Revealing Cigar Number 2 in the 2013 FOH Blind Tasting.


Recommended Posts

Quiet you.... pod.gif It was an underwhelming stick...it had to be a Monte Master...

Yeah i'm shocked mine was a JL #2. I guess i'll be avoiding uber dark wrappered, young Juan Lopez now.... very bitter and harsh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love the JL2. Or so I thought. Hated the Blind version of it - mine was so bitter and full bodied at times, as opposed to the mild/medium herbaceous taste I'm used to with them.

JL2 was the one Robusto I was certain it wasn't. Now I'm feeling more clueless than ever! Haha!

This comp has me stuffed... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never had a JL2 in my life,...well except for this one then! spotlight.gif Construction, draw and burn were ok in my cigar, the wrapper wasn't very oily though. It also produced copious amounts of smoke. I guess I was lucky with the cigar I received. My guess was obviously wrong but I quite enjoyed this cigar. All in all not an unpleasant cigar at all but not box-buying good for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned to Rob, I was at a bit of a loss for this one. Also, I just simply don’t have time to do a full review. For me, my pick was only about 70% sure, but after a JL Sel 2, it would have been a Montecristo Open Master (I feel your pain, Frank) and then a RyJ Short Churchill after that.

It really was a bit of a shot in the dark here for me. My palate was crap the last two weeks, as I just had some dental stuff done earlier.

And....saving grace is that I at least got one right this year, after the first year but then going 0-for-2 during last year's (didn't smoke the final one in that).

Congrats to the five that guessed both two correctly so far. Game's on, gents! This is a big one this year - 5 cigars!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - kudos to those who've guessed both. For me, this looked like a

Boli, smelled like a Boli, tasted like a Boli - so the result was a little humbling!

I really enjoyed the stick so the saving grace was that I picked up one of Rob's JL2 cabs the same day that I made my dud guess :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way, was my first response. I compared ‘Unknown #2’ to a box of JL#2 I had and there was no similarity. They didn’t look or smell the same. OK just looked at the bottom of the box and they're RTO DIC06, thanks Rob, so any resemblance between the unknown and what I had might be lost in the same way the output from a wine vintage changes from year to year.

That got me thinking about distinctive markers for a brand. What makes a JL#2 identifiable? Clearly take the band off and 57/80 cigar smokers don’t have a clue.

For me understanding and being able to identify such markers is the attracftion to a blind tasting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in the Psd4 crowd. I imagine Rob Is taking the cigars from a couple of boxes and that could explain the split in the reviews and guesses i.e. one box is smoking differently from the other and displaying different qualities.

Anyway 0/2 here need a winner soon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very impressed that five people got both right. That is not easy to do. clap.gif

yes agree - well done - would be great to see a 5 for 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be delighted with 1/5!

Plenty of time Tino - bad luck on your last stick - we better get onto the DC before the weather turns!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plenty of time Tino - bad luck on your last stick - we better get onto the DC before the weather turns!

Good point, DC in October could be interesting if we smoke them in order!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.