Tonyfinch

Forgot to mention the bill. Two cartes plus two bottles of wine plus one glass dessert wine plus coffee with homemade chocolates,a couple of cognacs,two pre-starters,one pre dessert,excellent breads-a terrific evening lasting 3 and a half hours- £138 for two. Is there a better value French restaurant in the country just now?

Had a fine meal at Hibiscus this week. What a terrific restaurant. It's small but feels spacious thanks to the very generous table spacing,the wood panelling chimes with the town style but also gives a warm cossetting feel ,and the lighting and other aspects of the decor have all been tastefully thought through. No question of any table turning here,even though there aren't lots of tables. Lots of passing trade was being turned away. Claire Bose later told us that her and Claude wanted customers to relax for the whole evening and linger as they wished. Refreshing or what? Claire is your perfect front of house. Warm, friendly, relaxed, helpful, she and one French assistant worked the room superbly, giving everyone the right degree of attention, explaining the menu and making perceptive wine suggestions when asked (the wine list is the least greedily marked up I've seen in ages- Chateau Musar '96 was in really fine nick and at £25 even a constant wine mark up whinger like me felt chuffed). Claire's unusual choice of a glass of Canadian Ice Wine (musn't say Eiswein) to go with dessert was also spot on. We considered the nine course tasting menu (£47) but I was a gonner for the carte (£32.50 for three courses) once I saw Roast Suckling Pig with Puree of Muscovado Sugar,Confit of Shallots and Carrots as a main course. One rarely sees suckling pig on a French menu in Britain and Claude later told us that he'd had trouble persuading local farmers to "bash their pigs on the head so young". The meat had all that moist milky richness so rarely found in ordinary roast pork and the crackling was like a crunchy creme brulee topping-wonderful. Our starters-Foie Gras skewered on a Fresh Liquorice Stick. Pear and Lemon Confit. Crispy Galette of Pig's Trotters ,Sweetcorn and Parsley,Smoked Beurre Blanc Main-Roast Pigeon,with a Gratin of Sweet Chard and Summer Truffle, Froth of Eucalyptus Milk-the pigeon was gamey and meltingly tender, the gratin was ever so slightly watery and separated For dessert we had a marvellous Confit (confit is a word used pretty liberally on the menu)of Rhone Valley Peach with Brioche Ice Cream, and an Espresso Sorbet with Whisky Creme Anglaise and a Warm Chocolate Madelaine-featherlight and scrummy. Faults? Apart from the watery gratin just a slight tentativeness with seasoning. I have no problem with restaurants that don't put out salt and pepper on the tables but in that case you have to get it spot on and I felt that Claude was erring on the side of caution . A couple of other potentially bold flavours were SO subtle as to be (to me anyway) barely noticeable, but my wife disagreed and I'll defer to her more nuanced palate. Despite being busy Claire always had a moment to chat and Claude emerged at the end of the evening. Conversation was warm and amicable until I made the mistake of mentioning Andy's name whereupon a distinct frostiness descended upon proceedings........... It seems to me that this restaurant is running at peak form. Claire said that the last couple of years had "flown by"-a sure sign that her and Claude are enjoying their work. As she waved away our attempts to pay a service charge ("its all included")we discussed whether it was possible for a young husband and wife team to ever run such a place in London. Claire thought definitely not-overheads, pressure, staffing problems etc. Looks like we're going to be beating the path to Ludlow for a while longer.

Simon-you'll have to eat some roti and naan at New Tayyab. Please try not to die there.

Well you can fall out of your room into John Burton Race at The Landmark,probably London's most expensive restaurant. Still you'll save on bus fares. Let us know what its like.

The intro blurb to The Rough Guide says written and edited by Charles Campion and then credits three others with "additional research and reviews" Even if all four are reviewing equally its hard to see how they can re-write a fully updated guide every year. I buy it because I respect Charles Campion as a reviewer. More wit, enthusiam and commitment to restaurants in his little finger that AA Gill has in his whole body.

There's the Lonely Planet guide to London restaurants. I don't know it but I assume it focuses more at the middle/lower end in keeping with LP's general policy.

Does this have social implications for people with nut allergies?

