The corona-sized H. Upmann Cameroon won a 90 rating a few months back in Cigar Aficionado. I also took note of it because of its relatively low price point, listing at around $4.25, if I recall. I finally got around to trying one and was slightly disappointed. Although it earns its 90 in terms of appearance, construction, draw and burn, it falls short on flavor.
Flavor, in my book, counts for the lion's share of any cigar experience, as long as the other attributes are working properly. I mean, who wants to smoke an excellently constructed, perfectly burning, fine drawing 17-dollar cigar that tastes like play-dough? (Actually, plenty of people seem to do just that, including some of the lucky "I smoke cigars for a living" aesthetes at at Cigar Aficionado). I think the cigar snobs have it wrong when they over-weight any of the other categories compared to taste. However, that is a much-debated argument and one I won't continue to elaborate on here.
Back to the Upmann Cameroon corona: It's flavor was not especially sweet, peppery, woody, chocolately, fruity, cedary or any of the other more far-fetched attributes that we cigar freaks like to think we taste in good cigars (Plum? Basil? Anthracite, anyone?). It was just a nice, medium-bodied, tobacco-flavored cigar, similar in my mind to the natural-wrapped Arturo Fuente's I've had. The smoke was pleasanty thick, a bit toasty, and pleasantly full for cigar of this ring gauge. It did not turn bitter until the last inch.
I don't plan to smoke another one of these again, but I recommend it for the price. Try it once, you might like it. Not my particular cup of tea, but then again I don't like tea that much, either. Some people do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
As a confirmed cigar snob (I prefer the term "effete SOB") I think construction is just as important as taste. A plugged cigar, or one that tunnels or burns down the side, is not going to taste good, no matter how superb the blend might be. I'll take a mediocre RP over a plugged Cuban any day of the week. (Well, maybe on a Tuesday...)
That's correct, cigarfan. A prerequisite for ANY cigar should be that it burns and draws correctly. But let's not hype and praise it for doing so.
Flavor and other qualities of the smoke have to be the deciding factors, once the "burn prerequisites" are met.
I can't tell you how many 90-plus cigars I've tried that are dogs in the flavor department. It seems clear that double-weighting the construction score unjustly allows dog-breath cigars to rise to the top. Throw in a high number on "appearance" and your foulest-tasting, overpriced dog has just scored a 91.
There should be a way to isolate construction & appearance from the rest of the rating. If a cigar doesn't burn right, call it a "lemon" and be done with it, period. And penalizing a great-performing cigar for being "ugly"? My god, people, we're not sticking these stinky blimps in our mouths to win a fashion show.
In summary: All correctly burning cigars should be judged in one class, competing against each other on the other qualities that really make a cigar stand out. "Appearance" should not be one of them.
Call me a dreamer. I'm not the only one...
Well happy Anniversary 99! You sir are correctamente! Any given long-filler hand rolled or hand finished and hand inspected cigar should and in my case is expected to burn and draw within reason without subsequently being rewarded with accolades. Period.
I also agree that while appearance should increase value and rating, it should take a rear seat to flavor. I will take a sloppily constructed and slapped on cap on say a Padron Ambassador or Palma with it's accompanying great flavor over that beauty of a bore anyday.
So while I may be reluctant to do so given advertised excellence promised in appearence and construction, I still buy em by the box because their flavor always deliver very high marks indeed. Different from box to box sure but always flavorable. You are very insightful and I enjoy your perspective.
Post a Comment