The great Fyodor blind taste test!

[moki]

Cigar no.5

This is another good one, I definitely enjoyed it. It had a nice prelight smell and some noticeable cinnamon spice on the prelight draw. In the first two thirds it held the Cinnamon flavor and had some notes of cedar and chocolate. It was full bodied, but not overly so, rich and flavorful but lacked a bit of complexity. In the last third it really grabbed my attention by gaining some complexity and developing some cocoa and some nice tangyness on the finish which had me questioning my original assertion of the country of origin. In the end it developed some Cuban like elements but I'm going to go with my original take on this cigar and say it is Nicaraguan. This one is a bit tough to call though. 8/10

Verdict- nonCuban

Cigar #5 results

Fyodor says:

Cigar rating: 8/10
Origin guess: Nicaraguan
Cuban/non-Cuban: non-Cuban

Survey says:

Actual origin: Cuba
Cigar #5 is a: Cuban Montecristo Reserva No.4 (5.12" x 42)

Commentary:

This is actually a special aged tobacco "reserva" release of the venerable Cuban Montecristo No.4. While many consider the Montecristo line to be one of the classic Cuban lines, I generally don't bother with it due to inconsistency issues inherent in producing so many cigars in so many factories.

Good to hear you liked it, but unfortunately it is indeed Cuban... which means it is now statistically impossible for you to achieve the 7/10 watermark we set at the beginning of the test. Hopefully that means a slight re-evaluation of your stance on Cuban vs. non-Cuban cigars... after all, it's hard to say you prefer something if you have a difficult time picking it out when you have it!

Either way, the pressure's off now... let's have some fun with the balance of the cigars! There are still some fun ones to come!

Results so far:

#1 - Cuban Montecristo Tubos 1970s -- (5/10) guessed non-Cuban, Domincan or Honduran - Incorrect
#2 - non-Cuban Cabaiguan WCD 120 -- (9/10) guessed Cuban - Incorrect
#3 - non-Cuban Tatuaje Black Label -- (1/10) guessed non-Cuban, "a country not meant to be growing tobacco" - Correct!
#4 - Cuban H. Upmann Sir Winston -- (7/10) guessed non-Cuban, Dominican - Incorrect
#5 - Cuban Montecristo Reserva No.4 -- (8/10) guessed non-Cuban, Nicaraguan - Incorrect

Score: Cigars 4, Fyodor 1

 

[rbbrock]

t's hard to say you prefer something if you have a difficult time picking it out when you have it!

I'm going to respectfully disagree with this statement. Fyodor may not be able to reliably identify whether a particular cigar is Cuban or non-Cuban, but it does not necessarily follow that, on balance, he doesn't like Cuban cigars more.

Non-Cuban ratings: 9, 1
Average: 5

Cuban ratings: 5, 7, 8
Average: 6.67

I'll acknowledge that this is far too small a sample on which to base any kind of reliable conclusion, but I think the premise is valid. Being able to identify something consistently is not the same as liking something consistently.

 

[moki]

I'm going to respectfully disagree with this statement. Fyodor may not be able to reliably identify whether a particular cigar is Cuban or non-Cuban, but it does not necessarily follow that, on balance, he doesn't like Cuban cigars more.

Again, if someone claims that love Cuban cigars, and would know the taste of a Cuban cigar anywhere, then they should be able to know a Cuban cigar when they taste it.

As for the ratings, if you throw out the Tatuaje Black (which is clearly an aberration), he has given non-Cuban cigars better ratings than Cuban cigars. However it is CLEARLY to small of a sample size to read anything into the ratings...

...and the way to test whether he can identify what he likes with any consistency is to give him the same cigars over and over again, and see how he rate 'em. We're testing something else here.

 

[rbbrock]

Again, if someone claims that love Cuban cigars, and would know the taste of a Cuban cigar anywhere, then they should be able to know a Cuban cigar when they taste it.

These are two separate things.

...and the way to test whether he can identify what he likes with any consistency is to give him the same cigars over and over again, and see how he rate 'em. We're testing something else here.

I agree. You're testing whether he can identify Cuban cigars by taste. I'm not saying that the test can't turn out to show that he rates the NCs higher than the CCs. I'm only saying that preferring something and being able to pick it out are not inextricably related.

 

[Fyodor]

Damn, I knew I should have said Cuban. And I figured by the way the cigars were falling it would be more likely Cuban than Nicaraguan but I'm trying not to think about it that way and give my honest opinion. I was torn and considering the way my luck is I got it wrong. But I must say, that cigar is quite unique among the Cubans I have smoked. Nothing like a regular Montecristo no. 4, or at least the severall I have had.

Well Moki if you will remember my comments after cigar no. 2 you will see that I've already had a "slight re-evaluation". And I intend to continue having fun and I can't say I've really felt any pressure thus far, so I imagine it will continue that way. And I must say that all five of these cigars have been extremely sought after ones. You are very generous and I sincerely appreciate it.
:thumbs:

-Mark

 

[septumus]

Cigar no. 4

The finish had some mineral hints and a light tangy citrus quality but not as prominent as I would expect to taste in a Cuban.

