I should have been more specific in my complaint. I think that wine, decor and service are all important aspects of the restaurant experience. In the case of the Gambero Rosso rating system, I think wine receives too much weight in the overall equation. I think of wine as its own separate course in a meal that desrves the same care and consideration one uses when choosing an individual course; however, as such it should be incorporated in the judges deteremination of the food score. Moreover, if a restaurant such as EP can warrant inclusion in a list of the top 16 restaurants based upon strong showings in wine, decor and service with such uninspired cuisine, I think such result is sufficient proof of that the scoring system is flawed. I don't see the value in a 20,000 bottle cellar in terms of the added benefit it brings to a fine dining establishment. As one who often dines with only my wife, an apertif and a bottle of wine are usually sufficient for our purpose. If I were, for example, to dine at La Calandre and have their full menu, a '61 Haut Brion or a '96 Dal Forno Amarone would not be appealing in such circumstances (given the 17%-18% alchohol content of Dal Forno, two people would need a very strong liver to enjoy such bottle). The progression of a meal at a great restaurant does not compliment a "great" bottle of wine nor does a "great" bottle of wine enhance a meal at a great restaurant. I yearn for that restaurant that does not focus on a wide breadth of wines that include Bordeaux from the 19th century but a small hand-crafted list that seeks to compliment the cuisine. The wines don't have to be the most expensive or rarest but rather they should meld into the symphony of flavors that are revealed from the kitchen. This might require more wines by the glass but it surely does not require more DRC or Margaux. In the end, I see EP as a very expensive Enotecha. Many people go there for the wine, the chance to have that rare bottle, and that, for me, is the antithesis of what a great restaurant should be.