Mild vs strong cigars. Which one age better ?

[Cigarsmoker81]

I was listening to lounge lizard podcast. They were interviewing the manager of Cohiba. He mentioned that mild cigars age better because they retain much of their flavors while strong cigars lose complexity. I always thought strong cigars age better and I googled it cigar aficionado website says strong cigars age better.

What do you guys think ? I was planning on aging Bolivar (BBF and Libertador) and plenty of Partagas but if they don’t age well then I would rather smoke them now. 

[Li Bai]

I'm not sure everybody feels the same about that, you'll probably have to check out for yourself 😉

[BrightonCorgi]

Lots of variables in your question. How are you defining mild and strong?  Nicotine, body, aroma, density of smoke, etc...

How are you defining aged?

Personally, I like the same cigar at different parts of its life. All the cigars you mentioned are fine for 20 years of aging. I would not worry or skew your plans.

I have experience plenty of non Cuban cigars that have aged into nothing. Like smoking rice paper. Never seen it with Habanos (with few rare exceptions).

[NSXCIGAR]

I see where CA says this. I've never heard this before. 

 As a general rule, strong cigars age better because they retain flavor longer than mild cigars. At the same time, they mellow and become smoother, a process often referred to as "rounding." Another rule of thumb is that thick cigars, which tend to be more complex because they are rolled with more leaves, age better than thin cigars such as coronas and lonsdales.

I've never heard anything like this before. First, most cigars pre-2002 were under 46 RG. What are they comparing to? And brands like RG, ERDM and QdO that are considered more "mild" are renowned for their aging potential. 

Sounds like a bunch of nonsense to me. 

[MagicalBikeRide]

I’ve a process and it’s generally been kind to me. 

-1-

Buy a box, bundle, pack, whatever.

-2-

Put them in storage for 3-6 months. 

-3-

Try one. 

-4-

If good, try more - effectively get ‘em while they’re smoking how I like. If really good and I feel they have legs, I’ll try a second box and put it away (pre-2022 anyway). 

-5-

If not good / tastes hot or generally too young - I re-visit in 8-12 months. And repeat this. 

 

And two side thoughts - 

-a-

I’ve had many a box and age has been unable to save it. They were just crap regardless.

-b-

The oldest box I have some sticks in is a dress box of Monte 1’s from 2011. Lots of people would tell me these are past their prime, but they retain everything I love about the marca. Just softer and a little more refined / complex that their younger counterparts. 

[MagicalBikeRide]

15 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Sounds like a bunch of nonsense to me. 

Yup, agree entirely. 

[Bijan]

Paul Garmirian in his book said the same about strong cigars or rather cigars with darker wrappers having better aging potential.

I think there was a certain archetype of Cuban cigar, dark with rough wrapper that was way too rough that people would just shove in the back of their humidor (Punch, Partagas, etc.). I don't think there's anything like that these days,

[El Presidente]

15 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I see where CA says this. I've never heard this before. 

 As a general rule, strong cigars age better because they retain flavor longer than mild cigars. At the same time, they mellow and become smoother, a process often referred to as "rounding." Another rule of thumb is that thick cigars, which tend to be more complex because they are rolled with more leaves, age better than thin cigars such as coronas and lonsdales.

I've never heard anything like this before. First, most cigars pre-2002 were under 46 RG. What are they comparing to? And brands like RG, ERDM and QdO that are considered more "mild" are renowned for their aging potential. 

Sounds like a bunch of nonsense to me. 

I am guessing that CA is coming from the NC perspective. 

Actually, John (Cigar Surgeon) and I were discussing this the other day when it comes to NC's and on the surface it appears to have some validity. 

In terms of Cuban Cigars, I don't see a parallel.  Hoyo De Monterrey Le Hoyo des Dieux is a case in point. 

[Fugu]

4 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

As a general rule, strong cigars age better because they retain flavor longer than mild cigars. At the same time, they mellow and become smoother, a process often referred to as "rounding." Another rule of thumb is that thick cigars, which tend to be more complex because they are rolled with more leaves, age better than thin cigars such as coronas and lonsdales.

...... Sounds like a bunch of nonsense to me.

Yup, complete bs - every single sentence of it. Must be coming from someone who’s never experienced matured CCs.

[Cigarsmoker81]

Thanks everyone. So is it fair to say that more mild Cuban brands age better ?

Hoyo/Qdo than say Bolivar and Partagas? I understand every palate is different but if there’s a “rule of thumb” it would be helpful to know. 

[Sudzdaddy]

Look forward to you getting back to us, we’re patient!  😉

[JohnS]

9 hours ago, Cigarsmoker81 said:

I understand every palate is different but if there’s a “rule of thumb” it would be helpful to know. 

