Bolivar Gold Medal (LCDH)

[crusse]

Thanks for reading guys, and i'm glad you enjoyed it...

Crusse i'm trying to come up with a scoring system, and it's funny you ask, because i was thinking about it all day yesterday...but i'm not sure how i would break it down
Any ideas chaps??

Some people break down a total of 100 into categories (appearance, construction, flavour, etc.). I just base my scoring on my overall impression. I'd give a poor stick a score of less than 60, an average stick a score of 60-70, a good stick a score of 70-80, a very good stick a score of 80-90 and a 'classic' stick a score of 90-100. Within those bands I will base my score on comparisons to other sticks of the same vitola. For example, I gave an ERdM Tainos a score of 95, because I preferred it to an aged RyJ Churchill, which got a 90, but didn't like it quite as much as the last aged Sir Winston I smoked (96).

Anyway, I don't think that there's a standardised system for scoring and it's more of an art than a science. Some reviewers like the guys at CA seem to give every other stick a score of 90 or more, but for me a stick has to be quite special to get 90+

[Puff Scotty]

Nice review, I'd best have another go at the Boli's, didn't much care for the one I had, left a acidic aftertaste, I'll go again

For example, I gave an ERdM Tainos a score of 95,

Bloody Hell! Does that mean a Dunhill Mojito from '84 would score 195...

[monkey66]

Bloody Hell! Does that mean a Dunhill Mojito from '84 would score 195...

Send us some out from your box Puffy and we can do a group review

[Puff Scotty]

Send us some out from your box Puffy and we can do a group review

NO!

[crusse]

Nice review, I'd best have another go at the Boli's, didn't much care for the one I had, left a acidic aftertaste, I'll go again



Bloody Hell! Does that mean a Dunhill Mojito from '84 would score 195...

I haven't tried one and very much doubt that I would ever be able to afford one. I base my reviews on comparisons to other cigars that I've smoked and Cuban Dunhills and Davidoffs / Gran Reservas are way out of my price range.

[Puff Scotty]

I haven't tried one and very much doubt that I would ever be able to afford one. I base my reviews on comparisons to other cigars that I've smoked and Cuban Dunhills and Davidoffs / Gran Reservas are way out of my price range.

Without trying to sound too condescending you've given advice (with codicils) on a personal scoring system reflecting that of others used elsewhere.
Not, IMHO the way to go, as other newbies like yourself may follow the points awarded by you to justify a purchase. You may want to keep points to yourself at the moment until you have a bigger range under your belt...or again make it clear that it is only your opinion ...

[crusse]

Without trying to sound too condescending you've given advice (with codicils) on a personal scoring system reflecting that of others used elsewhere.
Not, IMHO the way to go, as other newbies like yourself may follow the points awarded by you to justify a purchase. You may want to keep points to yourself at the moment until you have a bigger range under your belt...or again make it clear that it is only your opinion ...

I think that all scoring systems are fairly subjective and I've made it clear that my scoring system is only one possible way to go - I did give an example of another way of scoring. I have tried a fairly wide range of CC's but my experience reflects my budget. For me, cigars like aged Cohiba Lanceros, Trini Fundadores, Party Lusitanias or Upmann Sir Winstons are special occasion smokes. I suspect that most newbies don't know how to source Cuban Davidoffs, Dunhills, etc. and that even a lot of more experienced smokers won't be able to afford them. By most peoples standards, cigars like my 'special occasion' smokes come pretty close to the top of the pile, so I don't think that it's misleading to score them highly.

I understand that a lucky few will have smoked Cuban Davidoffs, Gran Reservas, etc. and that their scoring will reflect this. But I doubt that they are in the majority, even among seasoned smokers. In fact, some people might consider it misleading to use these cigars as reference points when scoring, as they are beyond the reach of most cigar lovers.

[kevree]

My scoring system goes....in order:

Yuk
Meh!
Ok
Good
Very Good
Awesome
Holy shit!

