Arturo Fuente, Fuente Fuente Opus X Angel's Share Robusto (from 3 pack Tin, acquired 2022)

[Lamboinee]

Cigar:             Arturo Fuente, Fuente Fuente Opus X Angel’s Share

Size/Vitola:     Robusto (5.25” x 50)

Wrapper:       Dominican Republic

Binder:           Dominican Republic

Filler:/ :          Dominican Republic

Origin:            Dominican Republic

Purchase

 

Date:               12/2022          

 

Synopsis:  Great construction and solid burn present a glorious beginning reminiscent of a richer and creamier Hoyo de Monterrey Le Hoyo de San Jaun.  But, the experience turns astringent and laborious in the second half. 

1^st Half:  The cigar presents with no construction issues.  It is solid throughout, with no soft spots.  There is a slight crack in the wrapper at the foot that could easily have been caused my own careless treatment or normal wear and tear from transit.  The cold draw is harnessed by sweet cream and leather with a touch of grassiness if I pull deeply.  I worry that the grassiness will be too present when smoked, but this never becomes the case.  The foot takes ignition well and, from the first few puffs, this cigar reminds me of my 2 or 3 experiences with the Hoyo de Monterrery Le Hoyo de San Jaun from a December 2021 Slide Lid Box; except, the 1^st bits of this cigar might even be richer and creamier than those Hoyo’s I have experienced.  Leather and a bit of spice/white pepper punctuate my puffs at different rates.  Retrohales seem to enhance the creamy mouthful which is a pleasurable experience when combined with sips of bourbon.  It seems unusual, but not completely unheard of, for the retrohales to enhance the creaminess of the cigar.  At times, there is more white pepper on the retrohale than I would prefer, but overall this cigar has been so enjoyable that these paltry issues warrant little concern.   The burn is less than razon sharp while still being perfectly acceptable as I approach and pass the halfway point.

2nd Half:  The second half begins with the noticeable presence of cedar and airy woodiness, where before there were mostly leathers and cream.  Likewise, there are bursts of dry tobacco with undertones of mild generic earthiness leading through the beginning part of the second half.  These sophisticated transitions are part of what I would call an enjoyably complex profile.  There are also upwellings of some generic nuttiness that are welcomed.  Somewhere in the 2^nd third, the retrohales cease to showcase not only the white pepper, but also the creaminess.  The retrohales reduce themselves to a generic an non-descript flavor that is neither objectionable nor especially notable.  The burn continues to be less than razor sharp but requires only minor cosmetic touch-ups.

Somewhere, from the bowels of its tobacco, astringency joins the party on 2 separate puffs.  Admittedly, I experienced this same astringent flavor on one occasion in the 1^st half.  However, I passed over its initial presence as it was fleeting and perhaps the result of my palette error.  There is no mistaking its presence in the 2^nd half and it tastes like some sort of blue goo window cleaner, perhaps with antibacterial additives.  In between astringent puffs I experience the emergence of some umami flavors along with brief returns to the leather and cream that were so glorious in the 1^st half.  The enjoyable attributes of this cigar are not as readily present, and they require more and more of a search.  Some nicotine strength begins to hit me around the 3^rd third and the astringency becomes all too ever-present.  A once stupendous smoke now seems to require too much effort and labor to enjoy.  I put the cigar down with 1+ inch left.  The ash was dense, white, and dime-stacked throughout the approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes of smoke time.

Completely Subjective Score: B .  8.3 out of 10. 83-85.  If I would have stopped smoking this cigar at the half-way mark I would have given it a 94-98.  In my experience with cigars, the most substantial attribute that weighs against NC’s is their tendency to “fall-off” in the second half to final third.  For whatever reason, I have smoked a far greater % of CC’s to the numb compared to NCs, regardless of the complexity or flavor profile of the cigar on the whole.  This particular cigar called the cleaning crew in too early, and they mucked the whole thing up with windex and 409.  This cigar was particularly enjoyable to me in the 1^st half, as it was very similar to the HDM Hoyo de San Juans I had experienced….perhaps even better in its initial half.

Personal Note:  This cigar was acquired in December 2022 as part of a 3 Robusto Tin from a local brick and mortar.  I discussed my experience with the Brick and Mortar owner and stated that I thought it might benefit from a bit of aging.  The owner said that, to his knowledge, the cigars in the tin packaging are generally older than other Fuente Opus X’s.  Also, for those unfamiliar, my experience has been that Angel’s Share Opus is regarded as less robust/strong than other Opus offerings.  That was certainly the case here and was consistent with my other Angel’s Share Experiences.