Holly Moore

I don't quite understand the notion of complaining that rating systems are inane, and then complaining about the rating that was actually assigned. If it's inane, then any rating—be it one star, two, three, or four—would have been a meaningless shortcut for the lazy. So why the fuss? ← Restaurant rating systems, be they insipid or inspired, are inevitable. The least one can ask is that there not be inequity in their inaneness.

Could this verify that there are indeed kinder, gentler souls hidden within New Yorkers legendary gruff exteriors? Is New York City going warm and cuddly?

We pause for a minute while I savor a bit of crow. I just took a look at Katz's paper menu and, as many times as I have eaten there, I never realized that Katz's features its Cheesesteak as "This would make Rocky leave Philadelphia." While I still consider ordering a cheesesteak at Katz's to be idiosyncratic and a waste of good stomach capacity, it is not fair of me to take Bruni to task for ordering and reviewing a cheesesteak if Katz's is foolish enough to boast about it. While I'm at it, one personal insigt - though I occasionally use smiley faces in my posts, I do my best to avoid them. My original comment on Bruni's review intended "cretin" as an exaggeration - in jest. I just don't see myself ever calling someone a cretin with malice aforethought. In fact I hope I don't hang out with anyone who would employ such dated insults. As to the Time's rating system, though Mr. Bruni did not create it, he is using it. I consider all rating systems - stars, liberty bells, toques or grease stains - inane and short cuts for those too lazy to read a review or at least its opening and closing paragraphs. A rating system that can never consider a one dollar sign restaurant, using the NY Times scale, capable of being "Excellent" or "Extraordinary," is both myopic and pompous.

Then don't pretend to be reading your first issue today. That is not how the NY Times star system works. Period. If the Inquirer wants to give the same rating to Tony Luke's and Le Bec Fin that's their prerogative, but it's not how it works here, and with very good reasons that have been hashed over interminably in this thread. ← Alas, the Philadelphia Inquirer has not given Tony Luke's the same rating as Le Bec-Fin. Nor do I think that the New York Times must give Katz's the same rating as Daniel. But a rating system that is incapable of acknowledging four star, one dollar sign restaurants is both pompous and flawed.

um, that sort of cretin is known as a professional restaurant critic doing their job. Is there another starred deli in NY? in the U.S.? ← Ordering something as obscure as a "Philly Style" cheesesteak at a New York Deli the caliber of Katz's, and passing over a multitude of more normal deli fare is a not restaurant critic being professional (meaning thorough I assume). Rather, to be kind, it is a restaurant critic being idiosyncratic.

Fortunately for we provincials the NY Times reached Philadelphia's newsstands long ago. As the NY Times seems to go particularly well with La Columbe espresso, savoring the words of Mr. Bruni (and of those before him) between sips of my triple latte has become somewhat of a Wednesday morning ritual. Interesting spin on the pastrami and brisket. 5% of Katz's menu. 5% of their tonnage, too? Would that it were. The lines at the slicers would be 10 percent of what they are now. Katz's is arguably the best at what they do. And while it may be pushing it to award Katz's four stars - a three star rating, which the Times defines as "excellent", seems appropriate. Word has it that 95% of eGullet NY posters also floss after brushing.

I don't think anyone really understands the NY Times ever-evolving rating system. The Times declares that one star is good, two is very good, three is excellent and four is extraordinary. No stars means poor to satisfactory. Beyond that the Times explains "Ratings ... reflect the reviewer's reaction to food ambiance and service with price taken into consideration." Since Katz's ambiance and service are above reproach, and since Bruni for the most part raves about the food - especially Katz's raisons d'être: pastrami and brisket - price must be the determining factor in Bruni's myopic and evidently pompous limiting of Katz's to a solitary star.

First off, what sort of cretin goes to Katz's and orders a cheesesteak? And assuming one orders with appropriate gusto, who has room for dessert? Except for these ever-so-minor, irrelevant objections, this is a rave review deserving of more than one measly star. The pastrami is "among the best in the land." The service from the slicer guys is impeccable. The ambiance is extraordinary. Knock off a star for the leaden knishes and questionable latkes, and we are still talking two stars at least. Is there a better deli in New York? In the United States?

Sweet Red Relish That and a slice of raw onion on a charcoal grilled burger - cookout perfection.

It was like driving a stake through my heart every time the burger griller at Five Guys used his spatula to presss all the juice out of my burgers - I counted a half dozen times per burger. He gets bored I guess, needs to pass his time away doing something. A lot of places like Nifty Fifties squeeze the life out of their burgers for insurance liability purposes and/or to obey some inane law about cooking ground beef to medium. I can still buy a pack of cigarettes or imported grapes soaked in DDT, but I can't legally order a rare burger? Back in the late 60's I went to my first Steak and Shake - somewhere in the midwest. Their approach was to use an ice cream scoop to drop a row of burger balls on the grill. Then the grill guy used his spatula to flatten them to the proper thickness. Then he left them alone, except to flip the patties. One thing struck me as sad about Laban's list - in an area as large as the Delaware Valley there is only one Charlie's like place. Tis a crime. Missing from the list - Dilly's, outside of New Hope and the Charcoal Pit in Wilmington. Seems to be the time of year for newspapers to write about burgers. Mark Bittman in Wednesday's NY Times food section wrote about home-cooked burgers. He demands that one grinds one's own beef. Not likely - for me at least - despite his valid concerns about packaged supermarket ground beef. Are there any butchers left in the city who will grind beef to order? I've never asked at Harry Ochs or Martins.