[Puff Scotty]

I understand your point of view but if you believe "you've made it clear". I would ask you to re-read some of your reviews where no mention of it being only your opinion based on limitations was stated. As the reviews are well-written this could easily lead to the inexperienced being misled.

regards,
Puff

[Puff Scotty]

My scoring system goes....in order:

Yuk
Meh!
Ok
Good
Very Good
Awesome
Holy shit!

Smoked all of them suckers!

[crusse]

I understand your point of view but if you believe "you've made it clear". I would ask you to re-read some of your reviews where no mention of it being only your opinion based on limitations was stated. As the reviews are well-written this could easily lead to the inexperienced being misled.

regards,
Puff

Sorry, I should have written that I made it clear in this thread. You're right, my reviews don't come with a warning. But they do contain my honest opinions and I would encourage everyone to take all reviews with a pinch of salt. I've read reviews by very respected and experienced reviewers (such as David Savona), bought the cigar on the basis of the review and found that it wasn't to my taste. All reviews are just the subjective opinions of more or less experienced smokers. No review is the last word on a cigar. Experience does count for a lot and that's why I waited until I'd been smoking CC's for 2 years before I posted my first review on this forum. I know that there are a lot of other guys who have been around longer than me and know a lot more than I do, but I've never claimed to be an expert -I'm just a guy who loves cigars and enjoys communicating his passion for them.

[tippexx]

I understand that a lucky few will have smoked Cuban Davidoffs, Gran Reservas, etc. and that their scoring will reflect this. But I doubt that they are in the majority, even among seasoned smokers. In fact, some people might consider it misleading to use these cigars as reference points when scoring, as they are beyond the reach of most cigar lovers.

I ain't 'cos they're beyond me too. Nine and above I've left in reserve in my scoring system ... just for those cigars I know I'll never be able to smoke.

As to scoreing/rateing etc. Everyone to their own I say, otherwise what's the point and where's the fun, I'm just happy if people read mine, and I certainly don't expect anyone to accept them as Gospel.

[kevree]

Ah reviews.

My thoughts are that reviews shouldn't be about coming up with a score out of 100.
Neither should they be written to appear arsey.

So, don't write reviews to try to please other people. Write something honest.

Reviews should be about describing not only the cigar.....but how it made you feel.
Describe the experience.

Let the reader imagine themselves sitting there smoking one with you.

Bare your soul a little.

Example: Here's one I wrote about 10 years ago now.

http://www.cgarsltd.co.uk/document.php?id=cuabat.htm&title=Cuaba+Tasting+Notes

I can honestly say....I don't give 2 hoots what anyone thinks of the review.
I was asked to write one on that cigar......and I wrote it in a way that made sense to me.......as a very subjective description of a cigar smoking experience.

[Puff Scotty]

Right, let's not beat about the bush!
"I waited until I'd been smoking CC's for 2 years before I posted my first review on this forum...." Crusse,Look at your own posts & do the maths...
I agree wholeheartedly that every review is subject to the guy who's reviewing the cigar but that doesn't get away from the fact that if you appear to be knowledgeable then others even less experienced may fall foul of that ignorance... That's ALL I was trying to say...
As already said I like your reviews...I just have a problem with a scoring system that has no real relevance..
I apologise if I seemed harsh or antagonistic but I always speak my mind..also I do totally agree with Arf & Kev, Arf for his method of leaving the top ten blank & Kev for saying it's fun, it should be for all....

Regards & apologies,

Puff.

[Puff Scotty]

Ah reviews.

My thoughts are that reviews shouldn't be about coming up with a score out of 100.
Neither should they be written to appear arsey.

So, don't write reviews to try to please other people. Write something honest.

Reviews should be about describing not only the cigar.....but how it made you feel.
Describe the experience.

Let the reader imagine themselves sitting there smoking one with you.

Bare your soul a little.

Example: Here's one I wrote about 10 years ago now.

http://www.cgarsltd.co.uk/document.php?id=cuabat.htm&title=Cuaba+Tasting+Notes

I can honestly say....I don't give 2 hoots what anyone thinks of the review.
I was asked to write one on that cigar......and I wrote it in a way that made sense to me.......as a very subjective description of a cigar smoking experience.

Excellent Kev...but you didn't score the f***er did you?