lol Rah.

I could care less about you sending fake cigars because I don't think you know any better....and that is not a diss on you. Some people just can't tell or don't know what the base "real" cigar actually "should" look like. We agree that you smoke it, if it's good...cool, if it sucks....toss it. I give you props for the package regardless of the Cohiba.

What does piss me off is that you didnt apologize for questioning people's faith a week ago, and for continuing to post after many civil longtime posters told you to slow the F down with bidding and posting, and you went ape on both and called people out on it. Do you really think we care what cigars you bid on and won/lost, are smoking at the moment, or are sending to people if you are a complete azzhat about your delivery? There is not a guidebook on, or proper way to be accepted or atleast tolerated on one of the oldest cigar boards on the net...but one tip is to take everything slower than you currently are. If you read this as me acting elitist and not helping you....you are a troll and should have recieved banhammer long ago.

I hope to see you talking about aged t52 piggies, how you love the Tatuaje Tatoo, and MB2's construction type stuff in 6 months...not Mark Twain BS! It is progression, even if you end up continuing to like Maxim de Paris. Atleast you will know what you like and we can't and won't bag on you for it. Please never break out the "Padilla Miami in yo face" stuff again. It is a great cigar, but is a driving, mowing, warm-up cigar to many here. I love the Miami but think you need to try 50 or so middle-top shelf stuff before you can trade words with DMV and others.

this will be the last I say to or about rah until i see less BS

DOCUMENTATION BUDDY!!! It can answer every question. If you have it, the question is answered. 🤔 If you don't, no one take you serious. 🤥

Documented fact: When you are given blood in a Hospital for whatever reason, you are tested-screened-probed-verified-examined, take your pick, for every disease under the sun. I was, and my blood is 'PURE', 'CLEAN', 'ABSENT','WHOLESOME', well I wouldn't go that far, of any and all the disgusting stuff we spread around to each other. Saying 'kiss off, or 'take a hike' would have been better suited to represent the meaning of my response.

Golly gee. I wouldn't want ya to actually sink your false teeth into me now pops.

Does look interesting and suspect. The lettering style is wrong, with round dots instead of square???
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/counterfeit/view/id/15403 

*pssst* enlarge the photo and you can see part of where it says "Republica Dominica" on the band. Then go read post #5 - it's not a counterfeit.

No, I don't resent your posting at all. You did not make any spurious allegations about me and I don't think your purpose behind it is to discredit or mock me in any real way.

Weather you like it or not, you and I have a very similar view on thought process, especially when it comes to the matter of anyone caring about anything anyone else writes in a forum such as this. Not caring about what is posted here is a fact we all conveniently ignore otherwise the rate of posting would be significantly reduced. Caring to the point of acknowledgment is 'normal'. It is done without much thought in order to maintain a continuous and most times courteous exchange of personal experience on all matters pertaining to cigars.

However, their are times when that exchange goes well beyond simple acknowledgement and agreeable or disagreeable opinions. And as I stated in a prior posting, members that have been posting here the longest should exhibit the wisdom that their longevity should have established when posting on any subject or matter presented by other members.

The matter of making a statement about an individual, especially one that is made public, is as important to me as any, and should be to everyone. Writing posts with the single purpose of slandering and discrediting a member, or 'take the rug out from under them' is wrong. I don't CARE if that poster has made 1 or 100,000 posts. You would expect such a post would not come from a poster of 100,000 due to some degree of wisdom they should have retained by years being in the mix of subjects or topics presented here. But it is not. It is WRONG in every case to make statements with their sole purpose being to attack and tarnish that members.

If my bidding practices 'offend' any members it is something they will have to learn to live with. It comes down to a matter of tolerance, as you said, because it is personal even if posted publicly. No one should have to justify, or 'apologize' for a decision when no can show it caused any harm or hardship in any way to anyone. The reason behind my thread too display the bids I had made with reasonable max amounts is my own, and not up for judgement, and in need of no ones approval. If you, or any member posted bids they had made I would either act on the information or not, especially without knowing the actual reasons behind the thread. That exceeds the level of 'caring' ANYONE should display as it has nothing to do with cigars. And the last thing I would do is call another member a liar. If they declare after being asked if they simple over bid, and said no, the issue should be closed. Antagonistic Insinuations as to why someone has done something, with no actual knowledge as to their reasons why, coupled with mocking, slander, and ridicule is WRONG as well.

But it is the standard routine here. I did not over bid. If I had, I would have simply said I had, as I truly don't care. I did misread 4 closing dates which I posted without care of the badgering and bad mouthing I would receive from doing so. But if my reason for offering additional bids after that careless error is not material suited for a cigar forum that is also my business and I do should not have to offer it up to justify the thread I started. And responding to members who have repeatedly labeled me a liar and a moocher or leech at the expense of other forum members with no proof is something any member would do. Do I honestly care? Of course not. Which makes their accusation look even more ridiculous.

And if you label Padilla Miami as being a stick lacking enough quality to be compared to a fake Cohiba or other cigars, that's your business. Using it in a harmless joke to my friend is my business. I think it is an excellent tasting cigar along with the other 95 brands and lines I have tried that are classified $6 cigars. And the chances of me writing rave comment about Ligas T52, or rare Oliva Master Blends II and most Tatuaje cigars are slim to none because I am on Social Security Disability that limits me to smoking Cigar Bid discount sticks, which I am more them happy with. I'll survive just fine without the $10+ sticks, that according to you are the only sticks worth talking about, which is your opinion, but won't stop me from offering details about a DIESEL or AMBOS MUNDOS I scored for $4 that I think is great. Doesn't make you a cigar snob. I guarantee if I were still working I would be sampling them and looking for as many more like them as I could find.

rah, if you quit bidding on cheaper sticks for a month, you could use that money to buy some higher priced sticks. Not as many, but you could see if it would be worth it to smoke less to have better quality.