I think the Time Out guide is far and away the best ,and certainly the most comprehensive,for a general restaurant guide. Its reviews are concise,well focused and ,I've always found,generally pretty accurate. It's especially strong on ethnic cuisines. I think it comes out each October so you may want to wait for the new one before buying. The Rough Guide to London Restaurants is well written-Charles Campion is a very positive and enthusiastic food writer-but is naturally limited by the tastes and preferences of one man. Zagat's and Hardens are a waste of time. As for national guides, The Which? Good Food Guide has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the era of ethnic restaurants ,but its reviews are extremely informative and as detailed as you could wish. The Michelin guide is OK for French/European, useless for ethnic. For pubs the best bet for drinking pubs is the CAMRA Good Beer Guide. I'm not sure what the best guide is for eating in pubs,though.

But nowadays people are becoming allergic to foods that they were never allergic to before. It's not uncommon to hear people say "I used to love cream and cheese but now I'm allergic to dairy" What they mean is: They got ill after they had eaten dairy one time and associate the two together thereby concluding that they have an allergy.Or they don't like dairy products any more. Or they may like dairy products but ,for whatever reason,don't want to eat them any more. Whatever, they are NOT allergic to them in 99% of cases.

I have no evidence to back this up but I would hazard a guess that the number of women claiming to have food allergies outweighs the number of men. Why? Because food allergies are part of a spectrum of food disorders that affect women more than men (although admittedly the gender gap is closing). As Fat Guy rightly says,genuine allergies are extremely dangerous and can be life threatening. That is NOT what is generally meant these days when people claim to have allergies. In the West we have an extremely complex,ambivalent relationship to food. The rise in smoking amongst teenage girls and young women has been proved to be directly related to their fear of putting on weight. THEY WOULD RATHER RISK CANCER THAN PUT ON WEIGHT. Is there not something deeply perverse about that? Saying you have an allergy is just another way of saying you don't want to eat something. Why not just say you don't want it or don't like it? Because the desire to not eat it springs out of a disorder rather than a naturally evolved set of likes and dislikes. A disorder doesn't have to manifest itself as extremely as anorexia or bulimia but is no less of a disorder when manifesting itself as a bogus allergy.

Thanks Andy. I've booked Chavignol for Wed. I'll report back on it. (And Hibiscus)

If people are fabricating food allergies then why are they doing so? Attention? Maybe, but it strikes me as part of a more general trend amongst Americans to refute thenotion of taking personal responsibility for anything that happens to you. You got ill from smoking? Why it's not your fault for ignoring the health warnings for 20 years but the fault of those nasty cigarettes and those who make them. I can honestly see a time when someone soon will sue a banana company for not posting a health warning on the banana to the effect that some people may be allergic to bananas. It already happens with nuts,doesn't it?

A damning review of City Rhodes by Matthew Norman appeared in the Sunday Telegraph magazine on July 28th. Norman dips his toe into the Janet Street-Porter/Nick Foulkes school of sneering at fellow diners,describing the restaurant as "a sea of greys and browns half filled..with sombre accountants and lawyers (do these critics expect punters to be dancing on the tables doing the hokey cokey?) Norman is told that Rhodes is in the kitchen "about 60% of the time" but questions this as the place is "as diametrically opposed to the Gary Rhoders image (ie joyous,enthusiastic) as could be" Norman is shocked by being charged £16.50 for three scallops,calls the restaurant "spectacularly dreary" and concludes that it is a "miserable,moribund,executive canteen". He questions whether Rhodes's partnership with the catering company Sodexho might be responsible. Has Jay done his interview yet?

Thanks Scott. It'ds only open Thurs,Fri,and Sat. Need somwhere for Wed. Anybody heard of Chavignol at Shipston 0n Stour? It's got a Michelin star apparently.

Anyone know anything about Croque-en-Bouche in Malvern Wells?

I'm off to Ludlow next week Booked into Hibiscus on Tuesday night but couldn't get into The Merchant House the next night-they're fully booked for the next couple of weeks. I don't want to go to that third Michelin place(Mr. Underhill's?) since it offers no choice on the menu. Does anyone know of anywhere else really good to eat? Doesn't have to be in Ludlow itself but somewhere in that general neck of the woods . Suggestions gratefully received

As for the performance art. On one occasion the lights dimmed, 'orrible squeaky plinky plonk music was put on and a ghastly looking woman, supposedly naked but for a huge brown fur coat,scurried up and down the staircases, appearing startled at the windows and threatening to jump. This was watched respectfully but when the whole thing was repeated about an hour later the drink had obviously kicked in and people were urging her to "jump" and "be quick about it", much to the disapproval to the stone faced, chain smoking harridan who appears to be in charge of this place (although who's actually in charge of the restaurant part is difficult to tell-one of its problems). On another occasion the same woman actually asked us all to be quiet and had clearly decided it was a good idea in the middle of dinner to subject us to some twat blowing into 5 musical instruments simultaneously and making a f--k of a racket FOR 50 MINUTES!! (I timed it). Even the staff looked embarrased. I don't know whether their policy has changed as the last couple of times I've been I 've asked if we're going to be allowed to actually converse throughout our meal and been told that there is "no performance" but if you feel like me and you're thinking of going there I would definitely check.

Wilfrid,the word Wapping comes from an Anglo Saxon chief Waeppa who settled his crew round here.It is also the origin of the word "whopper" referring to the bloatedness of the bodies that were constantly being fished out of the Thames round here (people made a good living doing this) So the next time you're in Burger King and you order a Double Cheese and Bacon Whopper-you'll know where the word comes from.

Circeplum, Wapping Food is 20 yards from me so I've eaten there numerous times.I have to say that this is now mainly out of convenience as it was always a bit hit and miss but recently has been far more miss than hit,with lots of the food being way too salty and carelessly prepared and presented. It struggles to decide whether it's a restaurant with an Arts dimension or vice versa. At times we've been subjected to ludicrous "post modern" performance art in the middle of the meal and diners have been told to be quiet if they don't show the requisite degree of respect. Its a (sort of)interesting building and worth seeing if you're down Wapping way. Its also got a good all Aussie wine list. I've never had a steak there,though its often on the menu.

I would NOT pay the £2. My point is that £2 represents a monstrous rip off for the amount of sauce you're going to get on your plate. Even if the sauces are made in the restaurant and not bought in in bulk(highly doubtful) it must still constitute an outrageous mark up. I know of no other restaurant,or even restaurant chain which charges a separate price for adding a sauce to your meal. Hamburger joints which ask if you want Thousand Island, Blue Cheese etc. on your salad have costed it in so that you "feel" you're getting it for free.Even in the most basic caffs no extra charge is made for servings of ketchup, brown sauce,mustard etc. The Gaucho Grill has got this seriously wrong.The trick would be to factor in a price rise of ,say, 75p and ask people if they WANT a sauce with their steak. Those who say no won't care about the 75p and those who say yes will think they're getting something for nothing.The restaurant "sells" more sauce,makes more money and retains goodwill.Everybody wins. Easy.

Walked past the Gaucho Grill at Canary Wharf the other day. I haven't eaten in one of these but I noticed on the menu that they charge extra for a sauce of your choice with the steak-£2 for bernaise,or mustard sauce or whatever. This seems to me as mean a piece of penny pinching as I've seen in a restaurant for quite a while. Why do it? It would be better psychology to charge a bit more and include the ruddy sauce. As it is I'm resolved never to go there on principle.

I think the best steak in London is to be found at the Arkansas Cafe in Spitalfields market. This is a one man American BBQ show-no frills,plastic utensils,no chips(they don't have a licence to fry or something). Also-not open in the evenings(except by arrangement)and not open Saturdays.It is also cold and uncomfortable. Great steaks though.

I agree. That is very sad for you, though God knows what made you think I was joking.

Course you have.It's just that in this country they called themselves BernI and put the word Inn afterwards. Lousy steaks as I recall.

Last week my wife and I shared a 2lb T-Bone at Doe's Eat Place in Greenville Mississippi which,according to itself,is "world famous" for its steaks.Hard to imagine a better one I must say. As for Britain, notwithstanding Smollensky's I've all but given up ordering steak in a restaurant. I find I can buy better meat at my local butcher and cook it just as well at home. A friend recently raved about his steak at Smiths of Smithfield(Top Floor) but others are far more sceptical about this place. And who are the saddest tourists in London? It has to be those sat in the variousAberdeen Steak houses in front of their dried out pieces of rump (their steaks,not their partners.)