I love being right, hate being wrong. Today I had a quick chat with a friend I've never met but have long respected. We were talking about some cigars I was considering, chief among them the Montecristo Edmundo. Just a terrible cigar when it first came out, it was not long before I realized a few years down in the dark produced a cigar that was FANTASTIC. So after he said he did not like the cigar, I told him that obviously he'd never had one with some good downtime on it. So tonight, I was thinking that I had never reviewed one here, and was rather looking forward to smoking one.
So off we went. I found one laying in a cedar box, cut it and lit it. I was greeted by the usual dusty cocoa I like in any cigar, but find mostly in the Montecristos. But it was light, as was the body on the smoke throughout. So I mostly began to reflect on how this is just a curse with the Montecristo. I hate to prolong the use of any cliche' but it just became necessary again. Montecristo's fat cigars are great when they are ON, but are FAR too variable in performance to ever expect to regain their place among the finest cigars in the world. SO close, and yet so far. Give me the thin ones, many of which I will review in months to come.
Now I can't say it's a bad cigar, I've had some outrageous Edmundos over time. But a good one is FULL of cocoa and light spice and cream. A little mild for what COULD be coming out of such a formidable cigar. This one is OK. A little heavy on the hay and light on the cream. From time to time there are HINTS of great taste. And I am hoping that the next one will be better. Aren't we always? A bit sweet here and there, but no real body to speak of. I am going to give this one a pass tonight and smoke another tomorrow, a fair review can't be made on this smoke, but the point can be well made that once again, there's a long way to go for Habanos. 2005 was maybe the last full year of hit and miss blends in cuban cigars, and things definitely began to improve rapidly. And there were some fantatsic smokes made in '05, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment