Good linking, Whopper.
I don't recall that we discussed the the relation between smoke volume and flavor. That's a question worth exploring.
Here's a nifty short article on
fire and smoke. Based on this explanation, tobacco smoke is clearly analogous to the smoke that is generated when wood or paper burns. Specifically, tobacco smoke consists of the volatized organic compounds in the tobacco leaf. In other words, those things in tobacco which deliver the flavor. In essence, no smoke, no flavor. Of course, having smoke doesn't necessarily guarantee flavor but that's another issue altogether.
In my experience, no
visible smoke generally equates to no flavor. Think about this. How many times have you left a cigar unpuffed to have it just about go out? When you draw, the first few puffs deliver no smoke and only tepid, flavorless (or stanky) air. The coal has cooled such that air passing through does not get it back right away above the 300F threshold for volatization. Pull a few more times and smoke starts to issue forth from both ends, the head and the foot. Now the coal has heated up and is starting to consume tobacco and release flavor compounds.
I think what your friend might be referring to is a phenomenon where the quantity of the smoke, as a consequence of the temperature of the coal (which is, in turn a function of the power of the draw), is necessarily so small that what little
visible smoke quickly condenses on the moist interior architecture of the mouth, namely the tongue, roof of the mouth, gums, and teeth. As we
did discuss in the other thread, flavor is observed to vary with draw intensity. So, while your friend is most likely maintaining combustion, he is doing so by smoking in a manner that favors delivery of a certain range of flavor compounds. In a sense, it is like brewing coffee grounds over a long time in cool water versus forcing superheated water through espresso under pressure in under a minute. Arguably, the product in both cases could be called coffee, but they sure won't taste alike.
To reiterate the discussion in the other thread, varying draw technique gives us a tool to expand the range of experience and flavors that can be drawn from a cigar. Visible smoke is a byproduct that is able to give us some hint of how the engine of combustion turns dead leaves into an experience that can range from the revitalizing to the relaxing.
Sorta long winded, but I think it captures what I was trying to get across. Does this make any sense to you guys?
Wilkey