Online Review Slant

tomatobodhi

I enjoy reading tobacco reviews. Having read a lot of them, I think I've noticed some slants that I tend to adjust for:

Strength: Reviewers tend to say that tobaccos aren't as strong in 'N' as they really are. I think maybe they want to come off as "tough" or something. Some of the tobaccos that are well known dizzying N-hits are covered with reviews that downplay this feature. I usually adjust reviews UP for nicotine hit.

Toppings: Reviewers also tend to play up their detection of toppings. It is well known that toppings are everywhere, but I still find reviewers really playing up their detection of top notes and added flavors. I tend to adjust reviews DOWN for flavors detected (especially when those who claim to detect flavors can't distinguish them or there is vast disagreement about what the flavors are).

Comments? Any other trends and audience-biases that you find in reviews and find yourself adjusting for?

drac2485

Like you the main one one is vitamin N. When I used to smoke cigarettes nicotine seemed much lower in cigars and tobaccos as I was used to it. Now that I only smoke, pipes or cigars, on occasion I notice I am much more sensitive to it so I always assume it is higher than they say and I smoke on a full stomach.

When ever reviews discuss room note, I laugh, everyone is different and their noses are different so what one might find pleasant or mild is over powering to another. Also, when thinking that most people smoke outside, how can you accurately judge the room note? Personally, I try to think of room note as not just when smoking but the lingering presence left afterwards and when it smells like an ashtray I don't find that too pleasant so I always assume the room note it worse than they say.

thebadgerpiper

I always take reviews with a pinch of salt. Everyone has a different taste in what they like. Even the most loved blends have their own detractors. I tend to read a full page of reviews and get a general consensus of a blend before adding it to my cart.

As for Vitamin N, I tend to see reviews mention it when the blend is notorious for a heavy hit.

judandhispipe

If I want a fair assessment of any tobacco, I look on TR and see if Pipestud has reviewed it. Our tastes don't always coincide, but he has extensive experience with pipe tobaccos, and is honest and fair. I've known him through forums and such for close to a dozen years; he's a good guy. 

ghostsofpompeii

It's always best for a reviewer to state beforehand that - "I don't usually like aromatic or English blends" when reviewing a blend he or she doesn't usually like - that way you know beforehand there may be a certain prejudice towards the blend they are reviewing. I've written a few reviews here and have come to the conclusion that I'm really not qualified to give a knowledgeable review of an English or Va-Per blend since I tend to shy away from them. So to write a review badmouthing an English blend I just tried, which reflects more on my particular taste profile than the quality of tobacco isn't doing the blend any justice. And is probably completely off the mark. So from the get-go let people know the type of blends you normally smoke so they can take your review with a grain of salt, or discard it altogether. And if you gravitate towards an aromatic - I'd suggest only reviewing an aromatic. Same goes for those who only like non-aromatics. Having someone like "Your Friend Bradley" from Stuff and Things review an aromatic you know he already has something of a prejudice towards heavily cased aromatics. So where a member like @Motie2 or I heap loads of praise on something like the moist sticky but "Oh So Good" aromatic Molto Dolce, Bradley might point out all the negative aspects of the blend because he's not a fan of aromatics in general. Whereas my review might suggest all the flaws Bradley points out, but I'd tend to accentuate the positives as far outweighing the negatives. Adding that the very negative elements of the blend are symptomatic of many aromatic blends. And as a result we aromatic smokers have come to expect as a characteristic of a sweet heavily cased aromatic. So my advice is to let readers know where your head is at before writing the review. It may mean less people read your review ... but those who do are more inclined to be interested in what you have to say.      

motie2

What he said.

Winton

The most recent blend I tried was described (in very small print) as a heavy Virginia Perique blend. It took the flame easily. It tasted good. Why is the world spinning? Where is a chair? 

Personal taste and nic-tolerance are very important in reviews. 

motie2

First (and last) time i smoked one of those big Bering cigars that came in an aluminum tube, I almost fell out of the chair.

ghostsofpompeii

@Winton Having smoked mostly aromatics I never really experienced the 'nic hit' - but once I started mixing in Perique as an experiment I discovered what the 'nic hit' was first hand. Last night was a perfect example. I smoked a 50/50 mixture of Captain Black "Black Sea" (containing Latakia) and Sutliff Raspberry Cobbler, adding with what I thought was a pinch of blending Perique. I realized about halfway through the bowl that the pinch was greater than I imagined. I'm a real light-weight when it comes to nicotine and I was getting dizzy and sick to my stomach. Now I'm going back to my aromatics again and pull back on my science experiments.