Serious Eats - seriouseats.com

Gee I love a good firestorm, Let's see, where do I start. First of all, Michael Nagrant's comment about shilling is pretty silly considering that I have published a survey where the scores and comments are driven by ratings from more than 900 people. All I add to the mix is to judge how a resstaurant performed based on expectations. As to the comments about being too close to chefs, Nagrant obviously didn't read the introduction to my book. What sets my guide apart from the traditional food press (at least what I hope sets it apart) is that is attempts to help diners get a better meal than the average diner gets. If Nagrant isn't interested in how to get a better meal at a restaurant, or doesn't believe in the concept, well that's okay. But my guide is directed at people who are interested in improving their dining experiences, rather than perpetuating the mediocrity that often passes for fine dining at many restaurants. But in order to do that you can't dine anonymously. You have to somehow communicate to the restaurant that you want their A game and not their B game and as soon as you do that, you can't be anonymous any longer. . Finally, Ed, don't you write for the Times which would make you sort of biased? But besides that, on what basis would you say that my critique of Bruni's review of Dovetail is unfair? While I was a bit strident in my tone (editorial style :-), I suspect that the assertions I made about Fraser's technical proficiency, compared to Humm's and Bouleys, are probably true. Humm spent something like seven years in the Pont de Brent kitchen and you can taste his training in his food. Fraser's food does not have any of the sheen or polish that you will find in Humm's food, let along Bouley's food. Unfortunately, the reviewer for the New York Times wasn't able to tell the difference and as a result, I was cranky after I followed his recommendation so excuse my rant about it (not really but you know what I mean,)

I think you're right, Tamara. I was probably premature with my opinions.
I'll have more to say after I've had a chance to read the entire guide.

Julia I wish you would read the book before making incorrect statements. In terms of the10 highest rated restaurants in the book they are in order;

1. Troisgros
2. Bras
3. Fat Duck
4. L'Arpege
5. Pierre Gagnaire
6. Urasawa
7. El Bulli
8. L'Astrance
9. L'Arnsbourg
9. The French Laundry

None of them are in NYC. In fact the only that are located 2 in the U.S. are in California. Secondly, your notion about who the book is directed at is misplaced and is unnecessarilly insulting to the people who actively travel to dine out and who do not earn large incomes. There are many people who fit that description who participated in the survey. But your raising it in this context does raise the question, if you are not someone who actively travels around the U.S. and Europe in an attempt to learn about cuisine and to better fine tune your palate, on what basis would you be an authoritiy on this subject matter?

Well your prior post made a snarky comment saying that it should be called, "The Rich New Yorker's Guide to Dining in the U.S. and Europe." Your last post tones that rhetoric down quite a bit which I appreciate. As to who actually practices this hobby, I took a look at the list of our top weighted participants which included exactly two wealthy businessmen from NYC (me included LOL.) Others professions on the list were:

Human resources manager in London
Project manager at a financial printing company in London
Investment banker in London
retired architect NYC and Paris
young attorney in NYC
professor in N. Cal
psychologist in NYC
professor in Chicago
Nuclear Arms expert in Wash DC
Political writer in London
Accounting clerk in London
eBay seller from Canada
Fashion model from Paris
Actuary from California
Housewife from California
Computer consultant from London
Computer executive from Northern Cal.

While some of the people on the list are high income earners, there are also those who do not make a lot of money but who save in order to take two or three trips a year for the purpose of dining. You have also twisted around a comment of mine when you said,

"And while experience with fine dining might be necessary to be an authority on high-end restaurants, I'm not convinced that experience alone necessarily makes one an expert."

Nowhere have I made that claim. What I have said is that experience is a fundamental component of being an expert on any topic, and by offering a blended opinion of people who might qualify to be experts, the results are more reliable than other guides on the market.

This argument reminds me of my love-hate relationship with OAD: I enjoy living vicariously through SP's adventures with his Black Card, but he's no critic (in the idealistic sense of the term); and I certainly can't fathom how he could or would objectively collect and synthesize the opinions of others. That doesn't seem to be the strength of his blog--I mean, who was asking for this? Really. He was supposed to be Alan Richman--minus the ability to write in grammatically correct sentences--not Tim Zagat.

I would have to disagree with lostfourwords and say that Steve is a critic in the idealistic sense of the term, to the readers of his guide. He makes it clear that his goal is to get you the restaurants "A" game. If this is truly what he intends, then who better to provide reviews than a man renowned for getting the best out of restaurants. After reading his tips, he would expect you to get the best out of each restaurant, and he would therefore be the ideal critic, in the sense that you are now receiving the restaurant's "A" game, as well as him (like an ideal critic, he is reviewing what you are getting)

That said, I would much rather read a guide such as this, presided over by one such as Steve, over the Zagat guide.
Have you ever read those?
They're so boring!
I'm not planning however, on buying any of these guides. The blog posts are much more interesting.

Regarding rating restaurants - I personally did not rate any restaurant I haven't dined at within the last 3 years or so. What's the point of rating my meal at Troisgros when I dined there 20 years ago? FWIW - we were never told that our ratings would be weighted by the number of places we reviewed. If that were the case - I could have rated dozens. But again - what would be the point of rating a place where I dined from the 1970's through the 1990's? RobynG

Great article! If you're looking for good restaurants in the area check out www.foodjoker.com. Great selection of places to eat and great site. Available also in 8 languages.