Vintage Cigars.....what is the good the bad and the ugly.

[El Presidente]

I was very fortunate to have smoked in the last week several Davidoff Chateau Haut-Brion, Romeo y Julieta 1982 Churchill and Partagas Royale (1960's).

Each were exquisite in their own way. The Haut-Brion still rich and intense with 35 years age, the R&J medium full with great intensity, the Partagas Royale not so complex but with remarkable mongrel and legs for another 10-20 years.

I also smoked plenty of current release or not so old cigars. Partagas Connie 3's, Punch Petit Punch, Punch Petit Corona's, Cohiba Robusto's (all four were 08's). Each stood their ground and cut it amongst the aged.

I never take cigars with me on my jaunts overseas. I like to purchase from Divans (full rack price) so that I can experience the level of customer service + get an understanding on what the average punter is smoking day to day. I must say that the level of customer service was excellent. There are always things I would do differently and upon insistence I conducted some staff training sessions in Kuala Lumpur and Singapore (damn tough replicating what we do here at Czar house.....but they got the jist). Adressing people by name, having fun, getting on the turps doesn't always come natural...but we made headway

What is my point?

I would rate the Davidoff Haute-Brion a 95 the 92 R&J Churchill a 92, the Partagas Royale 1960's a 90. I would still (right now) pick a great Partagas Connie 3 a 92. A great 08 Cohiba Robusto a 92. A tremendous 08 Magnum 46 /50 a 92 (Caveat .....I purchased an 05 Mag 46 in Singapore which is an 84 at best......08's are way above what they have been).

It dawned on me that we are enjoying a golden age in Cuban cigars. Would you pay in some cases a 500% premium in 30 year old stock....above current production? I made a decision somewhere between KL and Sing that I would no longer do so.

Am I a realist.....or a barbarian?

[Jesuscookies]

Give me my money back!

[sounddust]

I would if I could afford to, as I view it as more of a collection than a day to day smoke(especially the humidors). Kinda like paying $25 million for a Ferrari 250 GTO, when it could easily buy you 100 F430s that are far superior in performance. One probably won't use for the commute to the pub, but damn if it won't bring a smile to your face every morning.

[El Presidente]

Give me my money back!

Too late

Serously.....5 year old cigars I have no problem with. I do have Davidoff No 1 from 1982 which are a small fortune. Would I purchase them.....no.

What I would purchase is 2001/2/3 lancero's (properly rolled). !/4 the price. Same utility (or close).

[yossie]

I like your honestness much and stop buying your aged stock!

[El Presidente]

I would pick last years 03 Siglo VI in a heartbeat ....I would happily pay a small fortune. Same goes for the 2003 Sir Winston. Magic.

However would I pay quadruple again for a box of 1976 Sir Winston. Not sure.

Is the 1976 Winston 4 times as good? Highly Unlikely. Lets say it would rank a 96. Lets say our 2003 Sir Winston ranks a 94. Both are 6/6 Smokerings.

So I am paying for collectability which is a fair reason if I was one. Reality is I get my jollies from smoking cigars and so I am in a pickle.

Just tossing it out there for discussion and there are no rights and wrongs.

[Ken Gargett]

Am I a realist.....or a barbarian?

the latter has never been in question and the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

[n2advnture]

I believe that having experienced these cigars makes you a more diverse (experience, informed, etc...) cigar "connoisseur" (for the lack of a better word).

While I probably wouldn't buy boxes of them, I definitely recommend trying them.

They can be quite the experience when comparing the blends (I'm extremely fond of 70 Partagas blends and 80s HUp blends)

Just my $.02 though

~M

[anacostiakat]

I was very fortunate to have smoked in the last week several Davidoff Chateau Haut-Brion, Romeo y Julieta 1982 Churchill and Partagas Royale (1960's).

Each were exquisite in their own way. The Haut-Brion still rich and intense with 35 years age, the R&J medium full with great intensity, the Partagas Royale not so complex but with remarkable mongrel and legs for another 10-20 years.

I also smoked plenty of current release or not so old cigars. Partagas Connie 3's, Punch Petit Punch, Punch Petit Corona's, Cohiba Robusto's (all four were 08's). Each stood their ground and cut it amongst the aged.

I never take cigars with me on my jaunts overseas. I like to purchase from Divans (full rack price) so that I can experience the level of customer service + get an understanding on what the average punter is smoking day to day. I must say that the level of customer service was excellent. There are always things I would do differently and upon insistence I conducted some staff training sessions in Kuala Lumpur and Singapore (damn tough replicating what we do here at Czar house.....but they got the jist). Adressing people by name, having fun, getting on the turps doesn't always come natural...but we made headway

What is my point?

I would rate the Davidoff Haute-Brion a 95 the 92 R&J Churchill a 92, the Partagas Royale 1960's a 90. I would still (right now) pick a great Partagas Connie 3 a 92. A great 08 Cohiba Robusto a 92. A tremendous 08 Magnum 46 /50 a 92 (Caveat .....I purchased an 05 Mag 46 in Singapore which is an 84 at best......08's are way above what they have been).

