Robusto "C" Reviews/Discussions

[RevSmoke]

Here is where the reviews and discussion of the 3rd cigar sent to the panelists will take place. The birthing thread can be found here http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=60169&page=4

[Jason]

Aesthetics: 2.9
dark wrapper, scary dark, nicked where band was removed, prominent vein

Pre-light Construction: 3
hard to tell if the nick is going to be a problem but binder exposed after cut and chunk came off

Post-light Construction/How it smoked: 2.9
smokes well but trouble with the wrapper loosening up at band nick immediately that was compounded by cutting the head, exposed about a half inch square of binder at head. Unraveled wrapper completely by the last third

NOTES Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3:
flavor of black pepper but not the bite so much. Toasted bread
NOTES Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3:
more of same plus a few draws of toasted marshmallow
NOTES Flavor and strength – Last 1/3:
same
Flavor and Strength: 2.5
not much variance throughout

Aftertaste/Finish: 2.7
bland, papery

Aroma: 2.7
sour but a nice smell left on the hand

General Comments:
didn't hit the mark and had to toss it at the last third as the wrapper came off completely, binder was swelling, getting unweildy.

Overall score for the cigar. 55.6666666666667 (tally from above) 2.5 (my overall impression)

Recommendation: not

[DaBear]

Aesthetics: 4.5/5
This is a very nice looking stick, dark with a couple prominent veins. Makes me think its a broadleaf wrapper, though it is a bit thin for broadleaf. No oils to be spoken of.



Pre-light Construction: 5/5
Draw is just about right for me. A deep tobacco flavor on the prelight draw. Cuts perfectly.

Post-light Construction/How it smoked: 4.5/5
Burning much better than my D sample did, a bit wavy, but thats what I'll expect with a freshly lit stick. One burn correction total a third of the way in, and that was just me being anal about the burn line. Really the only negative is the cap is coming apart a bit, but no more than any other stick I clench a bit more because I like it.

First Third: 4.5/5



A nice deep earthiness greets me on the opening puffs, with the lightest sweetness building in afterwards. This is hitting my profile almost perfectly. A nice touch of spice is hiding in the background giving it a nice little bit of complexity. This is reminding me a lot of a Surrogates Bone Crusher. OK, I just checked and cheated a bit, its not, 1/8" too short, and a bit small RG wise. This has gotta be a DPG or Jaime though. The earth starts to lighten up and the spice begins to come to the forefront as the first third rounds out.

Second Third: 4.5/5



The spice continues to work its way to the forefront and is really making this a great smoke. Whatever this is, if the price is right, I'd say this is box worthy, and I'm not even halfway through! A bit more sweetness is working its way in as well, just before the halfway point. The spice is receding as I'm rounding out the second third.

Final Third: 4/5



A bit of a floral note is beginning to work its way in now in the final third. I'm still convinced this has to be a Jaime or DPG. I could see this maybe as an AJ blend, but it tastes too much like a Surrogate for me to think this is something other than Jaime or DPG. Its getting a bit harsh toward the nub, as the chocolate comes back to the front, but it isn't too bad, and not much will be taken for it.

Aftertaste/Finish: 5/5
The finish is nice and chocolatey, which is a-ok with me. A bit of spice is starts to mix on in, again, another welcome flavor. At about the halfway point the spice disappears, but I'm left with a chocolate bar in my mouth. This is really working with my palate.

Aroma: 4/5
Smells a lot better than the D sample, more earthy and deep.

General Comments:
Wow, this was just an awesome smoke that I'm burning my fingers nubbing. It may not be for everyone, but those who love a deep earthy flavor profile with a bit of spice and sweetness mixed it, this is a winner.



Overall score for the cigar: 4.5/5

Recommendation:
Definitely recommend. Assuming this isn't over a $10 stick, I'd definitely recommend this to anyone. This stick completely made up for the D sample yesterday.

[RevSmoke]

Sorry for the nicked wrapper. I hope the others are better.

Panelist, please go and read this post in the original thread.

http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showpo...0&postcount=96

[RevSmoke]

I wonder how these will smoke after a few days in the humidor, resting?

