This stick, about 4 1/2? long and 60 or so around in the widest section, proved to be a novelty item. I didn’t know what to expect from it, simply because it was obviously a novelty cigar. On one had it might just be produced for fun and appearances, on the other – it is just a regular cigar with an odd shape and strips of darker leaf here and there. Unfortunately the construction proved to be very poor, with a weird burn at times, and offering little or no smoke until you got well over 1? in to it. Flavors were very, very mild to mild, with just extremely bitter grass tastes and a bitter lingering finish. At the 1/2 way point the whole stick turned to soggy mush and got hot at which point I punted it. This $30 stick is good for appearances only.
http://cigarobsession.com/2009/09/24/the-football-cigar-review/
kaelaria
Everyone, Registered Users Posts: 572
Comments
Hey JZ
I totally agree with what you say; but this is what this was all about. He is swining the sword of critique and forgets it may turn into a boomerang if not used wisely. I think he was overdoing some of it and forgets diplomacy. Furthermore he could have simply ad that there might have been a problem with the shipping of the cigar. We would have never known that if i wouldnt comment in that way. Which is to sad for the producer, i would not send another cigar for review under these circumstances. What info he got from the producer i dont know.
And if the shoe fits he may wear it. All he said about taste shall be correct. But the way he frases it he knows what its means and it is received like that: "Flag on the play, personal foul; tasted like s h * *. 15 yard penalty repeat first down ". Did you smoke one to be in the position to write about its taste ??? So repeat first down! ;-) Anyhow - Technically i agreed with him on several points . So the question remains: what is actually the insult to the review ? When what you write is no insult ...
cheers