I call "Shenanigans!"

[Stewmuse]

Well, not quite, but I am somewhat incredulous about something Craig said on the show this week that is akin to what Oliva says about their Nub line. Craig mentioned a planned experiment of dividing a cigar (crosswise) into thirds to discover the differences between sections. This says to me that he believes that each section will have it's own distinct taste simply because of it's position in the cigar. Oliva's Nub series claims to just contain the "sweet spot," which is a similar idea, even if they got there by different routes. I do not doubt that a cigar's flavor changes over the duration, but I do have a few problems with their suppositions.

(DISCLAIMER: no science is to follow, just speculation on my part..)

It's my belief that cigar flavors change over the course of smoking primarily because of the addition of heat and smoke that is drawn through the length of the body. The yet-to-be-burned leaves are influenced by both of these factors, and the resultant change is what we taste. I also wonder why there is a seemingly arbitrary division of the cigar into thirds? This seems like it's just handy reference started from tasting reviews without any actual objective reasoning. Are there planned construction differences at these points? A change in the blend? Unlikely on both counts.

Craig mentioned that he would smoke each section of the cigar to get the differences, and my assumption is that he will smoke one section, take his notes, and then move on to the next, and so on. I think a better way would be to smoke them simultaneously, alternating puffs on each segment. My guess is that he won't find nearly as much difference because neither the leaves nor his palette will have been unduly influenced by the previous sections or addition of heat and smoke. In a similar way, the Nub only gives you the "sweet spot" not because of any superior blend, but simply because there isn't enough time, heat, and smoke for any real changes to occur.

Ideas? Corrections? Wrong opinions?

[kurtdesign1]

The science here is that larger, higher quality leaves have differences in thickness and flavor between stem and tip.

Cigars made with these leaves are sometimes created with just the center of whole leaves, then cut back to the desired length. This is instead of obtaining the greatest yield from a leaf by combining tip segments with near stem segments in order to create blend consistency. Cigars with whole leaf rather than cut and filled-in leaf are referred to as having a "closed foot". The alternative being called "open foot". Closed foot cigars will have more of a marked difference of flavor among thirds. Open, only what the blender intended.


You've been Tapatalk'd

[Stewmuse]

Okay. Assuming that is correct, how do you know which cigars do that? Not that this means that it doesn't occur, but I've never seen a video where anything like that happens, so I would think that frequency of this is quite low. Also, if only the central part of each leaf is used, I would think that their would be less change, since you are primarily using a single area of leaf. Or, perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are trying to find.

Also, I'm confused... Are you saying "cut and filled in leaf" is just the central part, or using the whole leaf? I don't understand "filled in," unless you mean the whole leaf used to "fill in" soft spots and such. The sentence about leaf yield is also perplexing...

[Kenhorne21]

I have to agree with you stew and think that as the cigar combusts through the smoking process the heat and pulling of air through the cigar greatly influences flavor. Cutting it into thirds I believe would take away from a complex blends true performance. I think if the cigar is fairly consistent throughout what Craig states may be true but a cigar with many change ups will perform much better in its entirety. Just my two cents but maybe worth an experiment. Btw my thought on the nub reaching the sweet spot right away is hogwash.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kip]

I've definitely seen the method of rolling described above where tips are strategically placed within the filler bunch (typically near the head). So much so that I'd call it a rule as much as an exception.

If flavor changes have nothing to do with tobacco/blend changes and is totally related to smoke, heat and combustion......is a good smoking experience owed less to the blender's skill than the smoker's? Is our cadence where the control of our flavors come from?

I don't really have a dog in this fight. Just thought I'd play double-back-flip devil's advocate.

Just a hillbilly, Tappin and a-Talkin

[kurtdesign1]

I like when Stews feathers are ruffled

Closed foot cigars are firm throughout. Open typically are softer nearer the foot.

It is rare and typically reserved for more premium cigars.

The flavor change comment is because the different intensities of flavor (from different leaf segments) are not combined as they are in the method where tips are broken off and inserted elsewhere into the cigar.

Kip described the "filled in" item.

Yield is lessened because more segments of the leaf are wasted when rolling with a closed foot.


You've been Tapatalk'd

[Stewmuse]

Well... The way Kip describes it, I have seen, but this always seems like a density issue, as opposed to a flavor. What I have NOT seen is the removal of the ends of a leaf, and then just rolling the middle part of the leaf. This would have to be a concious pre-roll action. I understand about leaf yield being lower, but your sentence was itself confusing. It still brings the question of how do you as the smoker really know? Firmness can be achieved either way.

Excuse me while I go preen my feathers...