I'm going with you on this one TG.

I did smoke the Cohiba, and wasn't entirely impressed.

I was just as unimpressed with this one as I am most Cohiba's.

I believe it was old and real, just a typical Cohiba, not a bad smoke and not a great smoke.

I heard someone talking about the Padilla Miami, I love that stick. And if you hunt around you can def. get a deal on them. They get better with some months on'em too... Just my 2cents...


BTW fellas with the long post's....sorry but too many words and I don't even try to read it.....sorry.....

*psst* - Yeah... did that and compared. Lettering styles on both still seem “suspect” at least according to CA. Cohiba is not gold embossed and does not have a gold embossed border surrounding. Can't tell if there is a gold embossed border between the top and bottom. "Republica Dominica" is in a sans-serif font (like Helvetica) and not a script. Dots are round and not square.

Looks more like this example of a counterfeit:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/msc_cao/counterfeit/ctr_4cc83bdae07a6.jpg 
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/counterfeit/view/id/15405 
“This obvious fake is intended to look like a genuine Cuban Cohiba band, but with claims of a Dominican origin. Aside from this glaring mistake, the four rows of white dots on the black background are spaced too far apart and should be squares, not dots. This band actually mimics the look of pre-1994 Cuban Cohibas, albeit with the blocked words "Republica Dominicana" on the bottom. The counterfeiters were probably trying to sell this cigar as a legitimate Dominican Cohiba.”


Than it does of this sample:
http://www.chiocca.com/cohibalabel.jpg 


But hey what do I know... you're the expert. It’s still a nice hit, and I'd still smoke it. 😇

Ok, I think I see what the problem is cac... First off, I was being humorous the *psst*, second, it seems that you might not be familiar with what I meant by "other manufacturer" in post #5, and CA isn't representing all of the possible legitimate manufacturers nor the chronology of when bands changed, which isn't really any surprise.

There are (or were, as the case may be) at least three DR Cohibas - General, who makes the red dot and holds the trademark in the US,. and Monticristi, who holds the DR trademark. The Montecristis aren't supposed to be sold off of the island, but they do pop up in cigar shops in the US from time to time, most likely a personal purchase that is being resold in the shop. Selling the General cigar red dots in the DR is somewhere between tricky and not legal, due to zona franca laws, and the fact that General doesn't own the rights to the Cohiba name in the DR. The CA website talks about someone pawning off a counterfeit as a General made Cohiba. The third one which was sold in the US, had a yellow band not unlike the Cuban band, but those were yanked off the shelves and destroyed 4 or 5 years ago when General won their trademark infringement lawsuit against the company making them. There might have also been a 4th, minor, manufacturer - don't really remember.

Regarding the bands, the Cuban Cohibas didn't go to gold foiled bands until 2003. Montecristi didn't follow suite until a few years later, the bands you posted on your website look like what I've seen of the newer stock although Monticristi seems to have a habit of changing their bands over the years and being very sloppy about it- some of their newer bands are two rows above the foil, some are three. Can't remember if the 3rd company ever went gold foil or not.

Based on the earlier posts, it sounds like this cigar was lying around the shop for awhile, and from what I can see through the cello, the spacing on the band including the block font looks like what I remember seeing touted as the older ones from the other manufacturer, and not quite like the CA counterfeit band with the wider spacing on the dots. I also seem to recall (not 100% positive though) one of them having block letters at one time, but I don't remember which one.

As for counterfeiting one of these two non-Generali Cigar Cohibas, I guess it could be, but in this country, the price point of the legit Monticristis and lawsuit cigars is (was for the lawsuit cigar) so low that shops wouldn't need to buy counterfeits - the logical thing to do would be to buy these "legit" cigars for a few bucks and sticker them to rival GC prices.

While it is possible that it is a counterfeit tossed in the bin, to me it seems unlikely based on the age and location, and is rather probably either an old Montecristi or one of the old lawsuit yellow bands that escaped destruction.

Hmmm....A solid argument.....

I can vouch that the band on the stick I received did look very much like the fake from the above post

also it did NOT look like the real cohiba band also from the above post.

As for how it smoked, it had a nice tight burn-line with a light grey ash that held on for close to an inch.

Flavor profile was medium with a slight barnyard/earthy flavor but overall it was on the bland side. It was not a harsh cigar at all and produced plenty of smoke. Construction was good, and I had no issues.

That is worth a try. Though I am on a 2 a day limit for now. If I knew I was going to have to cut back I would have tried your suggestion this month. Your not the first person to tell me that either. If I am still on the pittance of a daily smoke total come May 20Th I will bid on quality more so then quantity. 🤔

^ TG - *psst* didn't/don't want to interfere with the other ramblings.

Buddy, you are just a wealth of cigar information. Thank you. it would have taken me hours using that Google thing to research all that history of the bands and different companies. Some interesting stuff.

No BS... Thanks.

PS - picked up the Churchill sample from the owner of a local pub/hotel. He had boxes of them and was letting them go at $5 a stick. Except for the script underneath, it did match exactly to a Siglo II in my humi so figured fake or not it was worth a try.

🍺