Tobacco seed change...what’s the deal?

[Jimmy_jack]

I’ve heard it said, or read that the 90s and early 2000 Cuban grown tobacco was a different strain than today’s. 

Can anyone talk about that?

why?

when?

Is the old strain still grown anywhere on the island? 

Was/is there a true flavor profile that is different? I know there were construction and qc issues then. 

[boogalu]

Idk if my time line is right.. But it might have to do with them creating a strain that can withstand this blue mold that was growing back in the day.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Jimmy_jack]

Found another great post... never mind

 

http://www.friendsofhabanos.com/forum/topic/127844-cuban-seedleaf-changes-over-the-years/

[El Presidente]

18 minutes ago, boogalu said:

Idk if my time line is right.. But it might have to do with them creating a strain that can withstand this blue mold that was growing back in the day.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

• blue mould / black mould/black foot......is present all the time (not just years ago/in the day). 
• There are up to 5  tobacco strains being used at any given time 
• The rotational lifecycle of a tobacco strain (used for crops) is approximately 7 years. 

 

 

 

[Cigar Surgeon]

Blue mold rocked Cuba in 1979 took out something like 90% of that years harvest. They also had ongoing issues with black shank and broomrape, so they embarked on a process of hybridizing seeds to find something resistant to all of the above, while maintaining flavor standards.

They narrowed it down to 8, which were rigorously tasted and that was the Havana '92 and the Havana 2000. That led to Criollo '98 and '99 and I believe Criollo '10 and Corojo '12 which I believe are currently on the market.  

[Islandboy]

Having spent many years in the pineapple industry here, I can tell you it’s quite common in agriculture to be constantly researching and making tweaks to the recipe in order to address the constant barrage of agronomic issues that arise.

[THEMISCHMAN]

Great info. I’ve always been interested in the tobacco varietals/cultivation and blending side of cigars.

[Lotusguy]

Where is Monsanto when you need it?

[zeedubbya]

I remember the Cuban Cigars of the 90s differently than others. The thing I remember most was the strength and tannic nature of them. I recall getting D4s and Bolivar which were nearly unsmokeable because they were extremely strong and tannic. They had an overwhelming level of “bite” I would say. While age has clearly done a lot to them I would say they weren’t nearly as accessible fresh as Cuban cigars nowadays. Many of us would not have enjoyed Cuban cigars from the mid to late 90s with only a few years of age on them. If you enjoy a creaminess in cigars now you would have hated the “old” cigars. I think there’s been a shift of sorts. In those days Cuba made strong cigars and NCs were (mostly) milder creamier cigars. I believe today’s Padrón’s are closer in character to fresh Cuban cigars of the 90s than current Cuban cigars.

I also recall boxes from the 99-01 period being different. While a fair amount were poorly rolled and blended there were some winners. This was clearly the transition time of Cuba moving from strong tannic cigars to more creamy nutty cigars as others have mentioned. This wasn’t necessarily a bad thing to me. I didn’t enjoy some of the 90s cigars as much as others here have said.

This is not to say this is bad one way or the other. Just my experience. Age has done wonders to the 90s cigars. Age hasn’t been as kind to the 1999-2001 cigars.

It’s my opinion 2002-2008 produced some extremely great cigars. As well as 2013-2015. The cigars of 13-15 are so much better with a few years of age than the cigars of the 90s were. Will they age as well, who knows? I’m sure this is blasphemous to some, but it’s how I remember it. Would I trade my entire collection for cigars from the mid 90s—yes, NOW I would—since I know how they age. Would I trade the way they are now vs. the way they used to be? Most definitely not. I’m sure others remember it differently but this was my experience. Would like to hear others opinion.

Take this with the understanding that I was in my early 20s then and didn’t have near as much experience with cigars as now but I don’t think this changes the experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cigaraholic]

Piss on these new strains....it’s Havana Lite

We’ve gone from 80% great cigars and 20% blaha to 20% great cigars....you do the math...and then there’s the crap rolling 

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, cigaraholic said:

Piss on these new strains....it’s Havana Lite

We’ve gone from 80% great cigars and 20% blaha to 20% great cigars....you do the math...and then there’s the crap rolling 

Remind us when it was 80% great cigars? Not since 1996 from my timeline. 

