Nathan

that unfortunately Bruni gave a different impression then he intended? though, cheez, come on guys, how can overlook the first fricking paragraph? "....Gary Robins, a seriously gifted chef....Mr. Robins, whose new American cuisine at the Biltmore Room won him widespread praise, has a deservedly grander and less fry-happy sense of self." you're reading what you want to read.

arguably, Pernod is a closer substitute. but then, if you wanted to be a complete purist, you should use cognac, not rye. (the Sazerac switched to rye about 1880 due to a bad grape crop in France making cognac temporarily unavailable)

"Don't forget, a key to good service stems from an efficient, consistent kitchen." issues with the kitchen only plausibly related to one service gripe (food coming out slowly). did you read the review?

there were five paragraphs of positives about the food and one of negatives. you guys are reading a different review then I am

"The Biltmore got three stars and closed - you could get a reservation anytime while it was open." that wasn't true after the review. reservations were not easy. and it closed 3 years later. reviews matter. old stars from the past don't. " Cru has three stars and reservations are easy to come by." also a couple years ago. "Blue Hill has three - reservations are generally easy. I'm sure there are others." ditto. "Yet Landmarc has one - try a get a seat after 7pm (even on a Monday)." That's called "price point" "It think your statement was more true with other reviewers. The current person's rep is such that even the general public doesn't pay attention much" absolute b.s. most people that read the reviews barely know the names of the reviewers. its the outcome of the review that they care about. look, I know a bunch of the average readers of the Times dining column who actually eat out at expensive restaurants but are not foodies. They're called lawyers....and other professionals. They don't sit there wondering if Bruni is worse than Grimes or whether Hesser had some sort of deal with JG -- all they know is that RTR got one star and it's very expensive so it must suck, while Spice Market is really good cause it got a rave review and 3 stars -- and it's not even very expensive! Most people who spend money on food don't know anything about it. But they read reviews. once again, talk to some restaurant owners.

ok, I'm a glutton for punishment. here's why the chicken kiev doesn't count, cause Bruni says so: "That’s easy: because a torpedo of breaded chicken with a butter-filled cavity isn’t really what Gary Robins, a seriously gifted chef, wants to cook. Mr. Robins, whose new American cuisine at the Biltmore Room won him widespread praise, has a deservedly grander and less fry-happy sense of self." how about: " goose breast carpaccio isn’t all the rage in St. Petersburg, but maybe it should be." stroganoff "terrific dish" "Slices of pork tenderloin were complemented by a version of stuffed cabbage — steamed and filled with ground pork shoulder and foie gras — that was out of this world. And the pickled cabbage beside a beautifully roasted fillet of turbot was a kraut to end all krauts, studded with pastrami and suffused with butter and olive oil." "Sumptuous appetizer crepes" "potato pancakes...wholly on target, hitting that crunchy-oily bull’s-eye." now, compare this with the Robuchon review: "though not in so pious a posture, and certainly not on that day, during a supposedly “soft” opening when prices were actually higher than they are now. Although L’Atelier had already been installed and refined in Paris, Tokyo and Las Vegas, it hit the ground limping: bad bread, flustered service, palpable arrogance." "you still have to push past some nonsense." "making this L’Atelier feel fractured and conflicted." "The hotel intrudes on the restaurant" etc. (there's even more) "And many appetizers (a category apart from the tasting portions) are significantly larger than some entrees, like a few undistinguished slices of roasted rack of lamb. That lamb was one of the menu’s definite soft spots and the $46 that it cost underscored how seriously expensive, in bites per dollar, L’Atelier can be." and, of course, Robuchon is even more expensive than RTR.

Well, I suppose the only possibility for Rich's scenario would be such an eventuality -- someone needs the restaurant to close. Somehow I don't think that's the case here.

FG: Sure, it happens in the UK and Australia. But their food reviewers don't even write about food (and they generally know less than Bruni)...it's a game. Ramsay famously kicked a critic out. But you know what? Ramsay never would have kicked a Michelin inspector out. And he made it very clear in the Bourdain interview that he understood that the NYT critic was a different story. The idea that someone would do it in NY is absurd.

That's laughable. Sorry. It's a business. There are financial people behind it. When a positive NY Times review can still mean a 40% upsurge in business (and that's a fact), unless the RTR expects to sell out every night for the next five years (yeah right)...no such business, no matter how egotistical, would go out of their way to intentionally garner a bad review. Bruni can make or close a restaurant. It's that simple. No one else can say that. And if you don't believe that you might want to start talking to restaurant owners. Cause they believe it. That's why his expertise (or lack thereof) is such a topic of conversation...because he matters. Adam Platt is a pretty awful critic. No one cares. Cause he can't make or break a restaurant. Bruni can and does. Grimes gave RTR a Satisfactory a few years ago. You don't think that wasn't a factor in its closure (not long after)? I do.