They were in a USPS vehicle from Tuesday 1/15 till they arrived at my place on Friday 1/18. I boxed them on Sunday, 1/20. I put them in my vehicle to mail on 1/21, and they stayed in the vehicle overnight till 1/22 in sub-zero conditions. They were then again in USPS vehicles till they arrived at your home on either 1/24 or 1/25.

These cigars have seen severe temperatures and drastic changes. Do they need some time to settle out? Would it make a difference in the taste?

I do not know, but I would like to think so.

[Jason]

Aesthetics: 2.9
nothing striking here, some ugly but I pay it no mind

Pre-light Construction: 3
seems evenly filled and firm enough to expect a trouble-free smoke

Post-light Construction/How it smoked: 2.9
draws well but runs down one side the whole length, touch ups see uneven burn return in short order

NOTES Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3:
papery
NOTES Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3:
same
NOTES Flavor and strength – Last 1/3:
same
Flavor and Strength: 2.4
deader than a doornail throughout, the less said the better

Aftertaste/Finish: 2.4
ash

Aroma: 2.7
sour

General Comments:
didn't hit the mark and had to toss it at the last third as the wrapper came off completely, binder was swelling, getting unweildy.

Overall score for the cigar
54.3333333333333 (tally from above) 2.4 (my overall impression)

Recommendation: not

[Jason]

Overall

Me and this cigar simply don't get along! I actually smoked the third and it didn't go much better than the review above. This cigar leaves me all but speechless

[Weelok]

Blind Cigar C Review
Review Format
0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality
2.1 - 2.9 = fair
3.0 - 3.5 = good
3.5 - 4.5 = excellent
4.6 - 5.0 = superior

1) Aesthetics

Comments: This cigar has a coarse, dry dark maduro colored wrapper that has small thin veins. There are a few crystals are evident upon the wrapper which is nice. The cap is of the triple variety at the head of the cigars.

Score for aesthetics: 3.5 (seems a bit dry to me)

2) Pre-light Construction:

Comments: Good construction as it is not too hard nor too soft to the touch. The cigar appears to be well rolled and has a wonderful rich tobacco aroma off of the foot.

Score for Pre-light construction:4.5

3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked:

Comments: The cigar had an excellent draw and only required one match to get it lit. The smoke is bountiful and cool. The ash is a light gray color.

Score for post-light construction: 4 (bit too easy of a draw)

4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3:

Comments: This cigar is a perfect example of a simple Connecticut Broadleaf maduro as it has a nice smooth sweet flavor. The cigar has no bite at all and is very smooth. The strength is a low medium and might even dip towards mild which surprised me as I thought it would be stronger based upon the pre-light smell.



4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3:

Comments: The second third is basically a repeat of the first third making this cigar fairly one dimensional. The strength did pick up to the center of medium but the flavor remains a consistent sweet broadleaf maduro.

4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3:

Comments: The last third the cigar picked up the pace a bit. The cigar added to the flavor profile some strength to kick It up a bit over medium body while adding a bit of wood and pepper to the sweet broadleaf flavor. Along with adding some character to the flavors came a floral taste at the end of the smoke which I found to be a bit odd. Perhaps it’s some grassy / hay character?

Score for flavor and strength: 3

5) Aftertaste/Finish:

Comments: The cigar had a short finish as this is not an oily cigar. The finish tastes of a light, sweet chocolate with a light tingle on the lips. The finish is pleasant and easy.

Score for aftertaste: 3

6) Aroma:

Comments: The aroma is of sweet grass and generally mild and easy.

Score for aroma: 3.5

7) General Comments:

Comments: This is a pleasant cigar that is fairly one dimensional but does add some character as the cigar hit the last third. The cigar is easy on the mouth and would not be a crowd dispersant. I found the cigar to be a basic good cigar but not one that rises to the level of excellent or superior.

Overall score for the cigar. 3.25

8) Recommendation: Recommended

Comments: This is a pleasant cigar and for me is best early in the day.

[DaBear]

Aesthetics: 4.5/5
A couple thick veins, but an otherwise nice looking chocolate brown wrapper again. Probably my favorite of the samples aesthetically.



Pre-light Construction: 5/5
Cap cuts cleanly. A dark earthy tobacco scent from the foot, similar but with a kick of spice on the cold draw.

