Idea for a "Recommendations" resource

[thecrowdog]

LL, I'm being as polite as I can, but I honestly, truly, think you don't understand what I am wanting to do. And that's fine. You can stop crapping on it. Computers have nothing to do with it! AI tasting has nothing to do with it! IT has nothing to do with it. My level of experience has nothing to do with it. I'm merely saying I'm going to look at which VaPers, for example, have already been recommended by BoB members who love VaPers, and see if any particular ones get recommended more often than others. THAT'S IT! Some are going to be frequently recommended by BoB members who love VaPers, and maybe, just maybe, that's a good place for someone to start if they're looking for a good VaPer. And the same thing is likely to happen when I search all the questions about a good burley blend. Some are going to be recommended more than others. That's it. I don't know how you got this whole IT, software, computation, AI, databases, etc. in your head.

I'm not going to make some new review site, I'm not trying to create some software, I'm not trying to give certain blends a number of stars. I'm not going to guess who has more "experience" than anyone else. And my experience is irrelevant since I'm merely compiling what others have already written. I just wondered why no one ever organized all these answers to people's common questions into one place. So I am going to go about organizing it. I wanted to make it an ongoing communal effort but you've taken such a dump on this thread that I can't possibly retrieve it, so I'm just going to use what has already been posted in the past.

Man alive. At this point I don't even know why I started this thread. I should have just done it. So let's just stop talking about it. Who hurt you, LL? Who hurt you?

 

[LL]

LL, I'm being as polite as I can, but I honestly, truly, think you don't understand what I am wanting to do. And that's fine. You can stop crapping on it. Computers have nothing to do with it! AI tasting has nothing to do with it! IT has nothing to do with it. My level of experience has nothing to do with it. I'm merely saying I'm going to look at which VaPers, for example, have already been recommended by BoB members who love VaPers, and see if any particular ones get recommended more often than others. THAT'S IT! Some are going to be frequently recommended by BoB members who love VaPers, and maybe, just maybe, that's a good place for someone to start if they're looking for a good VaPer. And the same thing is likely to happen when I search all the questions about a good burley blend. Some are going to be recommended more than others. That's it. I don't know how you got this whole IT, software, computation, AI, databases, etc. in your head.

I'm not going to make some new review site, I'm not trying to create some software, I'm not trying to give certain blends a number of stars. I'm not going to guess who has more "experience" than anyone else. And my experience is irrelevant since I'm merely compiling what others have already written. I just wondered why no one ever organized all these answers to people's common questions into one place. So I am going to go about organizing it. I wanted to make it an ongoing communal effort but you've taken such a dump on this thread that I can't possibly retrieve it, so I'm just going to use what has already been posted in the past.

Man alive. At this point I don't even know why I started this thread. I should have just done it. So let's just stop talking about it. Who hurt you, LL? Who hurt you?

Chill, dude. :lol:

You asked for feedback & discussion, and you got it.

 

[DoverPipes]

Not to over simplify things, but wouldn't be easier to go to tobaccoreviews.com and see the ratings there? :scratch:

Garbage in, garbage out.

This comment from another (non BoB) forum touches on some of the reasons tr is largely considered useless:

I have been reading tobacco reviews nearly three years now. It's taken me that long to realize it's really a mediocre site at best. There are so many things wrong with it, I hardly know where to begin. The owner of the site should really seek out pipe smokers and ask them for input that could help create relevant information for that page.

If I had to pick the one issue with a site, it would be the reviewer who gives a one star vote because they didn't like the tobacco. Seriously, how relevant is that? Of course, the reviewer is left no choice because of the recommend options. They think 'Well, I didn't like it, so I can't recommend it,' that's only natural. How about an option to indicate how much you like the blend, and an option to indicate if you can recommend it? For example, I don't like Key Largo because of the cigar leaf, but I recommended it to a friend who likes cigar leaf and he loves it. Makes sense, no?

Overall, it's just a poorly conceived site and I caution anyone using it to consider these things. And it's not the users fault; they are only working with what they are given.

The Big Picture problem is the same one that wine, cigars, beer, etc. recommendation & rating systems have: BOTH ends of the transaction are 100% subjective. The taster/recommender and the looker-upper are both people, and sensory input does not quantify well. Yet crunching numbers is all a computer program can do. (Well, there might be some Japanese scientists working on a taste AI of some sort, but that hardly counts.)

I agree. Everyone has an opinion of what they like and what they don't. However, If 100 people like a certain blend and 4 hate it. I guess I'll tend to listen to the 100 who like the blend. I'll give it a go and form my opinion for better or for worse. It's all about doing some of the leg work for yourself. I have an idea of what I already like. I go from there.

