The notes I took during our last meeting while discussing the official OCCS rating system have evidently been stolen by another cigar club. I know we all gave quite a bit of thought to this, and we take it seriously--so I am very sorry for dropping the ball on this.
The best way to avoid this from happening again, other than obviously having someone besides me in charge of taking & keep the notes, may be to post our thoughts/discussion here. Besides, such discussion is one of the reasons we set this blog up in the first place.
I know we formulated 10 different areas for rating our cigars, each having a possible 10 points (thus making the "perfect" cigar a 100). We also discussed the number of a particular cigar that must be smoked before a cigar can be considered for a 100 rating, and I thought there was talk of having a minimum number for even posting a review for a particular cigar. I believe we also discussed what information should be posted in the description area of the cigar (origin, price, where it was purchased, etc.).
Again, my apologies for allowing our sacred notes out of club hands, but lets take it from here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am not sure if all of these are points we came up with (only 9 below):
ReplyDelete• Burn
• Construction
• Availability/Cost
• Overall Appearance
• Aroma
• Flavors/Complexity
• Overall Personal Experience
• Draw
• Band
• ?
Did we agree to review a cigar with a minimum of having smoked at least 2 of a particular cigar?
And if we were to give a cigar a '100' (perfect) rating, then we would have to smoke at least 5 before slamming down the 100?
Did we also agree that once in a while a rare or expensive cigar may be enjoyed and reviewed with having only smoked one cigar? But no 100 can be awarded until 5 are smoked?
We talked about including some informative information about the cigar at the beginning of a review. For example:
• Brand: Oliva Cigar Family
• Blend's name: O
• Size/Vitola: 6x60/Double Toro
• Origin and type of leaf of the filler(s), binder(s) and wrapper(s): Maduro. Nicaraguan puro. Same habano seed grown in three regions of Nicaragua: Esteli, Condega and Jalapa Valley were blended for this cigar.
Another question: Should we take down our 10/10 reviews and start over with the new system? (I see one cigar [Nub Maduro] that may not be a 100 after smoking more than 1 or 2 [great reason to smoke at least 5 before rating]. It is still a good cigar, but not a 100.) Afterall, if they are truly 100 rated cigars, we should be more than happy to re-review them with our new system. What are your thoughts on this?
Correct, remove or add where I am mistaken or talking crazy.
-Joe
Joe, I think when this is all said and done, it would make sense to take down the current 10/10 list and start from scratch with our new rating system.
ReplyDelete> Looks like you have the bases covered for the cigar information to be included above the actual rating points.
> 5 smokes of the same cigar before being eligible for a 10/10 rating makes sense.
> 2 smokes of the same cigar before reviewing also makes sense, unless, as you mentioned, the cigar is a rare breed (for whatever reason--be it price, availability, limited edition, etc.).
> For the life of me, I cannot remember the 10th review point. I'm pretty sure those you listed are 9 of the 10 we agreed on.
Adam
Was the 10th rating category ash? Was availability and cost seperate? Was flavors and complexity seperate?
ReplyDeleteMy first thought is that B/C Adam lost the original, I think he owes us a box of cigars. Well, everyone but Jeff b/c his humidor is was looking like mine used to. (That is obscene man).
ReplyDelete1. I think the points are correct but I also can't remember what the 10th one was. Maybe I wasn't sold on it to begin with. What if we weight the last catagory of OVERALL PERSONAL EXPERIENCE to 20 points. I mean so much of smoking cigars is relative to the person, why not judge it as such?
2. Yes on the minimums of 2 for a review and 5 for a "perfect" Box worthy smoke.
3. Yes on the exception of the "special" cigar but it must be noted as such in the review.
4. Joe, your lead in to the review is perfect. I think that should be our template.
5. I agree we should take down the original 10/10 list but I beleive that we should post it in the blog somewhere as a new post. So we can go back and reference it. The title can be something like "the Original's original top ten list" or something like that. Afterall this is a totally new review system we are using and it took us a lot of time to develop our tates and opinions to get to this point of our club and blog. We shouldn't just throw away our past thoughts.
I can't think of anything else right now but then again I did just get done having lunch so I am a little sleepy.