In general, in our hobby, the 'rule of thumb' is if the box is poor to begin with, they are unlikely to develop into cigars 'par excellence' in the long-term. It can happen, but it's better not to expect it.

Mild Habanos cigars that start off brilliantly can become even better in their long-term aging. This has been well-known for some time. I'm only repeating what has been said here already.

Strong Habanos cigars are redeemable, but in general, Habanos cigars haven't been that strong, so-to-speak in their youth for some time. Do any of us remember what 'Old school Partagas' and 'Bolivar true Earthiness' were like? Sometimes, a strong Habanos cigar comes good after considerable time down. The 2009 Asia-Pacifico Regional Edition Ramon Allones Celestiales Finos is one such example.

[Fugu]

18 hours ago, Cigarsmoker81 said:

Thanks everyone. So is it fair to say that more mild Cuban brands age better ?

Basically, indeed, this often tends to be so, in my experience. My take: There’s good cigars and there’s mediocre or even poor cigars to begin with (like John said). A milder cigar is less forgiving in that regard. If we are speaking of a strong cigar in the sense of a Ligero-accentuated cigar, then the Ligero tends to dominate the blend initially. Now, Ligero, and in particular leaf of lower quality, tends to lose (some/most of) its ‘in-the-face’ oomph with age. When you’ve then got a cigar lacking a spine of quality Seco in the blend, this cigar can shed much of the flavour you found so attractive in the beginning. There are also cigars made to please from the beginning. And Ligero can likewise even be used to conceal lower quality leaf in a blend of such an imposter cigar. Then again, a blend with good Ligero used skilfully and reasonably to give poise, strength and balance to a quality core of Seco and Volado leaf, can give a stronger cigar that may age to wonderful transitions over the course of its life (Punch SS1 or Partagás 898 springing to mind). In the end it all depends on the quality of the leaf, and not so much whether stronger or milder a cigar.

For that matter, the same holds for girth or the amount of different leaf used in a blend and “complexity”.... But, sure, a skinny provides less leeway for sloppiness.

[Capn_Jackson]

There are so many factors, right down to wrapper shade within the same line of cigar. In my experience it has never been as easy as “strong vs mild,” or even “NC vs CC” as to what ages well. I have had some Boli that lost a lot of flavor after only six or so years, but then I’ve had some Boli that were still incredibly flavorful after 8 or 9… which is more commonly the case with those. Comes down to so many different factors. With CC’s, as well, there are so many inconsistencies unfortunately in production, and some of those factors will make a noticeable difference. 
What has been said above, and I believe to be the best advice, is to sample a box along the way. After time and experience, you will gain a knack for estimating whether or not a cigar “has legs,” or will be able to rest/age for a long time. I have some various CC’s that are 5-6 years old, and I don’t think I want to rest any longer because I feel they’re about at their prime. I have others that are 9-10 years old that, I can tell, will be even better in another 3-5 years from now. There are “angles” or “blunt places” in the flavors that will tell you this, as you become more experienced at that part of the game.

Note: No two CC boxes are the same, even if they are “the same.” For example, I had two twin boxes of JL1’s from 2015, same box code, everything. One I (sadly) finished off last year because they were absolute perfection and I couldn’t stop smoking them. The other, I’m still holding onto. I think it will be better in a few more years. If I’m wrong? I’d rather err on the side of resting longer. But, importantly, I sample along the way so I can have an idea of where they’re at every 4-6 months or so.

[PigFish]

It is all speculative and mainly collector driven bullshit… How is that for an answer? Buy what you like to smoke. Age what you have not smoked yet.

Peer reviews have some validity if you know your peers and trust them. Professional opinions generally come with a motivation which includes their interests above your own.

The magic is in the hands of the maker in all but storage. The highest and best use of a cigar is smoking it. Until then, your only contribution is to buy it and store it correctly or incorrectly, and that in itself is yet another man’s (my) opinion.

Let’s look at this logically for just a moment. For the record I am not a believer in quantitative cigar taste decay but I will play along.

Let’s start with a jug of liquid. Let’s call the amount of liquid ‘taste’ and liquid lost to evaporation time. Is it better to start with a small amount of liquid and therefore a short time before it all evaporates or a larger amount of liquid in the first place?

Cheers! -Piggy

[joeypots]

Ya gotta figure it out for yourself. And what constitutes aged? Does it start at 2 years? 5? After the cigar is acclimated to its home? Do Cuban cigars need age now like they did 25 years ago? Not likely, tobacco strains have changes and the profiles of Cuban cigars are seemingly often in flux. Mention 5 years as the beginning of “aged” to some cigar smokers and they may look at you as if you have two heads. Who knows? Buy more than you smoke and in time you’ll have the cigars you need to make up your own mind.