• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

CA names Montecristo No 2 top cigar of 2013

CMontoya79

CMontoya79

Newb Le professional!
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
6,069
Your thoughts gentleman? I haven't had one in a while, but do recall enjoying them greatly.
 
I think this was definitely a good choice. If you do enjoy them then get them while you can because we all know what happens to the No. 1 cigar of the year supplies. Tonight when I get home I'm going to light one up, it's been a while for me too since I last had one but do have a few in stock.
 
Doesn't surprise me, they've always been spot on when I've had them.  The ones with 5+ years on them, can be really spectacular.
 
I'm surprised....but not for reasons of whether or not the Monte #2 deserves it.
 
I think the Monte #2 is a great cigar that is certainly worthy of being number 1.  I could certainly argue some other choices, but I have no problem seeing it as number 1.
 
My surprise is that CA actually put a Cuban cigar as number 1.  I subscribe to CA, but I know what I'm getting.....and very money/sponsor influenced publication that is less and less about cigars every year.  To me, it's very obvious that the top 25 as a whole has a lot to do with money/sponsorship and not as much to do with actual taste/quality.
 
I find that Cuban cigars are essentially ignored because their subscriber base does not have easy access to them.  Therefore they play to their audience and keep things out of Cuba for the most part.  I realize they toss in some Cuban flavor from time to time, but it isn't addressed nearly as much as it should be in a magazine titled Cigar Aficionado.
 
So in short....good for the Monte #2, it is deserving.......and good for CA, allowing it to happen. 
 
Brickhouse said:
I'm surprised....but not for reasons of whether or not the Monte #2 deserves it.
 
I think the Monte #2 is a great cigar that is certainly worthy of being number 1.  I could certainly argue some other choices, but I have no problem seeing it as number 1.
 
My surprise is that CA actually put a Cuban cigar as number 1.  I subscribe to CA, but I know what I'm getting.....and very money/sponsor influenced publication that is less and less about cigars every year.  To me, it's very obvious that the top 25 as a whole has a lot to do with money/sponsorship and not as much to do with actual taste/quality.
 
I find that Cuban cigars are essentially ignored because their subscriber base does not have easy access to them.  Therefore they play to their audience and keep things out of Cuba for the most part.  I realize they toss in some Cuban flavor from time to time, but it isn't addressed nearly as much as it should be in a magazine titled Cigar Aficionado.
 
So in short....good for the Monte #2, it is deserving.......and good for CA, allowing it to happen. 
Click to expand...
 
Then again, this is not the first CC to win cigar of the year and if they don't win it they are always on the top 10 spots. The magazine ratings (every single magazine I have read from CA have the CCs in it). So to me, is not so surprising. But I do agree that maybe some of those cigars might be there because of the sponsorship, like it's weird how this year I saw so many contributions between Drew State and CA (giveaways and such) and all of the sudden Herrera Steli is on the top 10, now don't get me wrong, I do think this cigar deserves to be there. I guess we will never understand or know what's really going on there, but one thing is for sure and there is no denying it, their list is for the most part pretty decent and the top 10 cigars are usually very deserving of their spots.
 
Monte # 2's age well and a great go to cigar.  As for CA  - too much advertising and I totally agree with Brickhouse.
 
Brickhouse said:
 
 
but I know what I'm getting.....and very money/sponsor influenced publication that is less and less about cigars every year.  To me, it's very obvious that the top 25 as a whole has a lot to do with money/sponsorship and not as much to do with actual taste/quality.
 
Click to expand...
 
A Monte #2 is a good cigar, but not a top five. Some of the other crap they put on the list is just that...crap. They have always asserted that they smoke the cigars blind. I also think that they have a lot of experience, but the list still astounds me every year.
 
Top two.....really,......... where's the punch line?
 
I smoked two of them this year with Feb 12 box codes.  Even Shanken's vanity mag can get something right on occasion.
 
I think they are great cigars, I have had a couple that were well over 5 years old. I can agree with not believing CA let them be the number 1 of the year. Also, does anyone here read Seth's list?
 