Verdict- nonCuban

Cigar no.5

In the end it developed some Cuban like elements but I'm going to go with my original take on this cigar and say it is Nicaraguan. This one is a bit tough to call though. 8/10

Verdict- nonCuban

Though his ultimate decisions on two of the Cubans were NC he did, at the very least, catch the fact that there were "Cuban like elements" in both of them. Maybe there is something to it after all just not quite so prominently as most people speak about it. Just thought I'd point this out and kudos to Fyodor for soldiering on :thumbs:

 

[bfreebern]

Wow, Reserva #4.

 

[jstrat]

This has been great reading! Looking forward to the next cigar ... :thumbs:

 

[moki]

I agree. You're testing whether he can identify Cuban cigars by taste. I'm not saying that the test can't turn out to show that he rates the NCs higher than the CCs. I'm only saying that preferring something and being able to pick it out are not inextricably related.

So if I tell you that I prefer Belgian beers over American beers, but I cannot tell with any degree of accuracy the difference between a Belgian beer and an American beer when I taste them blind, what does that tell you about what I prefer?

It tells you that what I prefer when I know what beer I'm drinking is different from what I prefer when I do not know what beer I'm drinking. Which in turn tells you that I like the idea of liking Belgian beers more than I truly like Belgian beers.

This is exactly the same way that companies are able to establish brands and brand loyalty.

 

[moki]

Though his ultimate decisions on two of the Cubans were NC he did, at the very least, catch the fact that there were "Cuban like elements" in both of them. Maybe there is something to it after all just not quite so prominently as most people speak about it. Just thought I'd point this out and kudos to Fyodor for soldiering on :thumbs:

I'm going to have to disagree; what about his absolute certainty regarding the "Cuban like elements" in cigar #2, which was not Cuban at all? It reminds me of a soothsayer... the few times they actually get something right, people marvel at it, and forget the pronouncements they make that are dead wrong.

 

[septumus]

Though his ultimate decisions on two of the Cubans were NC he did, at the very least, catch the fact that there were "Cuban like elements" in both of them. Maybe there is something to it after all just not quite so prominently as most people speak about it. Just thought I'd point this out and kudos to Fyodor for soldiering on :thumbs:

I'm going to have to disagree; what about his absolute certainty regarding the "Cuban like elements" in cigar #2, which was not Cuban at all? It reminds me of a soothsayer... the few times they actually get something right, people marvel at it, and forget the pronouncements they make that are dead wrong.

Touche moki. Point taken

 

[Sportsdls]

I agree. You're testing whether he can identify Cuban cigars by taste. I'm not saying that the test can't turn out to show that he rates the NCs higher than the CCs. I'm only saying that preferring something and being able to pick it out are not inextricably related.

So if I tell you that I prefer Belgian beers over American beers, but I cannot tell with any degree of accuracy the difference between a Belgian beer and an American beer when I taste them blind, what does that tell you about what I prefer?

It tells you that what I prefer when I know what beer I'm drinking is different from what I prefer when I do not know what beer I'm drinking. Which in turn tells you that I like the idea of liking Belgian beers more than I truly like Belgian beers.

This is exactly the same way that companies are able to establish brands and brand loyalty.

However in a blind test if they constantly choose the Belgian beers over the American beers, even if they aren't such which is which, then they prefer Belgian. They might not be able to pick one out of a blind line up, but if they like it consistently in a blind line up then they prefer it. They aren't mutually inclusive, however if you consider yourself a connoisseur then you should be able to pick out the distinctions that make you enjoy it.

 

[MoeCizlak]

This is fascinating to watch unfold. Thank you Moki and Fyodor. I've read the links to the blind wine tasting but was wondering if anyone has passed this Cuban/Non-Cuban test with any degree of accuracy. Would the reviews at CA be able to discern the difference? What about those that write the reviews for some of the sponsors of CP? Moki, have you done it yourself? I'm just curious if it's possible to tell the difference or I just haven't seen someone with an "expert" pallate take the test.

 

[moki]

This is fascinating to watch unfold. Thank you Moki and Fyodor. I've read the links to the blind wine tasting but was wondering if anyone has passed this Cuban/Non-Cuban test with any degree of accuracy. Would the reviews at CA be able to discern the difference? What about those that write the reviews for some of the sponsors of CP? Moki, have you done it yourself? I'm just curious if it's possible to tell the difference or I just haven't seen someone with an "expert" pallate take the test.

Yes, I've done it myself. Some I have done well at, some I have not. Here were my comments on the last blind taste test I did:

.....

It's really hard to know how much is statistical variance (ie, luck) because just 10 cigars means nothing, really. I will say though that all of my guesses had reasoning behind them.

Also keep in mind that there are still two cigars to go... If I get them both wrong and Dane gets them both right, he's only one cigar behind me in the test.

