James Suckling retires

[icehog3]

I didn't see where Clayton called people at CA "experts". He said "you don't need to have encyclopedic knowledge of cigar history and cigar production to rate, recommend and review Habanos.". It was you who said that people here were trying to pass themselves off as "experts".

If someone here who normally has similar likes to mine recommends a cigar, why would I not take that as a valid recommendation, even if he had only been smoking exclusively Cuban for 5 years?

[TheRiddick]

Originally Posted by icehog3

I didn't see where Clayton called people at CA "experts". He said "you don't need to have encyclopedic knowledge of cigar history and cigar production to rate, recommend and review Habanos.". It was you who said that people here were trying to pass themselves off as "experts".

If someone here who normally has similar likes to mine recommends a cigar, why would I not take that as a valid recommendation, even if he had only been smoking exclusively Cuban for 5 years?

We're talking apples and oranges here, don't we. I was pointing out that when it comes to KNOWLEDGE and CIGAR WRITING no one on this board is even close to Suckling's level. Exclusive CC smoking or not, which has nothing to do with the discussion. And please point out to me how someone smoking CCs for just 5 years has any real perspective into Cuban cigars, something I did point out, when recent releases are nowhere near what Cuban cigars used to be (and what turned a good number of us away from Cuban smokes). Occasional older Cuban smoke here and there doesn't make for an "expert", sorry to be blunt. Suckling has a long and proven experience and knows what Cubans were like in times gone by, something that is really not known to 99% or more here.

Clayton stated Suckling is not relevant and is not followed, yet I would still love to hear from him how having hundreds of thousands of readers is not relevant? More relevant than anyone here or elsewhere last time I checked. People actually pay money to read his "irrelevant" opinions. And no, I do not agree with every one of his reviews, nor should I.

Every time I read a TN here about some newish CC described as "strong" or "big" I simply cringe, they are no more than medium, AT BEST, and most are simply way too mild lately. Do you really think people have a real and proper perspective into what Cuban cigars are without having a long and varied tasting history with them? Suckling is among a few who does.

I really don't give a s**t one way or another about Suckling, I do not drink EU wines for the most part lately (used to, though, but not Bords), but it is curious to see Suckling being criticized by relatively new people to cigar (and wine) world.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

We're talking apples and oranges here, don't we. I was pointing out that when it comes to KNOWLEDGE and CIGAR WRITING no one on this board is even close to Suckling's level. Exclusive CC smoking or not, which has nothing to do with the discussion. And please point out to me how someone smoking CCs for just 5 years has any real perspective into Cuban cigars, something I did point out, when recent releases are nowhere near what Cuban cigars used to be (and what turned a good number of us away from Cuban smokes). Occasional older Cuban smoke here and there doesn't make for an "expert", sorry to be blunt. Suckling has a long and proven experience and knows what Cubans were like in times gone by, something that is really not known to 99% or more here.

Read my post again... where did I imply that anyone here is claiming to be an "expert". I will say thet word again for you...."expert". I certainly don't consider myself to be an "expert" om Cuban cigars, or any cigars for that matter. But I know what I like, and I don't have to have a historical perspective into the profile of pre-embargo Cuban cigars to know what I like, and certainly am entitled to write "I like this cigar" in my review if I choose. You are right about apples to oranges, you are doing the same thing yourself.