Brickhouse said:
I'm surprised....but not for reasons of whether or not the Monte #2 deserves it.
 
I think the Monte #2 is a great cigar that is certainly worthy of being number 1.  I could certainly argue some other choices, but I have no problem seeing it as number 1.
 
My surprise is that CA actually put a Cuban cigar as number 1.  I subscribe to CA, but I know what I'm getting.....and very money/sponsor influenced publication that is less and less about cigars every year.  To me, it's very obvious that the top 25 as a whole has a lot to do with money/sponsorship and not as much to do with actual taste/quality.
 
I find that Cuban cigars are essentially ignored because their subscriber base does not have easy access to them.  Therefore they play to their audience and keep things out of Cuba for the most part.  I realize they toss in some Cuban flavor from time to time, but it isn't addressed nearly as much as it should be in a magazine titled Cigar Aficionado.
 
So in short....good for the Monte #2, it is deserving.......and good for CA, allowing it to happen. 
Click to expand...
 
I couldn't agree with you more.
 
Very glad to see this, as the Monte #2 has always been a fave of mine.
 
This cigar has been around for a long time. A very consistent smoke, I've never had a complaint with any I've had whether fresh or aged.
 
Very enjoyable cigar. Wish I still had a full box, they would be from 2006.
 
Sunward said:
Very enjoyable cigar. Wish I still had a full box, they would be from 2006.
Click to expand...
 
Yea, the one they rated was from this year april 2013 so it would be nice to try to get a box of those, age them and smoke them in 2023!
 
whylieineedacigar said:
 
Very enjoyable cigar. Wish I still had a full box, they would be from 2006.
Click to expand...
 
Yea, the one they rated was from this year april 2013 so it would be nice to try to get a box of those, age them and smoke them in 2023!
 
Click to expand...
 
The actual box code is ALT ABR 13 for the winning cigar.
 
I was lucky enough to get two boxes with the same box code. I tried a few already, and they were excellent... I will probably smoke a few more and hide the rest in my long term aging cabinet...
 
If anyone would like to try one, pm me.
 
I had only Montecristo Classic and these were fine sticks, may be should try other ones.
 
While it's good to see such a legendary cigar achieve the #1 spot, it's still hard to believe anything that comes from CA. But still, to guys like me that have a long, fond past with that cigar, it's really cool to see it up there none the less. Reading what you younger guys occasionally write about them is like a blast from the past because you hardly hear about or see anyone smoking them for some time now.
 
Through the 60s, 70s, 80s, and early 90s, there weren't many better cigars out there that smoked as smoothly as a #2 right out of the box. They were known as a VERY consistent smoke and was the go-to cigar for a lot of guys...myself included. There were always crappy months or season here and there, but for the most part...you knew what you were getting when you opened the box. You didn't need to age them 6-8 years or any of that crap like is preached as the gospel today. You still aged some here and there, but for the most part you smoked them right out of the gate because they aged the tobacco for a longer period of time back then.
 
As the 90s moved along, they fell on some hard times 'consistently' wise and have only recently made a comeback of sorts. There were a few flashes of the old days here and there after 2002-2003, but you had to have someone hand pick you a good looking, pleasant smelling box in an attempt to get a solid smoke....to buy them blindly was like rolling the dice...and most of the time you lost.
 
I still have a few from a box from 2008 that is OK at best...but other than that one box, I stopped buying them about 20 years ago. In the early 90s, Bolivar's Belicosos Finos stole a good portion of the #2s business due to their lack of consistency.
 
Man, if I had a nickle for every box of those I smoked...loved those little belis back then...they were like eating candy! It's a very different cigar today...as are most CC anymore since they changed their seed selection and growing techniques....not to mention how often the crops were wiped out from hurricanes. You'd think they would have constructed sturdier aging barns to protect the tobacco harvests instead of the matchstick built ones they still have some of to this very day.  :rolleyes:
 
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top