You'll always get the occasional idiot who will right something like this when he's reviewing a Latakia blend: "I smoke aromatics 24/7/365, this tobacco tastes like ass" :scratch: Not a very helpful review.

I have no idea why anyone would not want to try a little of everything on their own. That's how you figure out what works for you.......

 

[bruins]

it doesn't matter if tobacco flavors are subjective or not. we rank subjective things all the time, books, music, beers, etc. now whether or not you agree with the results of the ranking is completely individual. for me, the biggest determinant as to whether a 'best of' list is worth your time is who the judges are. if i ask ten of my friends the best five movies of the year, well that's going to be a completely different list than if i ask 10 movie critics. so on the point of the control group, the BoB is a good one, IMHO. you have many many years of experienced enthusiasts. it's a relatively small group and are usually eager to share there opinions.

i did a crude micro version of what crowdog is suggesting simply by starting a thread, 'your top five tobaccos'. i made a tally of the answers i received. certain blends rose to the top. it gave me ideas for tobaccos to try without feeling like i was throwing a dart at a board. what i didn't think to do was divide them into blend categories. for someone starting out, it would be a valuable resource. that's why you see repeat threads asking for a top five. newbies want some reliable beginning point, and for me at least, tobaccoreviews is too overwhelming. now, for someone who's an experience enthusiast, such a list would probably be a source of irritation, just like some movie review lists are to me. (the hurt locker was okay, but it wasn't brilliant.)

 

[Anonymous]

Somebody who understands quantum physics could explain this better, but the odds against any particular co-incidence of the factors involved is mind-boggling.

Examples are easier. I've smoked FVF for years. Reading through Tobacco Reviews, I encountered a review by one guy who said it "tasted like a cigarette," which is about as far off the chart as you can get. I thought he was nuts. But then I opened a tin of it that had apparently just been made a few weeks earlier and, you know what ? -- it tasted like a damned cigarette ! Today, a couple years later, it's tasting the way it should. Conclusion : without knowing the tin time involved, three reviewers, smoking the same tobacco, can be describing an apple, an orange, and a grapefruit.

Then there's jar time. Open an aged tin. The first bowl from it will be (to many) different enough to notice from the next one a day or so later (this assuming it's been jarred properly on opening). By the second or third week in the jar, having "breathed" for a while, it's settled into what it (arguably) "is" (long-term). (Then again, you can revisit something you put away because you didn't like it and find that, years later, it's good stuff indeed). Not jarring it, or waiting a while beforehand, sends it down yet another path.

Then there's the pipe . . .

The one thing, IMHO, that Tobacco Reviews (by anybody) are good for is that they record useful data. Case in point : if you do NOT like Lakeland Floral Shampoo, being able to read enough reviews of GH & SG offerings with an eye to whether (or not) people detect a soapy element in them is invaluable. If nobody does (or hardly anyone and not much of it), I'm good to go. If they do, I'm advised.

Ditto with Perique. To some, a little of this goes a long way, and "too much of a good thing" is a distinct possibility. Reading reviews of VaPers, you can get a decent ballpark impression of how much Per there is in a given Va, narrowing the search and avoiding considerable expense to learn that Escudo has a great deal more of it than Fillmore.

Then, there's the matter of what "useful data" even are. There are people who think that piling up fifty flowery adjectives results in a useful composite whole. I don't.

My all time favorite reviewer's taste impression (wish I'd remembered his name to credit him) : a element of "sweaty girl bum."

A man after my own heart.

:face:

 

[bruins]

My all time favorite reviewer's taste impression (wish I'd remembered his name to credit him) : a element of "sweaty girl bum."

A man after my own heart.

:face:

that was beaupipe describing C&D Star of the East Flake--"because it tastes a bit like sweaty girlbum and I'll be a little lonely, I think. Nice Latakia to smoke in the winter." also my favorite review ever.

and you, yak, are one of the enthusiasts who's top five of particular categories would be nice know. you also make me want to age my escudo, which i tend to smoke away as i get it. you mean this stuff gets better?

 

[mark]

I guess what irritates me is that Crowdog is enthusiastic about a project that benefits those who are fumbling about finding a good representation of the different styles of tobacco ,,,doing no harm to anybody, and runs headlong into negative attitude. I don't think it's in the spirit of BOB,,,,To those who don't think it can be done successfully and is a total waste of time, don't get involved, don't participate, and ignore the project. I'm glad Thomas Edison ignored the naysayers,,,,I'd have appreciated a consolidated list and saved a bundle when I started,,,,

Rant done,,,whew,,,,

 

[thecrowdog]

I think people got the wrong idea right away. maybe it's my fault, I tend to use a lot of words, and people tend to skim, which is not a great combination. whatevs. someday soon I'll have a couple of hours to myself and I have a good idea how I will spend them. if that helps anybody in the future, cool. if it turns into a total waste of time, no big loss.