"I don't doubt that Bruni thought that "more than a few dishes weren't so successful."" I doubt it. I think he really, really loved the food. But was absolutely poisoned by the front of the house.

"Dude, which part of "More than a few dishes weren’t so successful" equates to three stars?......price pt considered or not......c'mon bro." That line was a meaningless throwaway to help justify the demotion. He only had one actual dish complaint (the off-menu chicken kiev doesn't count). Read the first page again. I haven't read Bruni that rhapsodic about food since the Per Se review.

"It doesn't make sense to hire a famous fusion chef with no background in Russian cooking to revitalize this traditionally highly traditional restaurant. I happen to think the food works." Your second sentence explains why it does kind of make sense. Robins is exactly the kind of guy who could pull it off.

I'll put it this way: when I compare that review to other three star reviews (and every three star review mentions inconsistencies with the food -- that's how you justify not giving four), I come away convinced that with perfect service the RTR would have gotten three stars. just line the review up side by side with other three star reviews and you'll see what I mean. Robins is an immensely talented chef...I remember the Biltmore Room fondly (although I had a service issue there as well -- but it ended up being handled much better). he deserves a restaurant worthy of his skill.

quick revision: he didn't like one dish -- the sturgeon. the chicken kiev (which isn't even on the menu) hardly counts. btw, Eater has bizarrely misread the review. an absolutely completely wrong reading. he seems to think it was food that was the issue and that Robbins will soon be looking for new employment. he didn't read the same review I did. the review was very clear that the front of the house was the issue...(I doubt Robbins is even responsible for the caviar service)

"I think he docked one star for the inconsistent kitchen and one star for service. Even if the service had been perfect, he had too many issues with the food to award three stars." Read just the first page of the review. That is a three-star food review. Compare it to the Robuchon review. The only real food issues he found were with the caviar service. "It was clearly more than just the sommelier. Remember, it began with the waiter saying "It's not my problem." He also mentioned "outdated menus," "ludicrously slow" service for food and drinks, and that servers "responded dismissively to complaints" (suggesting more than one)." Never said it was. Said I thought the place got knocked two stars for service (in the context of the price point). I think the sommelier episode was good enough for one right there -- the rest of the poor service only exacerbated matters. I think RTR was unlucky in the sense that if the sommelier episode hadn't happened (if they hadn't been out of the bottle thus precipitating it) -- they might have walked away with two stars. That's what I'm saying. I don't see how it wasn't a three-star food review. But service/price was going to knock them down to two (the price justified the food but not the service) and then the sommelier episode caused a (perhaps not unjustified) tantrum.

"It is possible they recognized the Times critic and purposely gave him a hard time?" absolutely not. no restaurant in NY would ever do that. ever. I don't see any reason to doubt Bruni's word as to what happened service-wise. and it was pretty catastrophic. There's no question in my mind that it was three star review for the food. The entire first page was euphoric. Yeah, he didn't like the caviar service....that doesn't knock you down to two stars -- not after some of the most positive food comments Bruni has ever made in any review. When I was reading that I assumed that the one-star was a misprint. Then I got to the service stuff. And the way he led with the food, it was clear that Bruni was pointedly saying that the food is not an issue. Its everything else. As for why service would knock a restaurant down two stars? -- one word: Price. Bruni is suggesting that if you charge four-star prices (which RTR arguably does for a full meal) but have "Poor" (not even one-star) service...you're going to get killed. You can disagree with that, but it's not illogical. " "In terms of food and all else, the Russian Tea Room doesn’t add up neatly or quite make sense"." I think this is saying that RTR doesn't add up because the food is great and everything else sucks. That's why it doesn't "make sense."

true. I can't think of anything right now that clearly deserves a review. Klee and Varietal are even newer. I guess Ramsay should be preparing himself for one shortly. you can only do so many re-reviews.

yeah, but I think he wants them without four star prices too. btw, who says it was the same sommelier?

yeah, its a little early. though it has been open at least two months I think... I have to think that wine bottle incident lost them a star by itself. it received over a paragraph (and it was pretty damning). wonder if that sommelier will have a job tomorrow.

Wow! Bruni essentially just docked the Russian Tea Room two stars for service (its clear that he thinks the food is three star quality)....especially service v. price. I do have to say that the service he describes is inexcusable. Looks like this is an especially egregious example of the front of the house hurting a great kitchen. I guess one thing is clear, this is one case where he certainly wasn't recognized.

Old Raj Junipero Sapphire Hendrick's Plymouth (for mixing) obviously I prefer juniper-flavored vodkas

that's not what he said, but I agree that it was worded such that it could be easily misconstrued (which some readers did)

I believe Daniel has a dessert tasting menu available in the lounge.

I can't say that I can understand why anyone would want to eat at Rice to Riches. It's all hypersweet and identically tasting. The concept makes it a cool place to take kids though...

I couldn't find it anywhere downtown...