oakapple

Some of your points are contradictory. For instance, replaced napkins have nothing to do with "enjoy[ing] the food," but apparently you find that ritual acceptable. I can't think of any "ritual" that does not have some purpose in enhancing the dining experience. (The multiple pens gimmick is not employed in any current NYC restaurant that I know of.)Gruff service really has nothing to do with formality. There are many accounts of unfriendly service at places like Peter Luger and Katz's Deli, and no one would call them formal restaurants.

Sometimes there's an element of luck in these challenges. Leah didn't even want Stefan on her team, and his desserts saved the day. And Fabio seems to have landed the FOH job on his own initiative, not because Leah had any insight to put him there. Radhika did a lot of things right. Her concept was much more coherent than Leah's, and she had the good sense to appoint Jamie sous-chef. Putting Carla on desserts wasn't a bad idea, as Carla had shown some talent in that department. By the time she realized the desserts had gone south, they may have been beyond saving. Her big mistake was giving herself the FOH job, yet only doing it half-heartedly.

I've never been, but other restaurants have given me the following reasons for not allowing take-away:The food suffers when not eaten right away (Frontera Grill).... With Momofuku Ko, I would guess the primary reason is the first one. ← Another potential reason is that both space and staff are limited.

Well, I'd say it's pretty obvious they have no such rule. The only one I know of is that physical intimidation or unwanted physical contact isn't allowed. Someone was once thrown off the show for violating that rule.

I would recommend La Sirène. We dined there last spring (blog report here). Bruni's review is fairly accurate. I think he genuinely liked the place. Perhaps he even understates its charms: if it had been Italian, I think he would have awarded two stars. Just be sure to check that it's open on Sundays. August, as noted upthread, lost its chef, and I haven't read any reports since then.

Surely they know that there is no privacy in that apartment, except maybe in the bathrooms. As for why they did it: I'm not defending them, but they are under a lot of pressure. It's an environment that doesn't always lead to the best judgment calls, whether in the kitchen or out of it.

Bluefoot chicken at Alain Ducaase.

I gave up after a few minutes.

What are the best high-end dining options in Manchester and environs? I am aware that there are no Michelin star restaurants in the city itself, and the nearest option of that kind is Juniper in Altrincham. French or French-inspired would be good, though not essential.

Formality in dining has been slowly ebbing away for about four or five decades. It isn't as recent as you think. But of course, it has tracked society in general. Do you remember when most people wore a jacket and tie to get on an airplane?I think you're too quick to describe high-end service as "unnecessary." When you dine at Momofuku Ko, you're giving something up that is very real and important. You may decide, as I and many others did, that Ko is still worthwhile. But it is not as if Chang showed the world how a restaurant should be run. Most restaurants in Ko's price range still practice those "rituals" and show no sign of abandoning them. It's because people like it that way—service actually does make a meaningful contribution to the dining experience. It is also worth noting that Chang's restaurants have been gradually adding many of the amenities they originally lacked. Ko will never resemble Daniel, but Chang is learning that many of the old conventions aren't so bad after all. The idea that Chang deconstructed (some say shattered) the conventions of fine dining has been greatly overstated.

Hosea regrets his make-out session with Leah:

Well...some people claim Daniel is still doing it, though I personally did not have that reaction. Maybe I just got lucky, or maybe they mistakenly took me for a more sophisticated person than I am.

I suppose you could graph it on a 3-dimensional axis: quality, quantity and consistency. At its best, service at Daniel is better than at Eleven Madison Park. But there seems to be a wide variation at Daniel between who gets their best effort, and who does not. At EMP, the highs and lows operate between much narrower bands, and it is highly unlikely that any customer would ever feel neglected.

It should be noted that nobody wants to work with Stephan. They are all elevating personal qualities over competence. The fact is, Stephan does act like a jerk much of the time, and I can see why others would find him irritating, but he never cooks a bad dish. Carla's stuff was probably going to suck no matter what Radhika did. Carla should have been in the FOH, and Radhika should have been in the kitchen, where her talents could be put to the best use.That said, I would still have sent Carla home, because she was the worst chef on the losing team.

Can you elaborate on this? I have never heard of a California style of service.

