Bolivar Short Bolivar TEB AGO 08

[Colt45]

Another cigar donated by the ever generous Professor Twain.

Construction: No apparent problems. Good weight and feel.

Appearance: Lightly mottled colorado wrapper. Smooth with just a bit of oil. The foot of this one had been cut at a slight angle.

Pre-light Aroma / Draw: Enticing fruity aroma along with light barnyard and cocoa. Great draw with a light tobacco taste.

Draw / Burn: Excellent draw and smoke. good burn.

Taste: First draws are of salt and caramelized tobacco, quickly becoming supple leather with a layer of unripened green pepper on top. Early

on body is on the light side of medium. Excellent draw, burn slightly off but of no concern.

As it settles in it loses it's early flavor becoming more cardboard in nature, with occasional fruit notes. Body remains south of medium, burn

evens itself out. It continues upon it's fairly lackluster way, with just a dusting of cocoa powder and a ghost of herbal notes on exhale.

My thoughts nearing midpoint are that this is a fairly straightforward, unobtrusive, light tasting cigar - what some might call a good morning cigar,

though I'm not sure it should be wearing a Bolivar band. I am however enjoying the post exhalation aftertaste of light tobacco and cocoa,

though there is still the element of cardboard. Good depth on the palate, just not much flavor to go with it. No harshness, no bitterness.

Though I don't expect much in the way of change given what it's shown up to mid point, it has shown just enough to keep me interested

and anticipating the following draws.

Past mid point and into the final third it picks up a bit of cotton candy sweetness, though on the whole has remained the same. I find myself intrigued.

My gut feeling is that with time, the underlying flavors will emerge, but that it will remain on the subtle side. I'm also thinking that if I were looking

for a Bolivar in this format, I'd be more apt to go for the Royal Corona, though if I did have a box of these, I would not be disillusioned.

Nearing the end it there are some of the herbal / black pepper notes I often find at the end of a young cigar, but the core is still light tobacco and cocoa.

Overall it has been smooth and easy to smoke from start to finish. I'll be very interested to see what members think of these over the next

year or two. There's something here, and I'm very tempted - I actually nubbed it. Thanks PT!

Score: (keeping in mind it is but one, very young cigar)

Flavor: 3/7

Complexity: 3/7

Performance: 3/3

Enjoyment: 2/3

Total: 11/20

[shrink]

There's something here, and I'm very tempted - I actually nubbed it.

With a smoke this short, I think that you were "nubbing" it from the first draw.

Nice review as always, Mr. Colt.

[Colt45]

With a smoke this short, I think that you were "nubbing" it from the first draw.

How true! I had to remove the RE band just to get a good look at it before smoking.

[Ken Gargett]

as always, excellent and interesting review. we do have our differences in scoring but, as with wine, always more important to read the words than just rely on the number allocated. otherwise, fo me, 11/20 says it bearly creeps in half way. that would be a dud for me, if one relied on score only.

and colt, you have made my day calling it the fat boy. rob was dead keen that 'fat boy' didn't catch on. seems to think it might not help sales.

[Colt45]

KG, I just wanted to try the twenty point scale a few times to get a feel for it or something similar.

I'm happy to use the hundred pointer, but what I'd like from you guys (or forum consensus), would

be a breakdown of the scale - what categories, and points awarded for each.

I threw in the fat boy for you - I like it as well! I've taken to calling the Monte sublime the Montecristo

Donkey Dong, but I don't think it quite as clever as Boli Fat Boy.......

[Professor Twain]

Great to get your take on these. I have only smoked a couple and was pleased to get classic Bolivar earthiness, but certainly milder than the thinner ring gauged cigars like the PC.

Looking forward to seeing you the next time I get to Boston or you get down to Florida.

[semery74]

Nice review colt. Your weighted scoring technique intrigues me, is it something you developed or learned from somewhere? I agree that flavor and complexity plays a greater role in the enjoyment, but I think the enjoyment characteristic can be summed up by the overall score. Would you agree?

Curious,

Steve

[Colt45]

Nice review colt. Your weighted scoring technique intrigues me, is it something you developed or learned from somewhere? I agree that flavor and complexity plays a greater role in the enjoyment, but I think the enjoyment characteristic can be summed up by the overall score. Would you agree?

Curious,

Steve

Steve, coming up with this "scoring system" stems from a number of discussions we've had here. First, if you have time, here are a few

links which give a little background:

Link1

Link2

Link3

Link4

As stated, we've had any number of conversations regarding reviews, scoring, and what the numbers mean. This came up again not too long

ago when members brought up Cigar Aficianado Magazine's scoring, and then the Casa Magna Robusto as cigar of the year. Our intrepid

Aussie FOH video review panel opined on this cigar courtesy of Van55.

