my example:

I have a box of "Oda' D' Horshit" robustos that have been out of production for 30 years. If I honestly rated them... I would say that they taste like ****! Yet the market for ODH cigars is prime and there are those that collect them. If I promote that they are in their 3rd maturation, that they are simply in a vacuum period and within some period of time they will become virtual orgasm for your palate, I can sell them for top dollar. What position should I take as a collector? My cigar are ****, or they are in a vacuum period?

I am keen on espying self interest, wives tales and bullshit. If you look at where these theories reside, they offen correlate to the collector community. As a result I am suspicious of them.

End of rant. -Piggy

[El Presidente]

We are of same mind on this Piggy.

So much has been written as Gospel on the stages of maturation. Much of it is currently under question which does not denigrate those that have had the cojones to have a crack at the theory.

[LeafLover]

I don't buy cigars with the intention of aging them. I buy them in terms of smoking them and enjoying them now as my life is short. 10-15-20 years? ****, I might have one lung by then. I don't dismiss the idea of aging cigars, age improves cigars, etc. I buy my cigars because I want to smoke great cigars now, and not how it will be in 20 years. Although, I won't run away from buying aged cigars, I don't have the intestinal fortitude and most of all patience to age them myself. No offense to you all who follow that philosophy. If you do, my hats off to you.

Nevertheless, this is an interesting read as I get to glean insight from the cigar connoisseurs and afficianados in FOH.

[Colt45]

I don't now, nor have I ever believed that the lifeless cigar will be anything other than lifeless.... ever!

Ray, in general I agree with you completely - a crap young cigar, with nothing to show is highly unlikely to ever come around.

But I have had cases where muted, even rather bland cigars have blossomed - a box of '05 H. Upmann magnum 46 come to mind.

Fairly lifeless early on, I really didn't expect much, but after three years or so it became one of my favorite boxes of cigars.

Personally, I feel the wrench in the works for all of this is the consistency, or lack thereof, of Cuban cigars. We have no way of knowing

if the cigars in a box were rolled by the same roller, or on the same day, or at times even using the same tobacco.

This does not diminish our ability to use experience and intelligence (thank you Nero Wolfe) to help us in choosing cigars, and boxes of

cigars, which may be of higher quality than others. I think any of us who've been around cigars long enough have done it - you pick up

a cigar, you feel it's weight in your hand, you look at it for oil and construction, give it a bit of a squeeze over it's length, take a good whiff

to see how it smells.

After a while it becomes second nature, and we might not even realize we're doing it.

[MontrealRon]

Bless you!

I'm getting sick of people following his words like it's the gospel....

Has anybody ever noticed that MRN never has anything critical to say about any Habano, past or present? His book, for all its beauty and utility, reads more like something written by a company flak than as a work of unbiased journalism. Is his relationship with HSA so important that he is afraid to tick them off by pointing to any problems? According to him, the only valid reason any cigar is ever criticised by smokers, is because they have smoked it too young!

I also love habanos, as do we all, but please don't try and tell us that all is perfect,

that the Cuban rose has no thorns...

[El Presidente]

The good Doctor along with Theo Rudman (sadly passed away), Marvin Shanken, James Suckling have all made great contributions to the Cuban cigar from outside of Cuba. I didn't know Theo Rudman but the rest are not exactly shrinking violets and I doubt they could have achieved what they have done if they were

No one is beyond intelligent questioning in the pursuit of knowledge and that includes the questioning of anyone here. En Fin: Attack the argument but not the man.

[CanuckSARTech]

Has anybody ever noticed that MRN never has anything critical to say about any Habano, past or present? His book, for all its beauty and utility, reads more like something written by a company flak than as a work of unbiased journalism. Is his relationship with HSA so important that he is afraid to tick them off by pointing to any problems? According to him, the only valid reason any cigar is ever criticised by smokers, is because they have smoked it too young!

I also love habanos, as do we all, but please don't try and tell us that all is perfect,

that the Cuban rose has no thorns...

Great point. I wouldn't think that he could/would be a "company flak", but I completely understand your observation on it. I think a huge part of it may have been having Adriano Martinez Rius' inclusion on that book as an honourary consultant - his influence might have played a part there. I/we could be reading WAY too much into it, but I do agree that it's a common thing in that Encyclopaedia that every negative is due to the smokers' own fault (smoked it too young, undeveloped/inexperienced palate, etc.)

And CBL, I don't think that anyone on here "...[follow] his words like it's the gospel". As Piggy pointed out, MRN's tasting conclusions are his own opinion and thus personal to him. Heck, at the start of the book, he has a whole note in there to the reader to say just that, to basically say that aside from the historical notes, all of the tasting and aging portions are completely his own opinion and the vast majority are open to discussion and can't be proved. Regarding tastings, everyone's palate is different - just like we all have different opinions on here in our reviews of a particular marca/vitola, so will we with those notes in his book. And regarding the aging....PLEASE! Who, out of regular/everyman cigar smokers fully intends to age their cigars for 20+ years at a minimum, or to wait for a cigar to only become good at that point??? There's obviously lots of dissention there, as has been discussed on here quite a bit in the past.