I have mixed feelings about the "no-incomplete parties" rule. It certainly brands the restaurant as "low-end" in my book, and therefore I was offended to find that policy at Babbo. But at truly low-end places, even those that take reservations, the policy makes some sense—and not just for the restaurant. At a busy place, it may make sense to give priority to diners who are ready to use the table, rather than those who are going to sit around and wait for one or more companions who may not show up, or who may be hideously late, thereby throwing the restaurant's reservation book into chaos. For instance, the restaurant may allocate a 4-top for a party of 3, and then the third never shows up, and it turns out the remaining couple could have been more efficiently allocated a 2-top. It affects not just the restaurant, but others who hoped or planned to dine there that evening.In other words, this policy not only helps the restaurant get more yield out of its tables, but at very busy places it also means that more diners who want to eat there can be accommodated. Of course, some restaurants adopt the policy for less admirable reasons. If they are clearly not busy, then routing you to the bar could just be a ploy to get you to buy an extra beverage you wouldn't have otherwise ordered.

This was the first McDonald's in Manhattan, and obviously Sokolov could not have predicted that there would eventually be one every 10 blocks. But it clearly didn't meet the traditional one-star criteria by any stretch of the imagination.I trust we can all agree, however, that Bruni has stretched the traditional star system to a degree not matched by any of his predecessors. Whether it's a good or bad thing is open to debate.

I've had several mildly disappointing experiences at Joe Bastianich's places lately—not enough to make me give them up, but there's a pattern: At Casa Mono, they would not seat me until my girlfriend arrived. Unfortunately, there's nowhere to stand at Casa Mono. The hostess told me I was in the way, and asked me to go next door for a drink at Bar Jamon. But I had just come from Bar Jamon. There wasn't any room there either. At Babbo, likewise they would not seat me until my girlfriend arrived. Just like Casa Mono, there is basically nowhere to wait if the bar is full—as it was on this occasion. The attitude here was less excusable, partly because Babbo is a three-star restaurant, and higher expectations go with that. In addition, this was relatively early and most of the tables were not yet full, so seating me would not have taken a table away from someone else. At Felidia, we arrived simultaneously and were seated immediately. But at the end of the meal, the server said he needed the table, and invited us to have a drink at the bar. I didn't time the meal, but I did not feel we lingered longer than is appropriate at this level of dining. Actually, I didn't feel we had lingered much at all. It is the first time I have ever been asked to leave a table at a 3-star restaurant. What is worse, the offer of a drink was apparently not serious. We were left to fend for ourselves, and when we got to the bar it was packed 2-3 deep. There obviously was no complementary drink, and in any case it wouldn't have been very pleasant. Of course, I do understand that Bastianich is blessed with some of the busiest and most popular restaurants in town, and he is trying to squeeze in as many diners as he can. But I do feel he ought to do better, especially at the three-star places.

There are definitely some sub-one star elements at Sripraphai, at least at the time Bruni reviewed it: Those factors don't make it a zero-star restaurant, but they are inconsistent with about 98% of the one-star places.

Fabio did make a major difference, but it wasn't in the kitchen. His cooking, though very good at times, has been uneven. Jamie played the scallop card one time too many, but aside from that, I don't have a problem with what she has cooked.

But, as we have all identified here, neither is Daniel (transcendent) - not even to Bruni. ← That, I think, is the difference between re-affirming an existing four-star rating and conferring one anew.

You don't think the reincarnated Bouley has an outside chance? (I have no clue as I haven't been and know very little about it.) I mean, I suppose the fact that Bruni demoted it to a three-star (IIRC) says something. ← Obviously Bouley has a slight chance, but it has been pretty far off the radar. There's no one screaming from the rooftops, "You have to try this," as you'd expect if Bouley had really upped his game. The few reviews I've read suggest that the new Bouley is very good (as you'd expect at this level), but not transcendent.

Yeah, it's almost as if they drugged the water at NYT HQ. I kept thinking, "Did Frank really write this?" I totally agree with this. ← It gets back to the fact that Bruni has never been a fan of classic luxury, but at the four-star level he has not decided what ought to replace it. With his tenure now rumored to be in its waning months, and no more likely four-star candidates on the immediate horizon, that question is deferred to his successor.

I think Stefan, Jamie and Hosea are the three best chefs remaining. Obviously there is an element of luck, and the best person does not always win, but I would not be shocked to see him in the finals. Carla, Leah and Fabio seem the least likely to be there, and I would put Jeff somewhere in the middle.

Yeah, but Hosea is a pretty good chef. Even without the romantic interest, he wasn't a bad first pick.