 

[LL]

I guess what irritates me is that Crowdog is enthusiastic about a project that benefits those who are fumbling about finding a good representation of the different styles of tobacco ,,,doing no harm to anybody, and runs headlong into negative attitude. I don't think it's in the spirit of BOB,,,,To those who don't think it can be done successfully and is a total waste of time, don't get involved, don't participate, and ignore the project. I'm glad Thomas Edison ignored the naysayers,,,,I'd have appreciated a consolidated list and saved a bundle when I started,,,,

Rant done,,,whew,,,,

Mark --

By floating an idea and asking for input, the "burden of ignoring" lies with the initiator, I think. Because while a majority of people in the world subscribe to the "feelings trump facts" worldview, not all of them do. And and a cattle call post is a cattle call post. Ya get what ya get.

As for the whole attitude thing, I guess what irritates me is the relentless insistence of the Feelings-Trump-Facts'ers that the rest of the world respect their optimism---regardless of whether it is justified or not---like it is a religion not to be blasphemed. :roll:

Maybe what the board needs is some sort of FTF indicator that people can set in their profile. A colored box that appears around their avatar, maybe, that indicates how likely they are to be butt hurt when disagreed with. Red for very, yellow for somewhat, and green for never.

 

[thecrowdog]

ok, it's definitely not my fault.

 

[Anonymous]

Bruins : there is an assumption operating here that everybody tries everything and ranks it. Maybe, for some, that's part of the "hobby." I never saw any point to taking the butterfly approach, preferring to search for something -- anything -- that could be anywhere near as good as Balkan Sobranie Virginian Nr. 10 was. (Sob !)

In the process, noteworthy stuff like Penzance, Stonehaven and Escudo were crashing disappointments -- gave the first two away minus one bowlful, and am only persevering with one bowl of Escudo every three months (and it was aged 4 years when a friend bombed me with it) to see if it ever stops tasting like dirt. Apparently, not.

Having a non-cathoiic, monogamous orientation, I can list you five outstandingly choice tobacs, but not (IMHO) the best five in any genre. The seek-no-furthers are, in no particular order,

1) Union Square (pure Virginia)

2) Full Virginia Flake (enhanced Virginia)

3) Blackpoint (English-Balkan with a hint of Perique)

4) Odyssey (Balls to the Wall Balkan)

5) Embarcadero (Virginia-Izmir. Initially underwealming until you "get it." Then it's like catnip is to a cat).

If you don't want to leave McClellands out of the picture, Tudor Castle Arcade. And if a subtle hint of cigar leaf in a big English would go down well (and it does on this end), Robusto.

The only one I'd recommend out of a new tin would be the Tudor Castle Arcade. With the rest, the longer you can wait, the better they'll be. Blackpoint after four years is utterly transcendental.

FWIW

:face:

 

[Anonymous]

CD : Maybe you could explain why the GIGO principle (garbage in -> garbage out) is not the root issue ?

:face:

 

[bruins]

nice post, yak. actually, i have some blackpoint someone gave me. i better leave it on the back of the shelf before giving it a whirl.

i get why people who have smoked for awhile are resistant to rank or quantify anything, especially with the many factors you listed a couple posts ago. for the newbie, of which i still consider myself one, lists like the one you just presented, are important, both for knowledge and exploring. whether or not i will end up agreeing with your tastes is the uncontrollable factor, but it does give me references, even if i hate some of the blends another hobbiest loves to death.

 

[thecrowdog]

the garbage in garbage out principle, used in this instance, seems to be implying that the opinions of seasoned members of BoB are just garbage. That's the garbage in, and me making note of those opinions and organizing them would be the garbage out. Therefore no one should ask which blend is a classic example of a full Balkan, because any answer given will just be garbage.

I, on the other hand, think that if I ask BoB members who love full Balkans to recommend a blend that exemplifies the style, their opinion is not garbage. Sure, it's just their opinion, but it's a lot better than asking my neighbor who has never smoked a day in his life. It's a lot better than relying on the prosaic copy on the tins. And if 20 of those BoB members recommend a particular blend, it's a good bet that it is a better place for me to start than say, a blend that only 1 person recommended, or one that has a pretty label. It doesn't guarantee that the most recommended blends are somehow absolutely better than others, it merely implies that people who love this style seem to agree on some good examples.

All I wanted to do was compile the recommendations that have been given here on BoB, and see which ones were recommended the most. That's all. It's ridiculously simple. Yes, I did ask for input, about whether this already exists (and I got some input on that) and whether there are blend "styles" or categories that I should remember to include.