[cigaraholic]

I’m an old man?...been at this since 1969...yes 96 was the last vintage of the old ❤️leaf....so 20+ years of 20/80?

[cfc1016]

5 hours ago, zeedubbya said:

Take this with the understanding that I was in my early 20s then and didn’t have near as much experience with cigars as now but I don’t think this changes the experience.

I was in my teens, and the only habanos I had access to were gifted to me by a good friend. I didn't usually get to work through whole boxes, getting to feel out that production run. Rather I just smoked what was shared with me.That said, my palate was FAR more sensitive/refined back then than it is now. I remember the tannic property, as you put it. I miss it. The bbfs I smoked from the 90s... yeah baby. That was pure intensity. The cigars weren't all great, but the good ones... man were they good.

2 hours ago, El Presidente said:

Remind us when it was 80% great cigars? Not since 1996 from my timeline. 

Yeah I don't remember that, lol. 1996 was my first habanos. I don't remember anything close to 80% of my smokes being great. 50-60% great? More likely. 75% good? Probably. 80% GREAT??? That's big.

The boxes of recent production (the past ~0-4 years let's say) that I've gone through since re-entering the hobby last year, have been a whole different world from what I knew coming into the hobby. Beetles and intolerably poor construction are just not nearly as big a nuisance for me anymore as they used to be. I haven't experienced anything young in what I would once have called 'sick period'.

I will happily remember my early years of smoking, and enjoy some aged sticks to remind me of different times (99 hdm dc and 2001 psd3s, namely...) but i REALLY LIKE the new generation of habanos. Sure it's not 100% perfection in every single way... but they're CUBAN. You don't buy a lamborghini for the reliability.

[zeedubbya]

I’m an old man...been at this since 1969...yes 96 was the last vintage of the old ️leaf....so 20+ years of 20/80

Since you have been doing this for a long time, maybe you (or others) could give some insights into the fresh cigars of the 70s , 80s and early 90s. I admit 96 and later is about as far back as my experience goes as well, and I definitely don’t recall 80/20 being even close to an accurate number. Maybe the late 80s, early 90s were a much better time (this time period is mentioned quite often as the best years for Cuban cigars). I think if I experienced a 2/10 rate I would likely give it up entirely.

Please take this the right way—in no way do I intend to discredit you, I would just like to know more about your experience. What were the cigars like? Did you have to age them a lot, or did you smoke them fresh, and what did you specifically enjoy the most that we don’t have now?

Maybe it’s possible we’re smoking a lot of crap compared to the pre 1996 period? A lot of the older experienced guys I smoke with do lament the “way they used to be”, so maybe my experience doesn’t go far enough back to make a valid assessment. I’m very interested to have someone elaborate on this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lotusguy]

Everything was better in the old days.


Except it wasn’t and we just romanticize it in our minds.

[cigaraholic]

As I said I’m old...63?.....but I started young.....not quite 16. The only thing I new about Cuban cigars was I wanted to try one and which end to light. I was hooked from day 1, the flavors were just amazing. I do remember my uncle looking at me sideways when he found out I was smoking a $2 cigar and showing me how many he got for $2.

The idea of aging cigars never occurred to me and I certainly didn’t have funds to do it anyway. I just bought as many as I could and smoked them. The older leaf consistently was much more intense, but that didn’t bother me. But I couldn’t smoke multiple cigars a day unless I stayed with light or medium bodied cigars.....1 Monte #2 and I was good! Montecristo had a dark chocolate profile, today it’s cocoa. The 2010 Monte EL reminds me of old regular production Montes. The flavor from just putting a cigar in my mouth and tasting the wrapper is something I do miss, so delicious you didn’t want to light it.

The cigars today aren’t crap...not at all...they’re just lighter bodied. 