Lets hope he didn't drag along his gang of cheesesteak eating teens again. It will be interesting to see how much emphasis he places on immenseness and baubles as opposed to smaller, traditional hamburgers.

Maybe one glorious day the Carolinas will unite under the umbrella of great barbecue and also include SC's mustard base sauce in such goings ons. How will they handle the almost important issue of red vs white cole slaw?

It's a common restaurant paradox. The emptier a restaurant, even a decent restaurant, the slower the service and the slower the kitchen. My theory is that it has something to do with adrenaline rush. Sounds like that was compounded by a very new server with very little if any training. No excuse though. Pad Thai is listed on DiningIn.Com and it is very possible that the kitchen was getting slammed with to go orders. No excuse though. I'm a fan of Pad Thai, though I haven't been there in a while. Hopefully it was merely a down evening.

Depends on the parents more than the baby. If they understand the effect that a noisy baby, crying or yelling in glee, has on other diners and are willing to remove the baby at the first sign of disturbance, not a problem. I'm of the opinion that a "no noisy baby" policy should also hold true for never-to-be-starred establishments such as Little Pete's. Army psyops provides recordings for use in military interrogation - at least they used to. Among other recordings, psyops has developed a continuous-loop tape of a baby crying that can be blared through speakers. Just as restaurants do not allow servers to waterboard their customers, no matter how justified, they should not permit their patrons to be subjected to the psychological stress of a crying baby.

Had brunch today at SnackBar. As Philadining pointed out more politely, the brunch menu is kinda mundane compared to the dinner menu. Little of the sense of adventure found in the evening. Hopefully that will be changing. That said, everything was excellent, from bloody mary, to the fried oyster omelet with remoulade sauce, to the wierd cheese grits. They serve the bloody mary with a straw which is counter intuitive to the horseradish foam. Would be a shame if people sipped the bloody mary through a straw rather then layered with the froth. The cheese grits were different from any preparation I've come across. No grittiness. Pureed perhaps? Great flavor.

If you miss elotes tomorrow at the festival, the elote lady in front of the grocery store across the parking lot from Taqueria La Veracruzana (same "last name" I believe) whips them up most evenings.

I'd agree if the stated purpose of the article was "what is new in Philadelphia dining." But it is not. It is 1.) how does one identify a "great food city" and 2) is Philadelphia a great food city. That the article is in "Food & Wine" and not "Popular Grease" does not justify a writer for a national publication painting just half the picture. Also a food writer who proclaimed, "Wow, they have cheesesteaks there, AND THEY'RE REALLY GOOD! They made with meat and cheese and come on these rolls...." should not even be writing for a local publication.

"sammies" ???

I am mainly taking issue with Ms. Cowin's criteria for a great dining destination and/or a great food city. The "soul" I describe in my earlier post not only is key to defining a great dining destination, be it Philadelphia or Paris, but also in savoring the differences between great dining destinations. From city to city there is a degree of sameness to young chefs' ideas, food artesians, wine scenes, chic cocktail lounges and such. Cheesesteaks, papaya doggeries, taco's, Italian beef, barbecued brisket, half smokes, brats, chowders, muffalettas, coffee milk, chili-mac, hot browns are the delicacies that help distinguish one great dining destination from another. Charleston is a wonderful dining destination. But if you don't pack a pair of jeans and a throw-away shirt for downing shovelfuls of roast oysters at Bowen's Island, you'll head home perhaps well fed but only half-informed as to what makes Charleston such a great food city.

Pardon my predictable point of view. An essential criteria missing from Ms. Cowin's elitist grading system is "Soul." Not necessarily soul as in soul food, but soul as in the gritty, everyday traditional peasant fare of a city's natives. Philadelphia's cheesesteaks, hoagies, and pork sandwiches. Chicago's hot dogs, Italian beef and pizza. Five star dining/eating at one dollar sign prices. Some cities have far more soul than others. Without soul, no matter how sophisticated its cocktails nor how experimental its chefs, a city can not be a "Great Food City / Culinary Destination." Breaths there a gourmet with soul so dead who never to herself has said, "Wiz with."

Can't answer that, but do recommend you avoid Chicago. Ordering ketchup on a hot dog in Chicago is as great a transgression as wearing a Dallas Cowboy's jersey to an Eagle's game.

In case anyone missed it, Laban award Jame's three bells in today's Inquirer.

Most who know me find my validation less than assuring.

That would be me.

At age twenty or so I took a weekly, two hour lecture course in Beverage Management that was referred to as "wine tasting" and usually ended with a lavish sampling of wines or booze supplied by manufacturers. (Drinking age in NY was 18 at that time.) The class was just before lunch, giving students the opportunity to sleep or walk off their research. Students being students, it is probably a good idea that the majority of mixing at the Mixology Wine Istitute is done with colored water. From a practical and liability point of view, locking away the hard stuff makes good sense. Other than taste - and we're talking basic formulas here, not cooking recipes - the colored water probably works fine. Especially if the colors are true. The only issues I see are in drinks where over shaking or stirring dilutes them. The other issue is the variety in flavors of different brands of the same liquor. That is not really classroom fodder. It is best learned sitting across the bar from Katie or some other "gastro pub hipster." Plastic garnishes on the other hand, though they may have more nutritional value than garden variety maraschino cherries, should not be used. The more practice students get prepping garnishes the better. I'm guessing there is homework, assigned or not, where the real stuff gets used.