About

 

D3S_5177

The Lone Caner is a sad island of rum appreciation in an otherwise obdurate ocean of whisky.

Being referred to as the ‘Caner is a wry commentary on the rabid whisky aficionados inhabiting  the province, if not the country, in which I lived; and from the inception of our Liquorature Collective, I loudly and cheerfully bugled my preference for the extract of the cane. As time went on this pretty much became an article of faith…need I go on? After sampling, reviewing and writing about rums on and for Liquorature for almost four years, I decided to open up The Lone Caner as a website in its own right in March 2013.

The site is about rum reviews and tastings and essays on producers, as well as whatever news of the rum world I feel like commenting on. Nothing more, though as time goes on I may bring books and photography in as well – the ‘Caner is, after all, a single person’s work and interests. However, this site is primarily geared towards rums and their makers.

I’ve arranged all posts on rums into one master index (see menu item at top – “Rum Reviews”), with a numerical sequencer showing which numbered review it was – my thoughts and opinions and development are therefore more easily followed for those curious enough to spend an inordinate amount of time charting the development of the reviews, and how my opinions changed over time. On the left there are two main sets of categories (and subcategories) – one is to classify rums into countries, and another, further down, for rums by makers.

Scoring systems are a pet bugbear of mine, and mine, while creaky and out of step with many others, is at least consistent – I started assigning ratings to rums some time after the 50th review, which is why earlier work often has no score at all. In my system, a product scoring between 50-60 is average, while 85 is a top-of-the-line, almost-walk-on-water rum – nothing has ever scored a ninety with me. I justify this by saying it leaves me more room for the excellent products to come but maybe I’m just trying to avoid going back to over so very many reviews and rescoring the lot. Opinions differ. (I was a lot harsher in the earlier reviews than I later became and actually scored some rums in the 40s, which one day will have to be re-tasted and re-scored since I know that’s a little insane).

Note that in an Iphone and twitter age, I write for desktop sized screens. I’m not brief, and write what I feel – only 20-30% of my verbiage is ever about tasting notes, and throw in any observation that seems relevant. This includes as much information about the distillery or producing company as I can find in order to provide as complete a picture of the product as I can.  Not everyone agrees with this idea (or my flowery language).

A few other points:

  • I buy just about everything, and take no freebies except from my friends, who know of my passion, or the occasional formal tasting…I found that I simply didn’t believe in my own impartiality when agents and makers sent me samples, and so I deliberately eschewed the practice years back. I relax the rule if I have already written about and reviewed many products from a given company.  I never solicit industry, but beg my friends a lot.
  • I have a day job, other interests, and a family.  Sometimes that interferes with the frequency of updates. It happens.
  • I’m not a bartender, cocktail expert, mixologist, oenologist, or -ologist of any kind. I’m not an XP panelist, nor do I take part in judging, or contests (this may be pure laziness on my part). In fact, I just happen to like rums, reading about ‘em, and writing . I’m in the fortunate position to have access to more rums than most.
  • What you are getting is an educated opinion – mine, to be exact.  That opinion is influenced by the amount of rums I’ve tried, my background and my personal palate.  My favouritism exists, and is earned, not bestowed or bought. You are welcome to disagree, as long as you concede that my opinion may also have validity.
  • Any errors of fact are entirely my own, made in all innocence during the course of my research.  When pointed out, I’ll correct them.
  • If you want to send an email, thelonecaner@gmail.com will find me; or, drop a comment here on this page.  I usually check in once or twice a day unless I’m on holiday somewhere.

 

All the best

Lance

“Ruminsky van Drunkenberg”

 


 Posted by on March 7, 2013 at 8:25 pm

  4 Responses to “About”

  1. nice to see a website of your own with your rum reviews.

  2. Caner – I love the website and articles. Every time I try a new rum (to me) I attach to your site to absorb your rum reviews whilst I enjoy.
    I find your reviews both tasteful ( you got the buds) and enlightening (” Hair on your chest and weight in your pants”) or weightening.
    I would love to hear you’re comments on a newer rum I recently ran into in Alaska liquor stores. It ‘s called ‘Kirk and Sweeney’. A rum that has a almost planted or infused vanilla flavour (not complex enough for a rum of this age) yet has a lovely finish in the throat that keeps be going back for more. I am a rum lover like yourself and find it a somewhat confusing rum as it seems un-natural or tampered with in terms of flavour ( not that complex), yet the finish seems to linger and call for another sip. I hate to put myself out there as a noob but I find it to be as intoxicating as the Cruzan single barrel or as Zacapa 15 or 23. I almost feel like I have been tricked by a infused flavouring yet I find the finish quite satisfying. Please let me know when you review this animal. P.s. I have a bottle of Brugal Unico I found in St.Thomas on a Cruise. I would love to know if you have any thoughts on it – I probably should just open it and go for it?

  3. Sorry – you must get quite a few of these rambling type comments – gotta say – take it as a compliment to you . Not easy to review rum and maintain such a cohesion of thought.

    Love the site – use comments as desired. Don’t know how you do it .

    • Hi Byron

      Let’s see if I can address all questions.

      I picked up a bottle of the Kirk and Sweeney, but have yet to crack the thing, since every time it comes to the forefront of my queue, something more interesting displaces it. I’ve tried it though (my friends helped) , and reckon it a mid-tier sipping rum of no real complexity, just a very pleasant one. Finish is clean and crisp, not all that long after a somewhat voluptuous taste. Has it been adulterated? Not sure. I was already three sheets to the wind when I tried it, so a more complete answer will have to wait until I do a formal.

      I think you should open and try the Brugal whenever you can. Sharing rums with my squaddies is always worth it since then they come back with their stuff which I may not have, and that keeps my expenses down. Plus, if you don’t, how will you know how good (or bad) it is, and if you like it at all?

      With respect to reviews, I sample, I make my notes, I pick a characteristic or a thought and I structure the essay around that as best I can. It takes time to do right, which is why I only put up one or two a week. It’s still a lot of fun finding the perfect phraseology to be both funny, perceptive and apropos. And after four years of writing, it’s become a weekly ritual I take great pleasure in doing.

      Thanks for all your kind words. Have fun in your sampling.

 Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>