whats the diffrence?

[carddoug]

I was wondering what was the diffrence between taste from the cuban then compared to what we can get here in the U.S.? And Im sorry I know the question is a little broad.

 

[grateful1]

I was wondering what was the diffrence between taste from the cuban then compared to what we can get here in the U.S.? And Im sorry I know the question is a little broad.

Search....Evil Dr Moki's Blind Taste Test!

 

[Spanishcedar]

I was wondering what was the diffrence between taste from the cuban then compared to what we can get here in the U.S.? And Im sorry I know the question is a little broad.

Search....Evil Dr Moki's Blind Taste Test!

+1 good rec.

 

[carddoug]

I was wondering what was the diffrence between taste from the cuban then compared to what we can get here in the U.S.? And Im sorry I know the question is a little broad.

Search....Evil Dr Moki's Blind Taste Test!

I couldn't find anything

 

[Q_The_Cop]

Here

and

Here

Searched by typing "Dr. Moki"

 

[insight]

Cubans have more twang and have hints of Tahitian Crack Cocaine (tm)

 

[pembroke3355]

Cubans have more twang and have hints of Tahitian Crack Cocaine (tm)

Damn that is what that twang is. :laugh:

 

[carddoug]

Thanks for the links Q, Thanks for the help guys. Once again you all were a big help! thanks

 

[sonuvabum]

Cubans have more twang and have hints of Tahitian Crack Cocaine (tm)

Damn that is what that twang is. :laugh:

No damnit! It's the weed!

Where you been?

Ain't you payin' attention boy??!?

:laugh:

 

[Drewcali]

Thanks for the links Q, Thanks for the help guys. Once again you all were a big help! thanks

Youve asked a fair question.

I think you will likely find everyone's opinion comes from a slightly different angle, because taste is so personal. I have found that I can recommend a variety of flavor and strength profiles amongst the cigars in our humidor, some of those flavors will overlap with the flavors you find in other world-class non-Cuban cigars, however many smokers seem to return to Cuban cigars for something unique they bring to the smoking experience.The tastes result from part soil, part blend, part quality of leaf, part tradition.

Cuban cigars taste more complex than their Caribbean counterparts. There exists more variety and taste and flavor in Cuban cigars than can be found anywhere else in the world.

Enjoy your smokes,

Cheers
Drew P

 

[carddoug]

Thanks for the links Q, Thanks for the help guys. Once again you all were a big help! thanks

Youve asked a fair question.

I think you will likely find everyone's opinion comes from a slightly different angle, because taste is so personal. I have found that I can recommend a variety of flavor and strength profiles amongst the cigars in our humidor, some of those flavors will overlap with the flavors you find in other world-class non-Cuban cigars, however many smokers seem to return to Cuban cigars for something unique they bring to the smoking experience.The tastes result from part soil, part blend, part quality of leaf, part tradition.

Cuban cigars taste more complex than their Caribbean counterparts. There exists more variety and taste and flavor in Cuban cigars than can be found anywhere else in the world.

Enjoy your smokes,

Cheers
Drew P

Thank you Drew, Im looking forward to the ones i'll be smoking.

 

[ManInBlack]

Search....Evil Dr Moki's Blind Taste Test!

Those threads are great reads. Thanks for pointing them out Gary.

 

[Kid Montana]

Search....Evil Dr Moki's Blind Taste Test!

Those threads are great reads. Thanks for pointing them out Gary.

+1 I also read every page of both of them. Fantastic experiments though I got into an argument with a buddy who said they were worthless from a scientific standpoint because the sample size was too small and the methodology inherently flawed. At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste and reviews don't really matter.

 

[BlindedByScience]

+1 I also read every page of both of them. Fantastic experiments though I got into an argument with a buddy who said they were worthless from a scientific standpoint because the sample size was too small and the methodology inherently flawed. At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste and reviews don't really matter.

OK, now I'm curious.

Small sample size, agreed. Flawed methodology? What is flawed about the particular methodology?

 

[Kid Montana]

+1 I also read every page of both of them. Fantastic experiments though I got into an argument with a buddy who said they were worthless from a scientific standpoint because the sample size was too small and the methodology inherently flawed. At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste and reviews don't really matter.

OK, now I'm curious.

Small sample size, agreed. Flawed methodology? What is flawed about the particular methodology?

Well, by virtue of the fact that the audience knew the average price of each cigar since they had to pay to participate, by virtue of the fact that the participants were expected to give a score and a price when its been well and firmly established that the two have a very low correlation in reality but a very high correlation psychologically, by virtue of the fact that for any one flight of cigars, a sample size of 10 is not enough to establish statistical significance... he had a bunch of reasons. I just really enjoyed reading the whole thread myself.

 

[grateful1]

Search....Evil Dr Moki's Blind Taste Test!

Those threads are great reads. Thanks for pointing them out Gary.

+1 I also read every page of both of them. Fantastic experiments though I got into an argument with a buddy who said they were worthless from a scientific standpoint because the sample size was too small and the methodology inherently flawed. At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste and reviews don't really matter.

Ummm, that was the point of the test!


:laugh:

 

[Kid Montana]

+1 I also read every page of both of them. Fantastic experiments though I got into an argument with a buddy who said they were worthless from a scientific standpoint because the sample size was too small and the methodology inherently flawed. At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste and reviews don't really matter.

Ummm, that was the point of the test!


:laugh:
[/quote]

Thats what I said but he'd gotten hung upon the concept that it was supposed to be a somewhat scientific blind test when really, all it was supposed to do is show that your tastes are your tastes and you shouldn't let reviews or consensus dictate what you enjoy. I first started off buying ~only~ cigars that Cigar Aficionado had given a score of 89 or better. After muscling through a lot of cigars that I didn't necessarily enjoy I realized I should just figure out what I like and buy those. So now I smoke Gurkhas. :laugh:

 

[insight]

+1 I also read every page of both of them. Fantastic experiments though I got into an argument with a buddy who said they were worthless from a scientific standpoint because the sample size was too small and the methodology inherently flawed. At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste and reviews don't really matter.

OK, now I'm curious.

Small sample size, agreed. Flawed methodology? What is flawed about the particular methodology?

Well, by virtue of the fact that the audience knew the average price of each cigar since they had to pay to participate, by virtue of the fact that the participants were expected to give a score and a price when its been well and firmly established that the two have a very low correlation in reality but a very high correlation psychologically, by virtue of the fact that for any one flight of cigars, a sample size of 10 is not enough to establish statistical significance... he had a bunch of reasons. I just really enjoyed reading the whole thread myself.

For point 1 I would say that is a matter of surface perception, having been a participant in both of these. Andrew is a total whackjob and put in cigars that blew the average price theory out of the water (in both directions). Look for example at the 80s HU naturales or the VSG round, for example (or on the other side the padron 6k or whatever it was). The money was certainly meant to offset the cost but I don't think it set the bar for determining value. As to the second point, just do a search on the "Good Dr. Insight" blah blah blah whatever test. I think there is something to be said for "If I like it, it must be expensive!". As to the third point I tend to agree with your friend, the sample size isn't suitable to 'prove' anything but there are trends apparent in the two tests.

 

[grateful1]

For point 1 I would say that is a matter of surface perception, having been a participant in both of these. Andrew is a total whackjob and put in cigars that blew the average price theory out of the water (in both directions). Look for example at the 80s HU naturales or the VSG round, for example (or on the other side the padron 6k or whatever it was). The money was certainly meant to offset the cost but I don't think it set the bar for determining value. As to the second point, just do a search on the "Good Dr. Insight" blah blah blah whatever test. I think there is something to be said for "If I like it, it must be expensive!". As to the third point I tend to agree with your friend, the sample size isn't suitable to 'prove' anything but there are trends apparent in the two tests.

So, you're saying size DOES matter?


I feel so dirty now!

 

[vortex]

There are some generalizations that can be offered. But I don't see the point. Each cigar has it's own taste and each smoker his/her own perception. Now comparing, say, DPG Blue robusto to Cohiba robusto you would get some specific responses, at least.