Post-light Construction/How it smoked: /5
Burn starts out fine, so no complaints there. A nice bit of smoke just keeps coming off the foot. A nice very light grey ash, that has become a bit flaky about an inch in and the SOB just ashed on my keyboard as I typed this. Burn has been fine through out the stick, a couple fixes here and there, but thats just my OCD about burnlines showing.

First Third: 4.5/5



A nice earthiness to the initial light with a light bit of spice. The spice retreats afterwards leaving the dry earthiness. The spice works its way back in about a half inch or so in. The spice disappears again, but a nice sweetness comes in toward the inch mark. Nothing really new to report as the first third rounds out.

Second Third: 4/5



More of the same into the second third, this really is more one dimensional than I remember it being. And nowhere near as spicy. Not necessarily a bad thing, but different. I no longer think this is a Pepin, not sure whose it is any more. Maybe an AJ blend, or could even be a Jaime blend. The earthiness gets a bit more chocolatey to the end of this second third.

Final Third: 3/5



Again, more of the same, but a bit of the spice I've been waiting on starts to come back in. Getting kind of boring here to the end. Had such high expectations after the first stick and it isn't even close to living up to them.

Aftertaste/Finish: 3/5
Theres a touch of an almost licorice flavor to the finish throughout the first third. The finish more or less disappears into the final third, not really getting any aftertaste.

Aroma: 3/5
Nothing good nor bad on the aroma, granted I blame that on being in a shop with about 7 other guys smoking.

General Comments:
This wasn't a bad stick, but it was not what I experienced the first time through at all. The flavors hit my palate well, but I feel I would have enjoyed it a touch more if I could have just zoned out and watched the game with it rather than try to pick out the flavors.

Overall score for the cigar: 3.5/5

Recommendation:
Recommended, but how highly depends on the price.

[RevSmoke]

Originally Posted by DaBear

General Comments:
This wasn't a bad stick, but it was not what I experienced the first time through at all. The flavors hit my palate well, but I feel I would have enjoyed it a touch more if I could have just zoned out and watched the game with it rather than try to pick out the flavors.

I get that. While you need to focus to do a review, don't do the rifle thing, where all you see, hear, smell, and think about is the cigar. That makes reviewing a job. Enjoy the stick, make notes as they strike you. The first two areas you write up right away (Aesthetics and Pre-light Construction), so you don't need to even be smoking the cigar to do them.

As for the other stuff, just smoke it. The rest you reflect upon later and get your impressions. Did it even smoke in thirds? Or was it just one long smoke? Hey, it might have had 5 distinct changes, or maybe it was constantly in flux (my personal favorite).

Peace of the Lord be with you.

[DaBear]

Originally Posted by RevSmoke

I get that. While you need to focus to do a review, don't do the rifle thing, where all you see, hear, smell, and think about is the cigar. That makes reviewing a job. Enjoy the stick, make notes as they strike you. The first two areas you write up right away (Aesthetics and Pre-light Construction), so you don't need to even be smoking the cigar to do them.

As for the other stuff, just smoke it. The rest you reflect upon later and get your impressions. Did it even smoke in thirds? Or was it just one long smoke? Hey, it might have had 5 distinct changes, or maybe it was constantly in flux (my personal favorite).

Peace of the Lord be with you.

I get that, it was just a comment on how I felt about the smoke. Some sticks I feel are best for zoning out to while watching a game or reading a book or just shootin the chit with the guys, this was one of them. I'm enjoying the review process, I certainly don't think its a job. I've been putting that stick in my travel when I go up to work off an on for the past two weeks just waiting for the time to hit and not force myself into smoking it. Tonight was the night it finally felt right. Its actually been an experimental night tonight for me, aside from this stick I'm on my second stick thats completely new to me tonight.

[jjirons69]

Next I hit baggie "C". I'm keeping the last two until after the big reveal.

Disclaimer from cigar "A" and "B" review - I preface by saying I smoke CCs 90% of the time. Smoked tons of NCs for the past 6 or 7 years, but within the past year or more, CCs have the flavor profile I enjoy most, plus I am afforded more skinny to smaller RG smokes that fit my time allotments. A lot of NCs are heavier and spicier than I enjoy as relaxation smokes.

