Nat Sherman cigars have been around for years, I have seen them since I started smoking way back in 1988/89. In the twenty four years I have been smoking I can't recall ever having smoked one. As I recollect I can't recall that I have ever seen one smoked by anyone that I know. As I plunge further into the depths of my twisted and dark closet of a mind I can't think of a single time anyone has ever told me that they have smoked one. In further pursuit of knowledge long past, I remember that I can't remember a single person ever saying anything about a Nat Sherman cigar to me, other than that they had seen them too. Sure I have friends that have been to the iconic lounge and store in NYC, hell I've been there myself on a couple of occasions, but even those people did not relay any stories to me about a Nat Sherman cigar. I thought about this as I prepared to smoke this cigar and I wondered if this lack of anything was positive or negative, I mean it could go either way right?
This cigar is quite a log, short and stumpy with a darker brown wrapper that looks like bark with all the bumps and rills that a tree would have to offer. The band work is somewhat mundane, and I am surprised by this, because my memories of Nat Sherman offerings in publications I have perused always had colorful band work, nearly pastel in some cases. That aside, the cigar itself seems to be well made, but it is hard to tell through the significant bulk of this stump. The pre light draw shows some very thin spice flavors and a shockingly horrific and vile essence of rotting vegetation and other organic material, I nearly take a moment for a quick spew. Gathering my wits I take in the pre light aroma and quickly wish I had not, it is also shocking and has hints of putrid water and some ammonia.
To say that my mouth was not watering at this point would be an understatement. The cigar opens with a profile that is heavily vegetal and metallic, this is really terrible. I seldom think of chucking a cigar so soon, but it is crossing my mind. Could it be that I have never heard anything about these cigars because they all this bad? I hope to hell not, they have been business for a long time. The back of the palate is bile churning mix of wet earth and paper. This profile is an absolute train wreck early on and I can't help but think it has nowhere to go but up. The draw is actually a little too tight for me and I am thankful, or else I may have already blown chunks. The burn is solid, but it seems slow to me, maybe this is where the timeless moniker comes from. I sincerely hope not, because I may be dead from exposure to whatever in this rocket by the time it burns down.
The first half of the smoke improves, in that I don't think it will kill me anymore, but that's really all I can say. It dawns on me, without checking the lineage, that this cigar must have some heavy Honduran seed tobacco in it, I often have violent reactions to cigars with too much Honduran influence. The profile has become a more bland presentation of paper and vegetation, with maybe some simple wood impressions. The back of the palate becomes less damp tasting but still smacks of earth and paper. The draw is still, blessedly, tight for me. The burn trucks on, albeit slowly, nicely.
The final half of the smoke does nothing for me either. The core profile is still bland with some creamy vanilla notes very late in the smoke. There is nothing redeeming about this cigar, except that it is almost over. The back of the palate still shows very simple wood, paper and wet earth impressions. The draw stays too firm all the way until the end. The burn was solid, but slow, throughout.
This is the worst cigar I have smoked in some time. I think I see now why nobody has ever said anything to me about this line of smokes. Either they knew I would laugh at them for their lack of cigar knowledge, or they thought I would punish them for their cigar insolence. Actually I would do neither of those things not knowing what a cigar was about. Now that I do, I would just discourage them from smoking this at all and give them something better, like a White Owl.
Appearance- 86 an ok looking smoke
Taste- 71 one of the absolute worst I have smoked in 24 years of smoking
Construction- 75 the draw was too tight and the burn was too slow, other than that it was gold
Strength- 80 a sloppy medium I guess, but there was nothing here to help anything in the smoke
Overall- 76.25 an abomination
No comments:
Post a Comment