Cohiba Lancero CLE NOV 01

[aavkk]

Its no secret that I love Cohiba's. I thoroughly enjoy Siglo I's, III's, IV's, and my beloved original release VI's, each one different in its own unique way. Ive dabbled and enjoyed the occasional robusto and have a few 10 ct 06 Piramides stashed away. Until last night I have never had a Lancero, why on earth has this been the case? It just looks like a million dollars! There is a reason they give these away as diplomatic gifts, it represents class, quality and attention to detail.

This particular example was a single made at El Laguito in late 01. A box is on the way...

Appearance was A+...perfect pigtail no overly hard or soft spots, very uniform foot with perfect bunch. Clipped the cap and draw at cold was sweet hay and barnyard with just the faintest hint of resistance. Had a divot which I love, this was no junior trainee of a torcedor!

As far as how it smoked- I was in a spell of relaxation for 135 minutes! Being critical it didnt shift gears on me as much as I would have expected but what it delivered was fantastic. For about the first 90 minutes or 5 inches it carried a med-full body and such overwhelming vanilla bean notes with quality espresso, creme brulee all over a bed of light sweet spice. As a side note for those familar with the Siglo III, I find the III to carry more of a honey note as opposed to the sweet vanilla dessert notes in the Lancero. Just trying to put things in perspective, I digress. Into the last 2 1/2 inches or 30 minutes each of the flavors mentioned were heightened and it was no doubt full-bodied. For a cigar of this length I would have liked to see a bit more nuance and changes throughout however it was definitely NOT boring. This flavor profile just sings to all my senses!

I will definitely be buying as many of these 01's as I can and am seriously considering some Coronas Especiales as well.

Overall, 5.5 out of 6 smoke rings or a 94. Had it danced around a bit more and shook things up which I suspect may very well be the case with further aging it will certainly be a classic.

[Colt45]

[Van55]

Overall, 5.5 out of 6 smoke rings or a 94. Had it danced around a bit more and shook things up which I suspect may very well be the case with further aging it will certainly be a classic.

Grrrrrrrr! I don't know how many times I gotta repeat it, there are no fractional smoke rings on the six smoke ring rating scale. Try blowing half a smoke ring!

Based on your conclusion "it will certainly be a classic" you would have to give it a full six smoke rings to be true to the scale. "A classic or classic to be" is the verbal description associated with the 6 smoke ring level.

Thanks for the review! I have most of a box of 2001 Cohiba Lanceros in my humidor.

[shrink]

Until last night I have never had a Lancero, why on earth has this been the case?

Damned things are expensive, and need quite a few years to show well.

For a cigar of this length I would have liked to see a bit more nuance and changes throughout however it was definitely NOT boring.

I can't think of a better example of a cigar that, while not particularly complex, has a richness and depth of flavor that makes it one of the greats. Sometimes people speak as if "complexity" is an absolute pre-requisite for excellence. It's not.

[aavkk]

Grrrrrrrr! I don't know how many times I gotta repeat it, there are no fractional smoke rings on the six smoke ring rating scale. Try blowing half a smoke ring!

Based on your conclusion "it will certainly be a classic" you would have to give it a full six smoke rings to be true to the scale. "A classic or classic to be" is the verbal description associated with the 6 smoke ring level.

Thanks for the review! I have most of a box of 2001 Cohiba Lanceros in my humidor.

Van, my apologies for butchering the smoke ring rating scale... its your baby and a beautiful one at that! My only issue is that I just cant justify calling this a perfect cigar, at least at this point. I sure hope to be able to in 7, 10, or 12 years from now. As much as I dont understand the CA rating scale I am very comfortable with a 94 knowing that 95+ is a classic. Its not quite there yet but at least for my pallete its got the chops to bring home the gold at some point.

[aavkk]

Damned things are expensive, and need quite a few years to show well.

I can't think of a better example of a cigar that, while not particularly complex, has a richness and depth of flavor that makes it one of the greats. Sometimes people speak as if "complexity" is an absolute pre-requisite for excellence. It's not.

Bob, you know this was not only extremely enjoyable but also very educational. Two days ago I would have disagreed with you that a cigar needs to have abundant complexity to approach near classic status. You are absolutely right that richness and depth of flavor are very much seperate from complexity and should be addressed as two very different animals. Complexity would be the icing on the cake (literally and figuratively based on the flavor profile) for this cigar.

[stargazer14]

....I know I can make half a smoke ring.

I know I can, I know I can....

[Ken Gargett]

Grrrrrrrr! I don't know how many times I gotta repeat it, there are no fractional smoke rings on the six smoke ring rating scale. Try blowing half a smoke ring!

Based on your conclusion "it will certainly be a classic" you would have to give it a full six smoke rings to be true to the scale. "A classic or classic to be" is the verbal description associated with the 6 smoke ring level.

why no fractions? and why out of six, when some use five smoke rings? just queries, not criticisms of that rating method. i will get round to doing the rating post soon, i promise. but have no idea where it is going to go. had a cigar the other night that i will review and tossed up whether to go 97 or 98 (it was a stunner). first half i was all for 97, 2nd half perhaps 98. does that mean 97.5? not that the world will stop turning either way but i am more and more convinced we'll never have a system that makes everyone happy.

[El Presidente]

Ken we left you with the responsibility for a thread for the ultimate Rating scale

Great review

[Ken Gargett]

Ken we left you with the responsibility for a thread for the ultimate Rating scale

Great review

yes i know and on it but just been a tad busy

[shrink]

yes i know and on it but just been a tad busy

Can you define tad? Something between a smidgen and a trace? Where is it on a numerical scale, if a whit is 1, and a mite is a 6? You better learn to get more specific, Ken...