I'll post both reviews and will average my scores and give a final summary. Pictures include for each event.

Cigar C #1 - After supper, strawberry daiquiri as drink, 1 and 1/2 hours, watching "Next Friday". Punched cut.

Review Format
0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality
2.1 - 2.9 = fair
3.0 - 3.5 = good
3.5 - 4.5 = excellent
4.6 - 5.0 = superior

1) Aesthetics: the look of the cigar - oily, coarse, smooth, dry, light, dark, pretty, ugly, etc...
Minimal veins, dark, smooth, semi-oily, maduro-toned stick. Nice triple cap and well-crafted. I like it.

Score for aesthetics: 4.4

2) Pre-light Construction: Roll cigar between fingers - soft spots? loose? tight? dense? lightweight? Well rolled? how does it smell?
Nice tobacco, barnyard smell. Maybe a little cocoa.

Score for Pre-light construction: 4.3

3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Does it draw well, does smoke pull through on its own, do soft spots appear after lighting, burnes evenly? smokes hot or cool? What is ash like? color of ash? flaky or solid?
Punched well, good draw, tight and dense. Lit well.

Score for post-light construction: 4.5

4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3: What does it taste like? Full-bodied, med. or mild? Does it taste earthy, spicy, fruity, vegetal, sweet, rich, harsh, direct, floral, robust, woody, green (haylike), acidic, salty? Is it pleasant or unpleasant? Does it build in flavor and/or complexity as you smoke it? Is it bland, flavorful, complex? Did it get bitter?
Initially was warm cocoa. No spice as I could detect. Very smooth. A little wood coming through. Awesome burn with no touchups. I like the maduro-like chocolate profile. Medium body. - 4.5

4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3: Still no spice. Flavors didn't change much from the first third. They do get a little bolder, which is fine. I really like the flavor profile of this stick. While you could call it somewhat one-dimensional, at least it has the cocoa, light woody, and little leather flavors, plus the smoke is creamy in feel. A great NC. Still medium. - 4.6

4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3: Still more of the great cocoa maduro flavors. The entire stick smoked well with no runs or touch-ups needed. This time I was digging the monotony. I also like the little to no pepper. I nubbed it and was sad to see it end.- 4.6

Score for flavor and strength: 4.6

5) Aftertaste/Finish: aftertaste is the sensation &/or flavor on you palate after each puff, not the taste left after you finish the cigar. Is it heavy - light? Spicy, cedary, fruity, bitter, hot, grassy? Mild - strong? Pleasant or not? Harsh? A nice pleasant aftertaste. It didn't have too long of a finish. The nice warm cocoa flavors dominated the tongue. Never hot and never bitter.

Score for aftertaste: 4.5

6) Aroma: What does it smell like? Good - bad? light or heavy? pervasive - mild? floral, perfumed, grassy, harsh, woodsy, overpowering, unpleasant, magnificent? Aroma was standard. A great evening stick to enjoy with friends.

Score for aroma: 4.3

7) General Comments: Are samples consistent? Did you particlarily enjoy of with a certain food or beverage? Did they appeal more at certain time of day? Did it remind you of something? Would you buy them? Sum it up as you would to a friends ("That cigar was awesome!") and give it an overall score.
See summary

Overall score for the cigar. 26.6/30 (or 89/100 for those that like the base 10 scale)

8) Recommendation: Would you recommend the cigar? Pick one of the following and explain:
Not Recommended; Possibly Recommended; Recommended; Highly Recommended See summary

[jjirons69]

[jjirons69]

Second smoke of baggie "C". I'm keeping the last two until after the big reveal.

Cigar C #2 - After supper, Apple Pie Moonshine as drink, 1 and 1/2 hours, watching "History of the World, Part I". Punched cut.

Review Format
0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality
2.1 - 2.9 = fair
3.0 - 3.5 = good
3.5 - 4.5 = excellent
4.6 - 5.0 = superior

1) Aesthetics: the look of the cigar - oily, coarse, smooth, dry, light, dark, pretty, ugly, etc...
Hardly any surface veins. Beautiful dark and smooth, maduro stick. Nicely applied triple cap and crafted with care. Good-looking stick

Score for aesthetics: 4.5

2) Pre-light Construction: Roll cigar between fingers - soft spots? loose? tight? dense? lightweight? Well rolled? how does it smell?
Nice tobacco, earthy, light manure smell. You know it was going to be good.

