Rating and ring gauge?

[JoshD]

Piggybacking off of Prez's thread that can be seen here:

Back to back 95's?

I was reading through it, and wondered if any of you have noticed a correlation between a high score and ring gauge?  There will obviously be some bias toward larger rings since their production far outpaces their smaller brothers, but how do you think 33-42 stacks up against 46-up?  Have you noticed any distinct difference?  

[Corylax18]

The correlation between Ring Gauge and Rating is obviously 1:1. The bigger the cigar, the better it will be.

Also, the more you spend, the better it will be. Cost and Rating are another perfectly correlated pair. 

The third and final 1:1 cigar quality correlation is Instagram likes. The more you get on a certain cigar photo, the better it is. That's just fact. 

 

Seriously though, I would recommend ignoring "ratings" and "rankings" entirely. Someone else liking a cigar has little or no bearing on if you will like it or not. Someone else's 95 might be an 85 or 65 for you. Conversely, their 65 might be your 95. If you spend all your time chasing other peoples preferences, you're never going to find what YOU like. 

Add the inconsistencies from box to box and from cigar to cigar within a box and you're setting yourself up for disappointment. With the current cost of Cubans I completely understand the desire to find a short cut, but that short cut doesn't exist. I recommend buying and trying as many different cigars as you can and building your own opinions/preferences from there. 

Eventually, after you have tried enough different cigars, you may start to find that certain reviewers tastes often align (or complete disagree) with your own. At that point, it makes sense to reference those reviews, but never to live by them. Again, the inherent inconsistencies in Cuban cigars make sweeping generalities impossible. 

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, JoshD said:

Piggybacking off of Prez's thread that can be seen here:

Back to back 95's?

I was reading through it, and wondered if any of you have noticed a correlation between a high score and ring gauge?  There will obviously be some bias toward larger rings since their production far outpaces their smaller brothers, but how do you think 33-42 stacks up against 46-up?  Have you noticed any distinct difference?  

No correlation whatsoever.

There are more 46+ gauge high scoring cigars simply because there are more 46+ gauge cigars. 

Substitute my scoring with a word like "stunning". Back to back "stunning". Use whatever words or rankings you are happy to use.  Back to back 95+ cigars is the golf equivalent of golf hole in one. 

[Fuzz]

2 hours ago, El Presidente said:

... the golf equivalent of golf hole in one. 

A golf equivalent of a golf hole in one? .... Have you been on the sauce this morning?

[El Presidente]

17 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

A golf equivalent of a golf hole in one? .... Have you been on the sauce this morning?

.....yes....

[dominattorney]

29 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

.....yes....

And for that, sir, we thank you 

[PigFish]

I think there is correlation. I don’t expect anyone to agree, as the process of of discovery is anecdotal and subjective.

I believe that there were many 42 ring cigars historically because they are optimized for most smokers.

 I have written about this a lot here and don’t really care to do it again today, but many of us have discussed this to some great length over the past 20 something years here

Best on your journey! The Pig

 

[BossHogg]

4 hours ago, PigFish said:

I think there is correlation. I don’t expect anyone to agree, as the process of of discovery is anecdotal and subjective.

I believe that there were many 42 ring cigars historically because they are optimized for most smokers.

 I have written about this a lot here and don’t really care to do it again today, but many of us have discussed this to some great length over the past 20 something years here

Best on your journey! The Pig

 

I agree with you. I can relate to choosing higher ring gauge cigars simply because I didn't want the resemblance of smoking cigarettes.

[TobaccoRoad]

I know that I'm in the minority but I prefer 46 RG and smaller. If I had to pick one vitola for the rest of my life it would be the Marevas/Petit Corona. There are most certainly great cigars in all size ranges but I typically get better flavors from the smaller ring gauges. I sometimes feel like I'm working too hard at a big RG cigar to truly enjoy it.

[BoliDan]

On 4/8/2023 at 8:04 AM, PigFish said:

I think there is correlation. I don’t expect anyone to agree, as the process of of discovery is anecdotal and subjective.

I believe that there were many 42 ring cigars historically because they are optimized for most smokers.

 I have written about this a lot here and don’t really care to do it again today, but many of us have discussed this to some great length over the past 20 something years here

Best on your journey! The Pig

 

The reason for this is maximum ligero seco ratio..you get the full flavor. Anything 48+ has volado. The bigger it gets the more volado. Volado has no flavor. 

 

Imagine a straw. The bigger the straw the more air you suck on versus the main content.  and eliminates more and more flavor.

 

However, as someone who has grown more in favor of light flavors l, sometimes I respect a robusto.

 

So I agree with Ray, and disagree, it depends on the smoker. Mostly I agree because mareva, Lonsdale, lancero is my preference 

[Ford2112]

My favorite cigars tend to be under 48 RG. 46 to 38 is my jam. Lonsdale and Lancero cigars. A Churchill can be the best of them all!