I've often been baffled by the differences in discussion between tobaccos depending on their intended end point (ie, cigarette, cigar, pipe, snuff, etc). For instance, when it comes to a cigar you're primary talking about filler, binder, and wrapper leaf. The wrapper leaf is most often the most important leaf in this mix, but all play some part. The typical nomenclature cites the location the tobacco was grown at. For instance, "Nicaraguan." Then we usually have if it was shade or sun grown. Sometimes how it was cured (Maduro/natural/etc). And occasionally we'll have some citation of the actual variety of plant. It isn't at all uncommon to hear, "A shade grown green Candela wrapper from the DR with a shade grown Connecticut binder and filler from Honduras, hand rolled in Miami". However, when encountering pipe tobacco, the first thing we discuss is a variety of tobacco plant, possibly the curing processing (air/flue/fired/etc). Cavendish itself is a misnomer. That leaves us basically with VA, Perique, Burley, Orientals (which comprise their own subset), Latakia, etc. Usually no mention is made at all of where the tobacco is actually grown or under what conditions the tobacco was grown in. Usually no mention of the quality of the leaf (like wrapper/binder/filler). Why is this? Does VA tobacco never go into a cigar? Does Connecticut never go in a pipe blend? Where is the cross over? When I read about cigars, no one ever says "burley". And when I read about pipe tobacco no one ever says "sun grown". The closest I've seen in the meeting of the two is when someone will say "some cigar leaf" in a pipe blend, however, what does that actually mean? I have no idea. They don't explain what that cigar leaf is. I'm looking to expand my Overall understanding of tobacco. Why don't these two things overlap more? And if they do, why are they described in such differing ways? Can someone please help this poor ignoramus out?