Score for Pre-light construction: 4.3

3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Does it draw well, does smoke pull through on its own, do soft spots appear after lighting, burnes evenly? smokes hot or cool? What is ash like? color of ash? flaky or solid?
Punched well, better draw than the first from the bag, tight and dense. Lit well.

Score for post-light construction: 4.5

4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3: What does it taste like? Full-bodied, med. or mild? Does it taste earthy, spicy, fruity, vegetal, sweet, rich, harsh, direct, floral, robust, woody, green (haylike), acidic, salty? Is it pleasant or unpleasant? Does it build in flavor and/or complexity as you smoke it? Is it bland, flavorful, complex? Did it get bitter? Same as the first "C". Nice cocoa flavors with hints of wood (oak), leather, and a little toast. No pepper again, just a creamy, tasty smoke - 4.6

4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3: I'm liking the "C" smokes. It just has that delicious maduro chocolate flavor. It doesn't change much and there are no surprises, but that's fine. The flavor is great and enjoyable. Still medium-bodied. - 4.7

4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3: Again, I took this one to the nub. No tar residue, no bitter flavors, never hot and squishy. Just a solid smoke. I do believe this one was better than the first. - 4.7

Score for flavor and strength: 4.7

5) Aftertaste/Finish: aftertaste is the sensation &/or flavor on you palate after each puff, not the taste left after you finish the cigar. Is it heavy - light? Spicy, cedary, fruity, bitter, hot, grassy? Mild - strong? Pleasant or not? Harsh? Great aftertastes! The cocoa profile stays with you. It pairs well with a sweet drink. No nicotine buzz, not curve balls, no surprises. For monotonous, very pleasant.

Score for aftertaste: 4.6

6) Aroma: What does it smell like? Good - bad? light or heavy? pervasive - mild? floral, perfumed, grassy, harsh, woodsy, overpowering, unpleasant, magnificent? Nothing to complain about. Lots of smoke to fill the area and the smells were good.

Score for aroma: 4.3

7) General Comments: Are samples consistent? Did you particlarily enjoy of with a certain food or beverage? Did they appeal more at certain time of day? Did it remind you of something? Would you buy them? Sum it up as you would to a friends ("That cigar was awesome!") and give it an overall score.
See summary

Overall score for the cigar. 26.9/30 (or 90/100 for those that like the base 10 scale)

8) Recommendation: Would you recommend the cigar? Pick one of the following and explain:
Not Recommended; Possibly Recommended; Recommended; Highly Recommended See summary

[jjirons69]

[jjirons69]

Cigar C Summary:

Overall average score for the cigar. 26.8/30 (or 89/100 for those that like the base 10 scale)

7) General Comments: Are samples consistent? Did you particularly enjoy of with a certain food or beverage? Did they appeal more at certain time of day? Did it remind you of something? Would you buy them? Sum it up as you would to a friends ("That cigar was awesome!") and give it an overall score.
Right up my alley! This is the NC profile I really like. Maduro, cocoa, woody, leathery, creamy smoke with no pepper - just a nice, relaxing ride. I can't wait to enjoy the two that are left over. This is my favorite so far and the last one better bring out the guns to top "C".

8) Recommendation: Would you recommend the cigar? Pick one of the following and explain:
Not Recommended; Possibly Recommended; Recommended; Highly Recommended. I would recommend to anyone that likes this profile. If they do, they won't be disappointed. I'd purchase them for sure.

[jledou]

Rubusto C review

Review Format

0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality

2.1 - 2.9 = fair

3.0 - 3.5 = good

3.5 - 4.5 = excellent

4.6 - 5.0 = superior

1) Aesthetics:

This cigar has a nice wrapper in my opinion, fairly dark, not too many flaws but maybe not a “perfect” appearance either. The wrapper did not seem overly oily on the first few samples which were smoked on cloudy days. The last one had a nice shine to it when the sun hit it.