But, as Rob listed a few more also, very few in the cigar world has helped to contribute in the way that he did with that book - you can't blame people for being enamored with what he did. There has really been nothing before or since his book that has been so all-encompassing and as complete as it was. His experiences in cigars appear to be 100 times greater than most, and thus he's able to contribute greatly. If you don't like his book, that's fine. But you can't negate the fact that 90% (generalization, I know) of cigar smokers do enjoy his book, and even agree with some of what he's got in there.

[CBL]

Wasn't attacking anyone on the forum And I fully understand how important his book is in the cigar world. I just don't like the fact that IF it's printed in the book everybody pulls a quote out of their ass whenever a discussion comes up. MRN will always have more knowledge of cigars then I could attain in 3 lifetimes, but if I want to smoke a box fresh off the truck and find my smoke disappointing I don't need some smart ass quoting MRN saying that my box is probably in a sick period and hasn't reached the first maturation or whatever.

And as vast as the information on aging in the book is, I'm not sure it could still fully be applied on the cigars of late as they've seen a huge change in how well the cigars smoke at an early age.

[PigFish]

Has anybody ever noticed that MRN never has anything critical to say about any Habano, past or present? His book, for all its beauty and utility, reads more like something written by a company flak than as a work of unbiased journalism. Is his relationship with HSA so important that he is afraid to tick them off by pointing to any problems? According to him, the only valid reason any cigar is ever criticised by smokers, is because they have smoked it too young!

I also love habanos, as do we all, but please don't try and tell us that all is perfect,

that the Cuban rose has no thorns...

Ding, ding, ding! Give this man a kewpie doll!!!

While did not bring up the good Doctor and don't wish this to become a "lets trash/defend MRN" thread. I could not agree more!

Words for the Habanos collector to live by. Tabacuba et al does not roll a bad cigar. If the cigar is bad you smoked it too soon, or at the wrong time!

Only a partisan person in the cigar business or cigar collecting business could come up with such hogwash!!! -Piggy

[PigFish]

Wasn't attacking anyone on the forum And I fully understand how important his book is in the cigar world. I just don't like the fact that IF it's printed in the book everybody pulls a quote out of their ass whenever a discussion comes up. MRN will always have more knowledge of cigars then I could attain in 3 lifetimes, but if I want to smoke a box fresh off the truck and find my smoke disappointing I don't need some smart ass quoting MRN saying that my box is probably in a sick period and hasn't reached the first maturation or whatever.

And as vast as the information on aging in the book is, I'm not sure it could still fully be applied on the cigars of late as they've seen a huge change in how well the cigars smoke at an early age.

Mate... some friendly advice. Don't listen to others regarding your smoking experiences. I mean how the hell does anyone know what you have experienced? There are no expert smokers, no golden tongued gurus, there are only the cigars that YOU like and YOU dislike. That is it. Like what you like and be happy! If someone does not like what you like be happy for them too. Respect of the tastes of another is voluntary and earned respect. Just because one claims to be an expert does not make him one. Just because one claims to agree with one who claims he is an expert does not make him one either!!! -Piggy

PS: Remember thought... Mr. Piggy is alway right! -LOL

[PigFish]

I don't buy cigars with the intention of aging them. I buy them in terms of smoking them and enjoying them now as my life is short. 10-15-20 years? ****, I might have one lung by then. I don't dismiss the idea of aging cigars, age improves cigars, etc. I buy my cigars because I want to smoke great cigars now, and not how it will be in 20 years. Although, I won't run away from buying aged cigars, I don't have the intestinal fortitude and most of all patience to age them myself. No offense to you all who follow that philosophy. If you do, my hats off to you.

Nevertheless, this is an interesting read as I get to glean insight from the cigar connoisseurs and afficianados in FOH.

Could not have said that better myself mate. I have always said, "Aging cigars is an unintended consequence of hoarding them. I am a cigar hoarder!" -Piggy

[mazolaman]

I don't buy cigars with the intention of aging them. I buy them in terms of smoking them and enjoying them now as my life is short. 10-15-20 years? ****, I might have one lung by then. I don't dismiss the idea of aging cigars, age improves cigars, etc. I buy my cigars because I want to smoke great cigars now, and not how it will be in 20 years. Although, I won't run away from buying aged cigars, I don't have the intestinal fortitude and most of all patience to age them myself. No offense to you all who follow that philosophy. If you do, my hats off to you.

Nevertheless, this is an interesting read as I get to glean insight from the cigar connoisseurs and afficianados in FOH.

I would also agree whole heartedly, I buy cigars to smoke.

I cannot really justify the expense of buying loads to lay down.

The only ones I have left to age were some BBFs and some JL1s as they were unsmokeable,but after a year,delightfull.

However,I tend to keep two or three from each box I buy,which will remain in the humidor,for some point in the future......

Still,I do find the opinions and thoughts of the more dedicated and experienced people on this thread interesting.