All this got me thinking about scoring once again. One thing that hit me personally in watching the great video reviews here was how the

score numbers are just kind of tossed out there - without much in the way of breakdown / criteria (please, do not read this as a knock - it is

in no way intended to be - just a personal observation).

My intention with the twenty point scale was to be as objective as possible. Strip it down, make it easy to understand, easy to use. Hence,

flavor and complexity take top billing. Performance pertains to things like construction, burn, draw, etc. Enjoyment - I had mentioned in one

of the above threads that I initially was not going to include such a category, as I think it subjective. But let's say you smoke a cigar that you

find quite flavorful, though the flavors are not your favorites. Objectively, the flavor score would be relatively high. The enjoyment category

gives an opportunity to factor in subjectives. And really, don't we smoke for enjoyment. I know I'm being repetitive here.

Not to speak for anyone, but I think many, if not most of us here feel that the body of a review is most important for giving one an idea

of what a cigar may be like. For me, this is really just an exercise and something for discussion

As a final note (and I've mentioned this elsewhere as well), if we are to continue to issue numbered scores, I think it worthwhile for us all to

reach a consensus on the scale, categories, and points awarded per category. I hope this hasn't been too long winded.

[Guest rob]

Good review Colt. So, would you actually succumb to purchasing some or go for the better value for money regular line smokes?

[Padrino]

Great review as always Colt. Although just to add on to what Ken mentioned, personally if it was 11/20 i'd have pitched it long before I nubbed it.

What would you have given it out of 100 ? I'm just curious.

[Tampa1257]

Nice review Colt.

I personally like the 5 or 6 smoke ring ratings the best over either a 100 point scale or a 20 point scale. If a cigar rated 11/20, I probably would never even give it a try, much like a 85/100 rating, yet a cigar that rated a 3 smoke ring, a good to very good cigar would be a sure bet that I would want to sample it.

Each to their own, I just don't agree with the arbitrary numbers given for complexity, construction, etc. Either a cigar is good, bad, very good or excellent, a classic or not fit for human consumption.

[SmokinAl]

...One thing that hit me personally in watching the great video reviews here was how the

score numbers are just kind of tossed out there - without much in the way of breakdown...

I hear you Pal. A common reference is something I spoke with the boys about and it seems to complicate matters a little. Whilst I agree with you on all points there's only one objection I have to this, sitting down with a notepad whilst smoking seems counter cultural. I really don't want to think that much.

[Colt45]

So, would you actually succumb to purchasing some or go for the better value for money regular line smokes?

If I were to acquire a box, it would be more as an experiment, and to settle my own curiosity as to how these might evolve.

I don't think I would do so at the expense of favorite regular production, but in addition to. Also, I'm not a big fan of the size -

for me dropping it down to a 46 or 44 ring might make a bit more sense.

Although just to add on to what Ken mentioned, personally if it was 11/20 i'd have pitched it long before I nubbed it.

What would you have given it out of 100 ? I'm just curious.

True, it could be looked at as a barely above average cigar, but again, it's been boxed for less than a year. I probably would have

scored it between 85-87 out of 100.

Each to their own, I just don't agree with the arbitrary numbers given for complexity, construction, etc. Either a cigar is good, bad, very good or excellent, a classic or not fit for human consumption.

Tampa, I think you understand I'm not trying to push an agenda or advocating the twenty point scale (or any for that matter). Some might

look at 3 out 6 as an average cigar. But when they have the reference key to understand what the number stands for, it makes sense, and

everyone is on the same page, This is what, if anything, I'm advocating.

Whilst I agree with you on all points there's only one objection I have to this, sitting down with a notepad whilst smoking seems counter cultural. I really don't want to think that much.

Al, no doubt - I get all I need to know from how you and the rest of the panel discuss the cigar. This might make giving a numerical score in the

video review almost superfluous. On the flip side, we could look at any review as more of an educational process, and noting a break down

for a given score might not be out of line. I'm not suggesting it for the panel - I like the vid reviews as they are

[Ken Gargett]

I've taken to calling the Monte sublime the Montecristo

Donkey Dong,

i really hope that catches on. habanos would be so pleased.

[Jimmy2]

I like the 100 point scale as i am used to it for wine also and its used all over for many many years so why mess with it.

I do the smoke rings out of respect to the others who like it that way but for me 100 point scale is perfect..

All four listed below should be told in the review itself as i try to do with mine everytime.

Flavor

Complexity

Performance:

Enjoyment