CA's best of 2014

[Quint]

Let's get down to earth, opinions are like A*** Holes , we all have one but some smell more than others.!

In other words we don't always agree, but respect others opinions!

Agree totally, but it also means we respect the opinions of the people who dislike the magazine.

Personally I never agree with CA's "best". Whomever is on the judging panel does not have the same palate as myself. I've found that many of their 95+ ratings or best of 20xx to be no better than burnt Tabaco, I can only reason that they are picking up nuances I am not. Rob's perspective is dead on, find somebody who has a similar taste profile as yourself and use that as a reference.

[helix]

Its just CA .

[avaldes]

Similar comments are found about their sister publication, Wine Spectator. I too chalk it up to a variety of taste and opinion. I am just glad that there is still a cigar magazine at all in the US! I love to see the goofballs in the back posing with cigars...produces a lot of laughs.

[laficion]

Who are they anyway ? You really have to be a wanker to note by country. What do they know ? That Is true for

all magazines. They can say what they want. That Is why Marvin Shanken has a humidor full of Cuban Cigars and

the Connoisseur's Corner Is ALWAYS about Cubans and VERY few N.C.'s .

Guy

[FLB03TT]

I LOVE one 200th of CA- "Connoisseur's Corner" at the back of the book. Can't EVER recall seeing ANYTHING but CCs listed.

We all know that many CCs benefit from some aging but to this extent??? Do so many of the fresh sticks really underperform the myriad Dominicans, Hondurans and Nics. to the degree reflected in their ratings?

I think not.

[Colt45]

We all know that many CCs benefit from some aging but to this extent??? Do so many of the fresh sticks really underperform the myriad Dominicans, Hondurans and Nics. to the degree reflected in their ratings?

I think not.

Perhaps it's as simple as they review X amount of cigars per month / year, etc (meaning they don't necessarily review every cigar, from every producer in a given time frame).

It happens quite a bit with wine publications - they can only rate the wines they taste.

[Shikar]

I like the fact that there still is a cigar magazine however flawed.

Regards.

[FLB03TT]

Perhaps it's as simple as they review X amount of cigars per month / year, etc (meaning they don't necessarily review every cigar, from every producer in a given time frame).

It happens quite a bit with wine publications - they can only rate the wines they taste.

My comment was, more than a little, tongue in cheek. My point was that virtually ALL of the Classic cigars in CC are Cuban and that many of the younger CCs we all smoke now are, given a level playing field, not light years behind these Classic CCs given the highest praise in CA.

[gcman68]

I don't see as much of a conflict as some others in the ratings as CC's lately have been among the highest rated cigars in the magazine. As for the CC's not appearing on the annual lists consistency and construction issues apparently account for a significant amount of the score. It's the main reason I appreciate the service that comes from our hosts as I no longer buy blind. It has been said that to make the list a cigar has to perform at the same level multiple times and its the main reason I believe CC's don't do well on the annual ratings list. A lot of reviews I have read are primarily where the reviewer had smoked 2 or 3 of a particular cigar, and while that is likely much more accurate, I doubt anyone at CA has the time to do that. Maybe I am naïve but I like to think that while the process is maybe flawed it isn't dishonest. If the day comes that CC's are as consistent box to box as NC's, and the ratings are what they are, then I will believe otherwise.

[stunod]

I have a question. If Cuban cigars are illegal to import in the US, how can CA get them and review them legally.

[Habana Mike]

James Suckling lives in Italy?

[JohnS]

I have a question. If Cuban cigars are illegal to import in the US, how can CA get them and review them legally.

I've actually wondered this too. And they always quote UK prices for them don't they in their magazine, which ain't that great right? Hmmm....they have someone located in the United Kingdom who does CC reviews for them?

[Colt45]

I think the problem many of us have is that we don't believe many of these ratings are based on opinions at all.

But if the topic is raised about the legitimacy of their lists I will respectfully give my opinion as well as listen to yours.

There are some out there who believe our host's way of doing business is little more than fleecing his sheep - they are certainly entitled to their opinions. But I've never once considered it a reflection of our host......

[Colt45]

And why would you? BAAAAA

Personally I don't think you can equate opinions based in ignorance to opinions based in fact, if that's what you're doing.

Truly just making conversation

[dflan82]

I'm of the same thought process. I get CA each year and enjoy the magazine for what it is, an embodiment of the pastime that we all enjoy nothing more. I also agree that their ratings are favorable to the NC category but what can you do? Nothing I presume. Either way, I trust Rob when it comes to CC's and that is why I am here.

Cheers,

Seth

You hit the nail on the head Seth. I subscribe to CA and enjoy it for what it is. I rely more on the opinions of Rob and other FOH members when it comes to "what to buy" on CC's.

[Cigar Surgeon]

I keep a running tally throughout the year of my best cigars reviewed / smoked. I feel it makes the process more transparent.