Score for aesthetics: 3.8

2) Pre-light Construction:

All of these samples have a solid construction without softspots in all 4 of my samples. I would call these dense but not overly heavy.

Score for Pre-light construction: 4.0

3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked:

The very first cigar I had out of the four had a tight draw, not completely plugged but a lot tighter than the rest. All of the samples burned very well without the need for a touch up. The ash varied a little form light grey to off white and in all cases looked flakey but didn’t leave a mess of ash flying all over the place.

Score for post-light construction: 3.8 (4.0 without the first sample)

4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3:

I will start off by saying the first sample had a very tight draw and exhibited a metallic aftertaste that was very prominent throughout the cigar. This taste was not present in the other three cigars.

The cigar started off on a mild-medium note with a very smooth oak flavor. This flavor lasted for about the first half inch before it started to transition for me in the last three samples.

4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3:

From the lighter oak/woody flavor I would slowly go into a deeper flavor and fully moved towards the medium side. I would start to get the slight metallic flavor as I got closer to the final third in cigars 2-4.

4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3:

I all cases the final third for the cigars turned more metallic, burned hotter and became harsh enough that I put down the cigars with about 1 inch or a little less left in all cases. In the end I would set this one down at med-full range.

Score for flavor and strength: 3.6

5) Aftertaste/Finish:

I would say that the final aftertaste was a little harsh but overall I would tend to put the overall impression as medium wood to earth notes on the finish.

Score for aftertaste: 3.5

6) Aroma:

Still my hardest category to pick up. I would overal give this a pleasant aroma that was not overpowering.

Score for aroma: 3.5

7) General Comments:

I would say this is a well constructed cigar from prelight through burn to finish. It tells you when it’s done and that is OK. I think the first cigar was off due to the tight roll, but overall I would say the cigar was consistent.

Overall score for the cigar. 3.75

8) Recommendation:

I would Recommended this cigar to most people. While not one of my favorites, this cigar still have a lot of good qualities and was enjoyable for me up until the final third.

[RevSmoke]

Tatuaje J21
4 7/8 x 50 Rothschild
1) Aesthetics: OK, given the hype, this cigar is rather ugly. It has a nice dark brown wrapper with a fair amount of veins and a triple cap.

Score for aesthetics: 4.2

2) Pre-light Construction: This is a hefty stick, very firm, and when cut gives of strong hints of pepper.
Score for Pre-light construction: 4.\58

3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Takes to flame willingly, keeps a nice even burn, and the grey ash clings tenaciously for a good inch and a half, begrudgingly giving up its grip with lots of assistance.
Score for post-light construction: 4.9

4a) Flavor and strength: This is closer to full-bodied than medium. It has some hints of cocoa and earth, while a spiciness hits that back of the throat. Caramel seems to creep in and out, and when not present and pervasive sweetness still linger. Nicely complex, constantly growing and developing in flavor. A serious nic hit was evident in this bad boy.
Score for flavor and strength: 4.8

5) Aftertaste/Finish: Caramel and pepper are predominant, and it lingers on the palate.
Score for aftertaste: 4.8

6) Aroma: Caramel and earth seem to predominate pleasantly.
Score for aroma: 4.8

7) General Comments: I like an occasional Tatuaje, and this one certainly satisfies.

Overall score for the cigar. 4.6

8) Recommendation: Yes, I would recommend this cigar. It is not one for the neophyte though.

[Jason]

well if there's a more interesting reveal I'll be gobsmacked.I truly did not like this cigar and smoked them all, quite a bad sample of a marca I've rarely had any trouble with. I've actually had a few Tats I really liked and had an overall high opinion of them, never had an offensive one until now

I'm confused

[Weelok]

Rev you have out done my expectations and surprised me to no end. I have never had a J21 but even so I would never guessed it tasted as it did. I can't wait to smoke the C I have waiting for me. I really missed the strength mark on this one and just focused in on the sweetness.

I am shocked it was not a Conecticut Broadleaf and it was a ligero leaf wrapper!!! I must have eaten something wierd before smoking my samples or had a beer that corrupted my palate. All I can say is I was owned!

My hats off to the enlightening experience of this blind review process.

Thank you so much for setting this up !!!