I tried one of these babies from the Montreal's LCDH 2 days ago while looking at the new CA magazine and sipping a couple Cuban espressos
It was good, but seeing how I am not the biggest fan of that strong Bolivar muddy / earthy taste, I was not in awe over the cigar.. But I did enjoy it..
Over all, it was a good full bodied cigar.... thick and creamy smoke after smoking about 2" ... very long finish.... and even longer aftertaste... lots of earthy notes.. Also, I did note some hints of burned almonds (or some other type nuts.. I couldn't put my finger on it exactly.. maybe chestnuts)...
The cigar was NOT oily at all.. it felt rather dry (not under-humidified, but just no oils on it's wrappers).. Light in color, and no popping veins.
Construction and burn were FLAWLESS.. Not even a single burn issue... (except for my fingers, when I was down to the last half inch)... cigar stayed alive for the entire hour I smoked it..... never did it need to be relighten....
overall impression: Good cigar.. Only for the experienced smoker though... I wouldn't smoke it on an empty stomach would I smoke another: YES would I buy a box: Probably not after smoking another one, DEFINITELY.. in fact, I have already ordered a box...
my rating: 91
This message has been edited. Last edited by: salibas007,
had another BGM last night... well what can I say, I liked it considerably more than the first one I had.. and let's just say that with full rack of baby back ribs in my stomach, that Bolivar aftertaste was very welcomed....
I'm definitely buying a couple of boxes for aging....
Originally posted by Steve Cohen: CA rated this an 88 on a April 07 box.
As if that means anything Steve!!
absolutely right..... a single rating means nothing... it could have been the cigar itself that had flaws, or maybe it's young age had to play a role....
just like in my acse, the first one I had was good, but not that extra touch.. the 2nd, well let's just say that i am waiting for a box now...
absolutely right..... a single rating means nothing... it could have been the cigar itself that had flaws, or maybe it's young age had to play a role....
You guys remember how lousy the first shipment of Monte Edmundos was? They were underfilled and spongy, dry, harsh and a teeny bit green. Since then, they've been uniformly excellent in my experience. I'm not ready to cast a verdict on the Gold Medals just yet...I'm just happy to see them back in Habanos' product line again.
The experience with the Edmundos is similar to what I read on another forum, except with the BGMs. At least one reviewer reported that the mid 2007 BGMs were better than the original (Dec 2006) boxes. Anyone else verify this?
A good review, I hope nobody minds be bringing it back up to the top. I'm intrigued by the Gold Medals, and this makes me want to order a few to try out. Expensive but apparently worth it. We'll see!
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
Salibus, you are absolutely right. $140 with free shipping, which is not bad... I'm impressed. I was going by the cost of singles, which is considerably more where I'm looking.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: aphexafx,
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
Suckling just wrote in his blog that these are selling for around $55 a box in Havana. Good God, if I only had a passport that worked like everyone else's...
Originally posted by Extensioncord: Suckling just wrote in his blog that these are selling for around $55 a box in Havana. Good God, if I only had a passport that worked like everyone else's...
It's just NOT fair. Not fair at all.
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