It dawned on me that we are enjoying a golden age in Cuban cigars. Would you pay in some cases a 500% premium in 30 year old stock....above current production? I made a decision somewhere between KL and Sing that I would no longer do so.

Am I a realist.....or a barbarian?

I have pretty much come to the same conclusion. But mostly based on a cost analysis.

See now! That is change I can believe in!!

[Guest rob]

Cost to performance (or quality) ratios are always exponentially worse when it comes to hobbies and the people who pursue them.

Regardless of the area of interest, extracting the last few % of performance (or quality) becomes financially prohibitive for most. Only the wealthy few (or the diehard fanatics) ever realise their ambition to acquire the best or rarest.

Wether it be: total harmonic distortion or power in Hi-End audio, horsepower from a motor, the thread count on a set of sheets, the running gear on a road bike, the lens for a camera.... whatever.

I'm one of those unfortunate folks who have waaay more hobbies and interests than is good for me. Having my obsessive personality type often leads to large credit card bills and lots of explaining to do. And the thrill of the chase is short lived as I'm soon back looking for my next fix.

[Colt45]

Firstly, when it comes to cigars, my thought is that older does not always equate to better.

Would I try some truly vintage cigars? Sure. Would I buy them? Doubtful at the prices they would probably command.

I enjoy smoking cigars and will leave the collecting to the collectors. All I want is a cigar that tastes great and draws

properly - if it was rolled and boxed yesterday, that's okay with me.

I think Rob's point about extracting the last percentage of performance / quality often being cost prohibitive is very good.

But I just think that in the case of vintage cigars, the mere fact a cigar is vintage is no guarantee of higher quality or a

more rewarding smoking experience

[beachcougar]

I have recently come to this realization as well. I have had the opportunity to smoke many, many older cigars over the past year or so. Most are good, a few are great and the rest were terrible. For what these cigars are now commanding, I am sticking to new market with some 97+ thrown in. Some of the best cigars I have ever had have been newer (06-08) production. I had an 06 Epi II that was probably in my top 15.......ever.

[beachcougar]

the mere fact a cigar is vintage is no guarantee of higher quality or a

more rewarding smoking experience

With vintage cigars, the storage conditions are everything. Most of the time you have no idea where the boxes have been. With new production you control the storage conditions and aging process.

[Kangaroo495]

I also smoked plenty of current release or not so old cigars. Partagas Connie 3's, Punch Petit Punch, Punch Petit Corona's, Cohiba Robusto's (all four were 08's). Each stood their ground and cut it amongst the aged.

So what else can we add to this list? Which cigars from 08 can really "cut it"?

I'd suggest:

Lusitanias

Monte Edmundo

Monte 2 (at a stretch)

BBF

Maybe Cuaba

Obviously these are all better when aged, but I think they are all great at the moment. Any others?

[aavkk]

Great thread guys and thanks for the honesty as usual Rob. Ive personally only had 1 cigar from the 80's and found it anti-climactic. I do have several boxes/cabs of great cigars from the late 90's that I am really looking forward to their further development. With that said, the majority of my stock is from 06 and 07 and I can honestly say that I am very happy with every single box I own, some are good, some are great, and some are just amazing. At my very small 2-3 cigar a week consumption I have enough to keep me busy for the next 11 years. Following the development and tracking the evolution of these cigars may just be the most interesting and fun aspect of this hobby for me or at least right up there with actually smoking the damn things.

[maalouly]

I believe buying aged cigars to be collected only as a piece of history. I wouldn't smoke any of my vintage cigars even though the idea of smoking one is tempting.

I also agree that vintage/aged cigars doesnt' always mean you will get a better quality cigar, the 08's have been smoking good today excellent in few years.

It all comes down to the individual and what they really enjoy doing.

[jeromeroselli]

barbarian for reasons excluding the aforementioned opinions

[kyee]

In real estate there's a saying: location, location, location!

In aged cigars, my motto is: storage conditions, storage conditions, storage conditions!

I've had many an aged cigar from 80's - mid 90's that plain sucked. On the other hand, I've had some that were just out of this world.

I have a friend close by that has one of the largest collection of aged Habanos that I've ever seen. Large walk in, most of his collection is from 80's to mid 90's. His walk-in is located in his basement, built into the hillside, so that there's a natural cooled den atmosphere in there. He keeps PERFECT RH/Temp settings in there. His aged Cuban cigars are the best I have EVER smoked, bar none. Would I pay a premium for those cigars? HELL YES! I know their provenance, I know without a doubt their exact storage conditions their entire lifetime. Would I pay that same premium for cigars being offered for sale online, with no idea of how they've been stored these past 20-30 years? Tough call...

[Professor Twain]

I would never pay the premium price required to buy very old cigars, although it is fun when a generous friend gives me one to try. I have had good experience with cigars aged 5-10 years and have been willing to pay a bit of a premium to get them. But my attitudes have changed about aging cigars with the high quality of many cigars from 2006 and later.