Dane (Hotboy), for all of the crap he gets, is a very knowledgable cigar smoker, with a very refined palate. I think it just shows that this is harder than many people beleive it to be.

What I did for each cigar was as follows:

1) I looked at the cigar. What kind of wrapper was it? That right there can exclude Cuba for certain wrapper types. What vitola is it? Certain nuances to classic Cuban vitolas can include or exclude the cigar right there.

2) I used my knowledge of JC, the person administering the test. I know in broad terms what cigars he is likely to have, and what taste profile he likes.

3) The taste of the cigar itself, recalling taste profiles of the cigars I have had in the past.

If you took away 1 and 2 above, I think I would have done worse

 

[MoeCizlak]

My ignorance will show glowingly here but I'm going to ask anyway: Wouldn't the true test be to test a Cuban with it's non-Cuban counterpart? Say like a Monty #2 with a domestic Monty of the same shape and size. Or do they not all make a domestic counterpart? To me this would be a good way to see if you know a Cuban or not.

 

[moki]

My ignorance will show glowingly here but I'm going to ask anyway: Wouldn't the true test be to test a Cuban with it's non-Cuban counterpart? Say like a Monty #2 with a domestic Monty of the same shape and size. Or do they not all make a domestic counterpart? To me this would be a good way to see if you know a Cuban or not.

No, that wouldn't be a "true test" at all -- in fact, it'd be significantly worse than what I've been doing here. There's no similarity at all between the Cuban and non-Cuban brands that share the same name, other than the name.

 

[grateful1]

What I did for each cigar was as follows:

1) I looked at the cigar. What kind of wrapper was it? That right there can exclude Cuba for certain wrapper types. What vitola is it? Certain nuances to classic Cuban vitolas can include or exclude the cigar right there.

2) I used my knowledge of JC, the person administering the test. I know in broad terms what cigars he is likely to have, and what taste profile he likes.

3) The taste of the cigar itself, recalling taste profiles of the cigars I have had in the past.

If you took away 1 and 2 above, I think I would have done worse

1 and 2 are VERY helpful when doing these tests.

...and 2 is very sneaky if you see past reviews from the fellow administering the test!

 

[Strayvector]

This is fascinating to watch unfold. Thank you Moki and Fyodor. I've read the links to the blind wine tasting but was wondering if anyone has passed this Cuban/Non-Cuban test with any degree of accuracy. Would the reviews at CA be able to discern the difference? What about those that write the reviews for some of the sponsors of CP? Moki, have you done it yourself? I'm just curious if it's possible to tell the difference or I just haven't seen someone with an "expert" pallate take the test.

Yes, I've done it myself. Some I have done well at, some I have not. Here were my comments on the last blind taste test I did:

.....

It's really hard to know how much is statistical variance (ie, luck) because just 10 cigars means nothing, really. I will say though that all of my guesses had reasoning behind them.

Also keep in mind that there are still two cigars to go... If I get them both wrong and Dane gets them both right, he's only one cigar behind me in the test.

Dane (Hotboy), for all of the crap he gets, is a very knowledgable cigar smoker, with a very refined palate. I think it just shows that this is harder than many people beleive it to be.

What I did for each cigar was as follows:

1) I looked at the cigar. What kind of wrapper was it? That right there can exclude Cuba for certain wrapper types. What vitola is it? Certain nuances to classic Cuban vitolas can include or exclude the cigar right there.

2) I used my knowledge of JC, the person administering the test. I know in broad terms what cigars he is likely to have, and what taste profile he likes.

3) The taste of the cigar itself, recalling taste profiles of the cigars I have had in the past.

If you took away 1 and 2 above, I think I would have done worse

Don't be so modest, Andrew. You're good...very good. Whatever the criteria you used, you used them well.

Your problem is you like checking out other men's packages. :whistling:

 

[rbbrock]

However in a blind test if they constantly choose the Belgian beers over the American beers, even if they aren't [sure] which is which, then they prefer Belgian. They might not be able to pick one out of a blind line up, but if they like it consistently in a blind line up then they prefer it.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say (and apparently failing at).

 

[moki]

However in a blind test if they constantly choose the Belgian beers over the American beers, even if they aren't such which is which, then they prefer Belgian. They might not be able to pick one out of a blind line up, but if they like it consistently in a blind line up then they prefer it. They aren't mutually inclusive, however if you consider yourself a connoisseur then you should be able to pick out the distinctions that make you enjoy it.

Yes, I understand that -- but there clearly is not enough data to even begin considering making such assumptions. In fact, it'd be ridiculous to do so. The statement is predicated on the fact that averaging the scores thus far, he (just barely) prefers Cuban cigars. Given the 1/10 rating given to the Tatuaje Black, an obvious "throw away" rating, it seems obvious that no such assumptions can be made... even putting aside the fact that we're talking about only 5 cigars in the sample pool.

In any event, let's hope he gets to another cigar today!