baldheadracing
Reading more, posting less
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 245
This particular cigar was a tag-along hiding deep inside the packaging of a GPS that I purchased from Strayvector a few days after I joined CP. Thank-you Strayvector! :thumbs:
I'm not 100% sure of the size - hindsite being 20/20 I should have measured the cigar - but I think it was the #4- 5"x48.
This was the first Pete Johnson cigar that I've ever smoked - marketing works in weird ways, and Mr. Johnson's comments that he is trying to imitate Cuban cigars has turned me off - I see no reason to pay more for an imitation when the "real deal" is legal here in Canada :blush:
However, the la Riqueza is not an imitation - it has a definitely non-Cubanesque broadleaf (sun-grown) Connecticut wrapper, coupled with Nicaraguan filler/binder. The wrapper makes this cigar closer in taste to, say, a Padron 1964 natural than a Cuban IMHO. Opinions vary on how much a wrapper can influence a cigar's taste, but in the case of La Riqueza, I think that the wrapper makes the cigar.
The wrapper is dark, but is not a Maduro. Being sun-grown broadleaf, it isn't as fine in appearance as a shade grown wrapper, but was a quality leaf - only small veins were visible, and were not felt. No appreciable sheen in the wrapper.
Overall construction was excellent, with a great draw, both cold and hot. The bunch was not flat-cut at the head, but the triple cap was perfectly applied; so, when combined with a sharp guillotine cut, there was none of the loose tobacco bits that I sometimes end up picking out of my teeth when smoking.
Pre-light taste was tangy, foreshadowing a light bite on the tongue of the smoke. The cigar was not as heavy as I would expect in a cigar in this price range - the probable reason for this was discovered once the cigar had burned down a bit, as there were a few stems in the filler, which lead to interesting mini-drainholes (for lack of a better term) in the coal. While not a full-blown tunnel, these mini-drainholes lead to a little extra harshness and hotter smoke for most of the cigar. This harshness disappeared, and the smoke cooled down, once the mini-drainholes disappeared - so I ended up nubbing the cigar. Nubbing is something I personally very rarely do. Again, other than the mini-drainhole issue, the cigar smoked and drew perfectly. The cigar had an even burn, good ash, and had no issues with burn line. One touch-up with about and inch and a half left in the cigar was it.
Taste of the cigar was just about perfect - a very light sweetness (although I personally prefer more sweetmess), no saltiness, no acidity (tannins), and just a hint of bitterness, but only when the coal had those mini-drainholes in it. In other words, well-prepared quality tobacco.
Flavours were again influenced by the holes in the coal. This medium-bodied cigar was quite pleasurable, had generous and complex flavours, was well-balanced, but had a relatively brief aftertaste. It is claimed that La Riqueza has no ligero, which could explain the minimal aftertaste. Flavours were more on the pepper/earthy end, but overall a quite nice, and complex, set of tobacco flavours.
In summary, this particular example was perhaps not the best example of the breed, but it was clear that La Riqueza was a cut above. At current market pricing, it isn't a deal, but you won't feel like you're smoking an over-priced $5 cigar, either
.
My score (yeah, I'm a statistician):
- price factor 14/20 (based on Internet pricing)
- taste 15/16
- flavour 17/25 (score affected by the mini-drainholes)
- construction (per-light) 14/15
- burn quality 12/14
- smoke 6/10 (because of the mini-drainholes)
Total 78/100
edit for typos
I'm not 100% sure of the size - hindsite being 20/20 I should have measured the cigar - but I think it was the #4- 5"x48.
This was the first Pete Johnson cigar that I've ever smoked - marketing works in weird ways, and Mr. Johnson's comments that he is trying to imitate Cuban cigars has turned me off - I see no reason to pay more for an imitation when the "real deal" is legal here in Canada :blush:
However, the la Riqueza is not an imitation - it has a definitely non-Cubanesque broadleaf (sun-grown) Connecticut wrapper, coupled with Nicaraguan filler/binder. The wrapper makes this cigar closer in taste to, say, a Padron 1964 natural than a Cuban IMHO. Opinions vary on how much a wrapper can influence a cigar's taste, but in the case of La Riqueza, I think that the wrapper makes the cigar.
The wrapper is dark, but is not a Maduro. Being sun-grown broadleaf, it isn't as fine in appearance as a shade grown wrapper, but was a quality leaf - only small veins were visible, and were not felt. No appreciable sheen in the wrapper.
Overall construction was excellent, with a great draw, both cold and hot. The bunch was not flat-cut at the head, but the triple cap was perfectly applied; so, when combined with a sharp guillotine cut, there was none of the loose tobacco bits that I sometimes end up picking out of my teeth when smoking.
Pre-light taste was tangy, foreshadowing a light bite on the tongue of the smoke. The cigar was not as heavy as I would expect in a cigar in this price range - the probable reason for this was discovered once the cigar had burned down a bit, as there were a few stems in the filler, which lead to interesting mini-drainholes (for lack of a better term) in the coal. While not a full-blown tunnel, these mini-drainholes lead to a little extra harshness and hotter smoke for most of the cigar. This harshness disappeared, and the smoke cooled down, once the mini-drainholes disappeared - so I ended up nubbing the cigar. Nubbing is something I personally very rarely do. Again, other than the mini-drainhole issue, the cigar smoked and drew perfectly. The cigar had an even burn, good ash, and had no issues with burn line. One touch-up with about and inch and a half left in the cigar was it.
Taste of the cigar was just about perfect - a very light sweetness (although I personally prefer more sweetmess), no saltiness, no acidity (tannins), and just a hint of bitterness, but only when the coal had those mini-drainholes in it. In other words, well-prepared quality tobacco.
Flavours were again influenced by the holes in the coal. This medium-bodied cigar was quite pleasurable, had generous and complex flavours, was well-balanced, but had a relatively brief aftertaste. It is claimed that La Riqueza has no ligero, which could explain the minimal aftertaste. Flavours were more on the pepper/earthy end, but overall a quite nice, and complex, set of tobacco flavours.
In summary, this particular example was perhaps not the best example of the breed, but it was clear that La Riqueza was a cut above. At current market pricing, it isn't a deal, but you won't feel like you're smoking an over-priced $5 cigar, either
.My score (yeah, I'm a statistician):
- price factor 14/20 (based on Internet pricing)
- taste 15/16
- flavour 17/25 (score affected by the mini-drainholes)
- construction (per-light) 14/15
- burn quality 12/14
- smoke 6/10 (because of the mini-drainholes)
Total 78/100
edit for typos