I have found that I prefer the taste of younger RASS, Dips, and Hoyos to the aged versions. The sweet intensity of the younger cigars is superior to the smoothness but lack of intensity that I find these cigars have with age. I'm actually selling off some of my older Hoyos to friends who prefer that smoothness. For other cigars I am finding that having just one or two years of age is plenty, this includes one of my staples, Monte 5s--they don't seem to lose anything with age, but I don't see great gains either given the high quality of the young cigars.

On the other hand, I think that some cigars really do get better with age. Cohiba is the best example, I'm trying to stay out of my young Cohibas because they have disappointed me. Upmanns also seem to thrive on age and the young ones just can't compete. (The Mag 50 may be an exception but I haven't had them aged yet).

I don't have enough experience with aged and recent versions of all of the marcas, but I think that the choice to smoke aged versus young cigars differs by what year they were produced and the character of the marca.

[Colt45]

I don't have enough experience with aged and recent versions of all of the marcas, but I think that the choice to smoke aged versus young cigars differs by what year they were produced and the character of the marca.

PT, speaking of vintage vs. aged, I think that's the crux. Not every cigar stands to gain by being aged for twenty, thirty, or more years. At

some point, many will have reached and passed their peak, becoming simply old cigars.

I think that up to ten years or so is plenty for me, depending on the cigar.

[PigFish]

Firstly, when it comes to cigars, my thought is that older does not always equate to better.

Would I try some truly vintage cigars? Sure. Would I buy them? Doubtful at the prices they would probably command.

I enjoy smoking cigars and will leave the collecting to the collectors. All I want is a cigar that tastes great and draws

properly - if it was rolled and boxed yesterday, that's okay with me.

I think Rob's point about extracting the last percentage of performance / quality often being cost prohibitive is very good.

But I just think that in the case of vintage cigars, the mere fact a cigar is vintage is no guarantee of higher quality or a

more rewarding smoking experience

This pretty much sums up how I believe. I don't go looking for aged cigars. Why should I? There is no guarantee for the premium you pay. Now if I find some and the price is right I will buy them but I won't pay more than I would for a current vintage. Furthermore I don't age cigars. As I have said for years aging is coincidental to hoarding!!!

I am always looking to smoke the best cigars that I have. If a box is not smoking well I can afford to stash it and start on another. There is no assurance that I will wake up tomorrow morning, no guarantee that my house won't burn down or that a rabid tobacco consuming super beetle won't gobble up my stash. I smoke what I want when I want and don't look back.

I am more into value cigars than valuable cigars. I won't spend a lot on any special cigar when I can buy a good box for the same price.

-Piggy

[b0rderman]

There is no assurance that I will wake up tomorrow morning, no guarantee that my house won't burn down or that a rabid tobacco consuming super beetle won't gobble up my stash. I smoke what I want when I want and don't look back.

-Piggy

Hear hear!

[smk819]

Am I a realist.....or a barbarian?

Rob, why do you tempt us so.

[Guest rob]

I think Rob's point about extracting the last percentage of performance / quality often being cost prohibitive is very good.

But I just think that in the case of vintage cigars, the mere fact a cigar is vintage is no guarantee of higher quality or a

more rewarding smoking experience

Scarcity (or rarity) was also one of my intended points when referring to cost ratio. There is certainly no guarantee of quality... but it's limited availability will serve to increase price.

Case in point - I have a pretty huge collection of comics... and I can assure you that the issues of Batman from #200 to #300 have some of the best stories and art ever.... but issues before that command significantly more dinero...

[El Presidente]

In real estate there's a saying: location, location, location!

In aged cigars, my motto is: storage conditions, storage conditions, storage conditions!

I've had many an aged cigar from 80's - mid 90's that plain sucked. On the other hand, I've had some that were just out of this world.

I have a friend close by that has one of the largest collection of aged Habanos that I've ever seen. Large walk in, most of his collection is from 80's to mid 90's. His walk-in is located in his basement, built into the hillside, so that there's a natural cooled den atmosphere in there. He keeps PERFECT RH/Temp settings in there. His aged Cuban cigars are the best I have EVER smoked, bar none. Would I pay a premium for those cigars? HELL YES! I know their provenance, I know without a doubt their exact storage conditions their entire lifetime. Would I pay that same premium for cigars being offered for sale online, with no idea of how they've been stored these past 20-30 years? Tough call...

Well put kevin.

If I could be 100% sure of storage conditions for Vintage stock I would be far more comfortable in purchasing them. The reality is that what I am offered from time to time in Vintage stock (15 + years) has been through more hands than Jackie Collins. I have inspected the stock and invariably it is questionable in terms of condition. There was one shipment of Davidoff (Cuban) which was dry as a bone that I inspected (out of New Zealand). Another vendor purchased them ($100K) put it in the humidor for a couple of months and sold them off without a hitch. To all reports those who purchased were happy with the flavour. One wonders how good they would have been had they been stored immaculately from inception.