[NSXCIGAR]

On 5/3/2018 at 5:06 AM, zeedubbya said:

I definitely don’t recall 80/20 being even close to an accurate number.

I recall many boxes I smoked in 97-99 being well over 80% solid. I smoked a lot of BRC, RyJ Ex 4 and Party Coronas from that time that would have 23/25 sticks be superb in both construction and flavor. 

And yes, Monte 2s, Party 898s, Boli CE, and Punch SS/RS would knock you on your rear end right until 99/00. PSD4 had calmed down in the late 90s a bit but there were still very strong--nothing like the creamy paprika woody blend they are today. 

On 5/2/2018 at 1:30 PM, Cigar Surgeon said:

broomrape

Anything with a name like that CANNOT be a good thing. 

 

On 5/2/2018 at 1:30 PM, Cigar Surgeon said:

Blue mold rocked Cuba in 1979 took out something like 90% of that years harvest.

I don't think the blue mold came back until the late 80s/early 90s. They also had an isolated outbreak in 1957. Amazing how long the original Criollo and Corojo lasted without issues. Cuba was able to coast on those strains for 60 years. Evidently it's climate change that precipitated much of the disease issues from the late 80s onward. 

 

On 5/3/2018 at 5:06 AM, zeedubbya said:

Maybe it’s possible we’re smoking a lot of crap compared to the pre 1996 period?

I'd say different, not necessarily crap. Yes, I preferred many of the flavors found in the 90s cigars over what we have today. I think the biggest casualty is the rich "earthiness" that was the hallmark of Partagas and Bolivar and the Cuban "twang" of that time always seemed to remind me of straight citric acid. I found a lot of that in Punch in those days. I only find a shadow of it still remaining in most CCs today. The upside is the "creaminess" found in many cigars today which simply didn't exist pre-2000. And yes, the tannic quality common then is all but gone today.

[cfc1016]

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

And yes, the tannic quality common then is all but gone today.

Do you still find it somewhere? I miss that old partagas/bolivar rustic intensity. A couple of the plpcs i've smoked from a  young cab have fleetingly reminded me of it, but only for a few puffs, before going back to something else.

By the by - the one thing i really do like about the newer stuff is how smokable - nay ENJOYABLE so many young cigars are these days, to my tastes. Especially with my palate not being what it used to be, I seem to be enjoying a lot of 1-2yo cigars more than 5-10yo stock, as they seem to have more relative intensity of flavor, yet are still quite approachable.

[BrightonCorgi]

On 5/2/2018 at 8:40 PM, zeedubbya said:

I remember the Cuban Cigars of the 90s differently than others. The thing I remember most was the strength and tannic nature of them. I recall getting D4s and Bolivar which were nearly unsmokeable because they were extremely strong and tannic. They had an overwhelming level of “bite” I would say. 

Very true.  

[NSXCIGAR]

12 hours ago, cfc1016 said:

Do you still find it somewhere?

The tannic or "green" quality, not really. I find very rarely it but it's isolated and not tied to any marca or cigar. Possibly an under-fermented leaf finds it's way into the roll.

The old earthiness is also effectively gone but believe it or not I think the Partagas Chicos is about as close as one can get. Occasional flashes with them.

[cfc1016]

27 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

The tannic or "green" quality, not really. I find very rarely it but it's isolated and not tied to any marca or cigar. Possibly an under-fermented leaf finds it's way into the roll.

The old earthiness is also effectively gone but believe it or not I think the Partagas Chicos is about as close as one can get. Occasional flashes with them.

Dude I love chicos. Definitely a staple. 

I suppose that ‘luck of the draw’ is one of the things i love most about habanos. There’s no telling what’s gonna end up on a torcedor’s table, right, @Ethernut ? ?

[El Presidente]

7 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

Very true.  

Agreed.

Cuban tobacco is far more flavourful and complex at an earlier time frame today. 

The concept that Cuban tobacco is "strong" didn't manifest itself in the past 2 decades.