[kurtdesign1]

Well... The way Kip describes it, I have seen, but this always seems like a density issue, as opposed to a flavor. What I have NOT seen is the removal of the ends of a leaf, and then just rolling the middle part of the leaf. This would have to be a concious pre-roll action. I understand about leaf yield being lower, but your sentence was itself confusing. It still brings the question of how do you as the smoker really know? Firmness can be achieved either way.

Excuse me while I go preen my feathers...

Come on, Mike. Say it. Say IT. SAY IT! You know you want to scream that you roll cigars and not me. You know you do! :p

You are correct, this is a conscious, prior decision typically reserved for a more premium cigar than what we call a "premium cigar'. Think Padron Family Reserve. Possibly even the 26 and 64 but I'm only guessing. The typical Padron's wouldn't employ this method of bunching. As far as another indicator of open V closed foot construction, this is harder to answer without being told which cigars employ which method of rolling. I have been told that the flavor is "purer" or more concentrated with closed because it is the taste of only one leaf segment at a time. Obviously we've all had great cigars produced in both methods otherwise only one method would be produced. Why produce a cigar that cannot taste "great"? There is a huge database of information on these methods over at what was referred to as ICC, in the "Wayne's Corner" forum. After the owner of the site passed away 4 or 5 years ago things went south and I can't vouch that the website is even functioning anymore. If you're interested, do some checking and I'm sure you can find it in some archive somewhere.

You talk about the smaller "tip" segments being for "a density issue". The need to modify density is lessened if only the centermost segment of leaf is used. It is most consistent in thickness/texture.

I am now going to my grammar tutor. How was your preening?

[Stewmuse]

You are correct, this is a conscious, prior decision typically reserved for a more premium cigar than what we call a "premium cigar'. Think Padron Family Reserve. Possibly even the 26 and 64 but I'm only guessing. The typical Padron's wouldn't employ this method of bunching. As far as another indicator of open V closed foot construction, this is harder to answer without being told which cigars employ which method of rolling. I have been told that the flavor is "purer" or more concentrated with closed because it is the taste of only one leaf segment at a time. Obviously we've all had great cigars produced in both methods otherwise only one method would be produced. Why produce a cigar that cannot taste "great"? There is a huge database of information on these methods over at what was referred to as ICC, in the "Wayne's Corner" forum. (elided...)

You talk about the smaller "tip" segments being for "a density issue". The need to modify density is lessened if only the centermost segment of leaf is used. It is most consistent in thickness/texture. I am now going to my grammar tutor. How was your preening?

This explains things more clearly, thank you, in regard to how certain cigars may be rolled using just certain portions of the leaf. Not to be (still or even more) of a peckerhead (that's for you, KF), but what are you expecting from the cut thirds? Will you know the construction/leaf method of what you are smoking? How will each third be affected by having actual fire applied to them, as opposed to the usually manner of ignition? How will you know, even, that your specific cigar is typical of the blend? Will you try smoking the sections in different fashions (consecutively, alternating) or different lengths (quarters or halves vs thirds)?

Why challenge you on all this??? Typically, I am very skeptical of statements that are passed along as "truth" when they are more likely to be wholly opinion, or, at least, very subjective. You relay one of these above. "I have been told that the flavor is "purer" or more concentrated with closed because it is the taste of only one leaf segment at a time." I do believe you have been told that, and it may actually be true. You rarely see, however, blind tests done to see if there is any real substance to this kind of supposition. I'd even be interested to see if any scientific data has been done with measuring draw and smoke volume from cigars that are "book rolled" vs. entubado. We hear from "credible sources" that there are specific differences, but is there real data to back it up?

Thanks for the replies...

Now, where's your blind/unbanded review???

[kurtdesign1]

Aww, crap. I have one blind review at home. Don't knowe why I didn't send that over the weekend...

I expect the cut thirds to reveal a more pure version of the leaf's flavor at each third. As stated above, someone postulated that flavor changes are influenced more by the heat and smoke of earlier combustion being drawn across un lit leaf. I find this statement to be more hypothesis than fact and smoking individual thirds could help support or oppose such a thought. Since I do not agree that tempo and strength are the largest contributing factors to flavor, I would expect each third smoked individually to yield more unique results than an entire cigar smoked at once.

I would likely smoke segments of each third independently, then at the same time, to test both aspects of how the flavor is perceived.

Regarding (again) your statement about "facts", I tend to think this one (purer) is more fact than opinion. If nothing is there to dilute flavor, it would be purer. The question you should be asking is whether that purity is even detectable to the palate. This is subjective since we each taste differently, but the subject himself could be the control. Someone like you would be best suited to determine this because you could roll cigars of each method to test. Now, going back to one of the first things I mentioned, higher quality, larger leaf would yield more accurate results. Unless you can grade out what you've purchased this may not even be possible.


You've been Tapatalk'd