How much stock do you really put into the CA reviews and top 25?

[BHalbrooks]

Originally Posted by kelmac07

I take absolutely ZERO stock in any of Cigar Aficionados reviews. When your scale is from 96 (best I've seen) to an 86 (worst I've seen)...doesn't leave much room for in between. If I smoked a cigar and thought it was an 86 (based on a scale of 100), I'd say it was a pretty damn good stick. Now if it was a 96, I'd say it was fantastic. If it sucks...why not give it a score of 6? ------Rant off------

While I faithfully read it each month...still waiting for the day when I purchase my first $ 5,000 pen, $ 35,000 watch and a Lamborghini.

I think you get all that at your 10 year subscription mark, Mac.

Iirc, they smoke an inch or two, and then write a review based on that, and pitch the Cigar

[FUEL]

Originally Posted by BHalbrooks

I think you get all that at your 10 year subscription mark, Mac.

Iirc, they smoke an inch or two, and then write a review based on that, and pitch the Cigar

Brian skim through the link I posted and read Gordon's comments in the comment section on that. That was the straw that broke the camels back for me but do agree with a statement he made and Im paraphrasing "like most things if you start out a cigar and get a little into it and hate it you aren't going to wait an hour to see if it transitions into something you might like."