Somehow this simple notion, which can be done on a napkin, got twisted into the absolute impossibility of the idea and then the absolute irrelevance of any patterns. So in essence, if I've never tried a "Virginia" in my life and I want to... where do I start? If it turns out that BoB members who love Virginias recommend Union Square, Best Brown Flake, and FVF more than any others, should I consider that information garbage when I'm trying to decide where to start my own experiences with Virginias? If someone else wants to consider that garbage, that's their business. But I think I'd try the top 5 most recommended and see if I like any. If I hated them all, maybe I'd try a different style. Maybe I'd try the next 5 on the list. But regardless, I wouldn't blame the recommendations as "garbage". If the recommendations of BoB members are garbage, why should I consider the recommendation of a tobacconist to be any different? After all, he has a financial interest in selling me something he has in stock and that costs more than others.

The garbage in garbage out principle, in this instance, seems to imply that the recommendations shared on BoB are garbage. Personally, I find it helpful to draw on the experiences of others, even if my results vary.

I don't understand how the touchy-feely feelgood vs fact thing came into it. And honestly, I don't see it as a particularly productive avenue of discussion.

 

[LL]

The garbage in garbage out principle, in this instance, seems to imply that the recommendations shared on BoB are garbage. Personally, I find it helpful to draw on the experiences of others, even if my results vary.

Oh, please. I said nothing of the sort. Stop trying to characterize my opinion of the members of this board in such a transparently cheap-shot fashion.

GIGO it is a well-understood, tongue-in-cheek principle of data processing that refers to any error of input that results in bad or unreliable output. In the case of a tobacco recommendations database there are too many to list. The quality of individual opinions is simply a null set in such a scenario---people like what they like because they like it, and for no other reason---it does not make their opinion "garbage."

 

[thecrowdog]

well just to be clear to you and anyone else, that is what "garbage in garbage out" means to ME in relation to this idea, this instance (as I said). I am not characterizing how you feel about BoB, only what I feel about a "garbage in garbage out" philosophy applied to this idea. As far as I can tell, you were referring to tobaccoreviews dot com.

And again, I don't see this as a productive line of conversation. I deeply regret bringing up the idea at all.

 

[LL]

well just to be clear to you and anyone else, that is what "garbage in garbage out" means to ME in relation to this idea, this instance (as I said). I am not characterizing how you feel about BoB, only what I feel about a "garbage in garbage out" philosophy applied to this idea. As far as I can tell, you were referring to tobaccoreviews dot com.

And again, I don't see this as a productive line of conversation. I deeply regret bringing up the idea at all.

Trying to figure out that first paragraph makes my head hurt.

As for the second, as I said before, you wanted feedback and you got it. You don't have to pay the slightest attention to anyone. That's hardly cause for regret, or for not giving the project your best shot. Fire away.

 

[Puff Daddy]

You can compile it. So go compile it already. In the end it'll be nothing but another useless list of something a small segment of a bigger population chose at a specific point in time, not relevant to to any actual preference trend (go to sales figures for that). Hit the "What are you smoking?" threads, there you'll find the most likely trends on this forum based on what people actually smoke.

It'll be just another list to be lost in the ether unless you have something really unique to do with it after it's compiled. I'm not trying to be a prick, but really, you've done plenty of arguing about why you should be able to compile it without malice, but you've got nothing original that you profess to be doing with the information. Nothing that isn't already being done, anyhow. You got a couple negatives and a couple of atta boys, so go do it and show us something already. Just don't make it a bunch of :bball: that only serves to produce

 

[thecrowdog]

CD : Maybe you could explain why the GIGO principle (garbage in -> garbage out) is not the root issue ?

:face:

my bad, I thought he meant me.

 

[Anonymous]

This is an idea that's been kicked around for years.

The bottom line problem is the abundance of people who don't know how to fill or smoke a pipe in the first place writing half-baked impressions based on half a bowl of something out of a desire to see themselves in print. My all-time favorite is the turkey who summarised everything GLP's ever made as having "the trademark taste of crap."

Slice it, dice it, run it through the statistical veg-o-matic any way you like, but garbage in yields garbage out.

Even if you come up with a B.S. Detector to weed out the me-toos and wanna-be poseurs (some of whom are a lot more articulate than others), fact is that there are folks who can detect a 2% presence of some little-known condimental leaf in a blend, but who cannot "taste" the Lakeland Shampoo in so many of the SG & GH offerings. At all. (!!!!!!!) People just don't all have the same taste mechanism or acuity. Even when impressions are congruent, they're still ideosyncratic.

:face: