America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 21 years ago by BBJ. 14 replies replies.
90+ Rated Sampler not actually 90+ rated
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
scottypop Offline
#1 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 10:12 AM EST
Joined: 01-25-2003
Posts: 48
First off let me say that I am not trying to bash Cigarbid. I love the people here in the forum and I bid on lots almost every week since I joined and have been very happy. I just happened to notice that one cigar listed was definately not rated a 90 and since I recently purchased this sampler but haven't received it in the mail yet I thought I would check into this to see if any of the other cigars were not actually 90+ rated. Don't get me wrong these are all fine cigars but I thought this should be addressed.

Cigarbid's 90+ Sampler claims that each cigar in this sampler has been rated 90 or higher by Cigar Aficianado magazine.
I checked www.cigaraficianado.com online ratings and found that not the be the case.
4 out of 10 rated between 84-86.
1 cigar, the Puros Indios No. 4, is listed as being the size of the Toro which is rated at 87. Can someone verify which cigar actually ships with the sampler?

Macanudo Duke of Windsor (6"x50) - Rated 86 May/June 2000
Leon Jimenes No. 1 (7.5"x50) - Rated 85 Nov/Dec 1999
Romeo y Julieta Cedro Deluxe No. 2 (5.5"x44) - Rated 85 March/April 2000 * see note
Don Juan Churchill (7"x49) - Rated 90 Autumn 1995
Mayorga Robusto (4.75"x50) - Rated 90 Jan/Feb 2000
Puros Indios No. 4 Especial (6"x50) - Rated 91 ** see note
5 Vegas Torpedo (6"x54) - Rated 90 March/April 1998
La Gloria Cubana Wavell (5"x50) - Rated 90 Winter 1993
Perdomo 2 Rhombus (5"x50) - Rated 91 July/Aug 2001 *** see note
CAO Brazilia Go! (5"x56) - Rated 84 July/Aug 2002

* note that the Cuban version of this cigar was rated a 90 but not the Dominican Rep. version sold in the sampler
** The No. 4 is rated 91 but it's size is not 6"x50 - it is 5.5"x45. That size listed for the sampler is the Toro which was rated at 87 in Jan/Feb 2001. Can anyone verify the size that actually comes in the sampler?
*** note that a Perdomo2 Rhombus is 5.5"x54. Perdomo2 does not make a cigar 5"x50 - probably just a typo
efm Offline
#2 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 10:33 AM EST
Joined: 01-23-2001
Posts: 499
I think your point is well known and I don't think anybody really cares much. Cigar Aficianado ratings don't mean a thing unless you happen to agree with them. If you choose to buy the sampler pack you'll decide which cigars you like and that's the only rating that matters.
Robby Offline
#3 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 10:44 AM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
I'm not sure on this, so don't quote me. But the ratings change from issue to issue. So it's "possible" that at some time, the cigar was rated at a 90+. The point made previously is that it doen't much matter. Some of the smokes they rate very highly, don't. Others which should be off the chart, aren't considered.
scottypop Offline
#4 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 11:08 AM EST
Joined: 01-25-2003
Posts: 48
I'm not trying to create drama but I do believe that if they point out that cigars are rated 90+ by a specific source and that is not the case then they are in a way falsely advertising a product. I think they have a responsibility to their customers to provide them with accurate descriptions.

I wrote them and I am sure they will respond to my email and hopefully address any changes that need to be made to the description.

However, I do agree with your points. The CAO Brazilia Gol in my opinion is better than all of the others included in this sampler that I have smoked and it is rated one of the lowest by CA.
cwilhelmi Offline
#5 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 11:09 AM EST
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
I think they're saying the brand has had a cigar rated 90+, not the actual cigar in the sampler. I don't like it either but...

Also, they're using cigarinsider ratings which you have to pay to see through the CA site...

The fact of the matter is those ratings are worthless and smack of being influenced by advertising spend by the manufaturers...

As SteveS says, smoke a bunch of cigars, determine what you like and keep smoking those...
scottypop Offline
#6 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 11:18 AM EST
Joined: 01-25-2003
Posts: 48
As far as the brand being rated and not the individual cigar this is what cbid says "10 of the most highly rated cigars on the market. Each of these excellent cigars has been ranked 90 or above by Cigar Aficionado magazine."
Slimboli Offline
#7 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 2:41 PM EST
Joined: 07-09-2000
Posts: 16,139
They also state:

"From time to time, substitutions may occur due to inventory conditions."

Who knows?

This may be the case with the ones that are listed below the 90 rating ... they just may have needed to substitute some they were out of in their regular lineup.

If you knew what a huge job it is to keep everthing current on this site, you would be amazed. They do a pretty good job of keeping it current, but mistakes will happen. I don't think that they are intentionally trying to mislead their customers with 'false advertising' ...

... me thinks you have way too much time on your hands! ;^)
eleltea Offline
#8 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 2:46 PM EST
Joined: 03-03-2002
Posts: 4,562
Scottypop made an interesting observation, and I agree with him re the Gol!s. The only numbers that mean a damn thing are the ones you assign to your rotation. If CA rated a cigar I didn't like a 99, I still wouldn't smoke it.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#9 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 4:34 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
scottypop

valid point, not withstanding posts to the contrary.
jdrabinski Offline
#10 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 6:56 PM EST
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Glad you posted this, scottypop. I agree, and was more than a little irked when I ordered one awhile back. I didn't do research ahead of time.

Even among the cigars rated '90,' few are from the past year or two. Almost all were rated 90 in the late 1990s. The Wavell, for example, gets much lower marks from 01 or 02.

A '90' Sampler is supposed to be just that...a 90+ sampler. They should rename it. It is misleading. Tough to argue with that.

Still, I love Cbid. Just this one thing puzzles me as well.

John
jgjam Offline
#11 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 7:05 PM EST
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 909
Your mileage may vary....

They maybe a little loose with the rating... but it's someone eles's rating... the important one as pointed out earlier is what your personal rating would be...

If your really want to read some really overblown hype for cigars pick up a copy of a well-known, and not to be mentioned here, competitors catalog. Of course they need to make those cigars sound really good to get the prices they want for them... Damn, I'm sure glad C-bid is around.

John
cwilhelmi Offline
#12 Posted: Sun, Feb 23 2003, 7:26 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
I bet it starts with a T, and in belongs in the T, toilet that is...
couldITbe Offline
#13 Posted: Mon, Feb 24 2003, 1:59 AM EST
Joined: 06-06-2002
Posts: 201
Many sizes have been rated more than once in the last few years. I'm not sure if the CA website is up to date or if they replace old ratings as they rate the same size again. However, a more comprehensive source is the 10th anniversary issue of the magazine (Dec '02) which lists all past ratings on p. 178. Here you can see:

1) Macanudo Duke of Windsor - Mar/Apr '98
2) Leon Jimenes No. 1 - Sep/Oct '97
3) La Gloria Cubana Wavell Maduro - Winter '93/'94; Autumn '92
4) Puros Indios #4 - Spring '96
5) 5 Vegas Torpedo - Mar/Apr '98
6) Perdomo 2 Rhombus - Jul/Aug '01
7) Romeo y Julieta Cedro Dlx #2 (currently subbed in for Montesino Diplomatico)
8) CAO Brazilia Gol - May/June '02 (currently subbed in for Brazilia Samba size)
9) Don Juan Churchill - Autumn '95
10) Mayorga Robusto - Jan/Feb '00

Sometimes substitutions happen as in the case of the Romeo y Julieta. We're not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. We all use the internet so no one gets away with that very long. Now if we could all commence the overbidding on this sampler so I can meet payroll this week???
eleltea Offline
#14 Posted: Mon, Feb 24 2003, 2:15 AM EST
Joined: 03-03-2002
Posts: 4,562
Thanks for starting my morning out with a laugh, Keith!
BBJ Offline
#15 Posted: Mon, Feb 24 2003, 3:41 AM EST
Joined: 11-21-1999
Posts: 286
OHH!OHH Keith Let Me Be First!!!!!$47.00
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top