jparrott

Resurrecting this topic. I saw the "Great Hotels" segment on IALW on the Travel Channel this weekend. The tables in the dining room are REALLY close together. Against several of the banquettes were two-tops with what looked like about two inches between them. Never mind the closeness of other tables for conversation, but what about all the commotion of seating diners in the banquettes. Multiply by multiple seatings (grrr) and you've got a recipe for disruption, not the kind of carefree luxury of top rooms in France. No thanks.

It used to be $20 for an unlimited assortment of things that now appear to be the "a la carte" choices on the new dimsum menu. Are the items in the "tasting" taken from that menu as well? If not, they've just jacked the price up almost 100% without much of a change. Still nice tho :-).

Any idea of hours for the "Farmers Market"...and Litteri's? Thx

Another oxymoron.

Down here in DC, the Post tries to strike a happy medium by reviewing all new places, but twice a year, publishing a "dining guide" in lieu of a review, to collect new impressions on "standard" places...this means sacrificing only 2 reviews instead of 15 or 20...hear us, WG?

What, you mean "Diner's Journal should have a real purpose? What a concept!!!

In NYC? So in essence, there are at maximum 52 restos that the NYT reviewer could keep tight tabs on? That would barely account for the number of high profile openings each year, plus Daniel, GT and a few other standbys. Clearly too tight a ship to keep for just one reviewer. Which of course is more an argument for two reviewers than for cutting back, but we know what economic times are like now.... I am specifically talking about the top-ranked places, the 3 and 4 star ranks. Surely these places can be reviewed at least once a year? These are the restaurants that are consistently in the minds of those who care, so why shouldn't they get scrutinized more often. But if you take those 15 or 20, that means you can't review more that 30 or so new places each year (unless you have two reviewers devoted to high-end places)....in a place with as much turnover as NYC, that means you have no room to devote to (a) high-profile places that are flops or (b) low-profile places that overachieve.... Jake

In NYC? So in essence, there are at maximum 52 restos that the NYT reviewer could keep tight tabs on? That would barely account for the number of high profile openings each year, plus Daniel, GT and a few other standbys. Clearly too tight a ship to keep for just one reviewer. Which of course is more an argument for two reviewers than for cutting back, but we know what economic times are like now....

I realize this is off-topic, but it's in line with the idea that zero or 1-star restos rarely appear under the Grimes by-line. In many occasions (such as 1998 burg) the WA doesn't publish notes on wines under 86 points, so there's no context for the minimum "positive" (i.e. 2 stars or 86 point) ratings... Maybe this kind of cross-discipline discussion is better for Symposium, but it's clear that the problem is endemic in both environments.... Jake

I don't really know what "true" Thai is, but I like Paya Thai in Tysons. Mostly for the winelist, though--lots of Koehler-Ruprecht and other underrepresented, high-quality German producers and very reasonable prices.

Number 1, no prob. Number 2, no chance. At least from any place, anywhere, where I've gotten good ducks.

No specific recco, but don't these tend to be room-temp or warmer and not chilled? In my family (half of which is from Hong Kong), we tend to serve it at whatever temp it comes at, usually just warm.

So in light of this shock resolution, perhaps a Robert Parker Q&A would be appropriate?

My fave is the seven springs, which is not as froooty as some of the others. The Shea is good, but chunky.

Legal in DC. Free Mondays at Lavandou and Sundays at Melrose. As I recall, $20 at Equinox. Plenty of other places allow it for around that. Do call ahead. Jake

St. Innocent is by far my fave Oregon producer....not as oaky, not as overextracted, well balanced and age well...and, extra-plus, their 1996s and 1997s are excellent efforts in relatively poor vintages.... Jake

There's a lot more truth there...a good relationship with a bartender at a high-end place will bring much joy, both food and drink-wise. Especially if you share your (brought) wine copiously.

Chambers has surpassed them. Better service, more interesting (and just as varied) selection, prices just as good, aisles you can actually shop in.

Chambers St Wines is the best Loire shop in America, not necessarily the broadest, but a great selection at all price levels, including the best selection of cult Muscadet. Chambers also has a good Alsace selection, including Boxler, Dirler, and Kreydenweiss, and occasional older vintages of N. and S. Rhones, in addition to a fine selection of current releases. It also is the best place I've found in America for buying interesting, cheap wines. 160 Chambers St., A train to Chambers St. Great staff, too--David and Jamie have excellent palates and don't try to sell crap. http://www.chambersstwines.com Note: I have no connection w/Chambers St. Wines, other than that they have taken a lot of my money :-). Jake

Winot: Don't be in any hurry. This Gig has excellent balance and fresh acidity. Probably 5-6 more years with no trouble. But it's in a happy place now :-). Steve: It's got acidity, sure. I like acidity. But no one at the table said it had too much acidity, and some of them liked froooty wines. Some other bottles of this I've had recently have not shown as concentrated, and the owner of this bottle said that this one was the best of the stash he had (4 bought at the same time, I think), so BV may be a problem. Jake [edit to answer two questions at once]

Restaurant setting, plenty of food, not much spitting. However, we left a fair amount for the staff for letting us be loud and raucous. I was driving so I took small pours; those riding the Metro were a bit more generous. However, the tasting was long enough (4 hours) and had enough food that no one was particularly blotto at the end--a few of us adjourned for an extra pint at the Irish pub across the street.... Jake

1992 Chave Hermitage Blanc Opened over the course of the evening to classic honeycomb, wax, mature apple flavors. Long, with crunchy mineral and wax accents on the finish. 2001 Guigal Condrieu Not so great until about 3 hours of air, when the oak got hemmed in...not as typical as the Villard 2000 Villard Condrieu Grand Vallon Some oak, but pure flowers, pear and spice, with sufficient acidity. 1999 Nigl Riesling Kremser Kremsleiten Glorious. Firm, crunchy lime, apple and dark slate. 2001 Pepiere (Ollivier) Muscadet Sevre & Maine "Clos des Briords" So expressive. Apple, lemon, chalk, all in spades. 2000 "Plan de Pegau" VdT Corked. 1997 Chateau de St. Cosme Gigondas Cuvee Classique A little green, says Gus, but I think just well balanced, with firm tannin and restrained fruit. The first of a pattern of well-balanced, far-too-young wines. 1999 Brunel Les Cailloux Chateauneuf-du-Pape Really approachable, but also really complex. Earth, dark cherry, some loamy accents. Awfully nice and not at all froooty. 1999 Dom Pegau Chateauneuf-du-Pape Beautiful. Perfect balance. Perfect earth. Perfect spice. Just enough froot. Dark cherry, some raspberry. Sweet, but so, so young. 2000 Dom Pegau Chateauneuf-du-Pape Ack. Frooot. But also the firm, sweet-earthy Pegau signature. But I liked the less-ripe 1999 more, with its tension. Still, very balanced, though, more balanced than... 2000 Beaucastel Chateauneuf-du-Pape Too much frooot. Too much fat. Some caramelly oak. May always be sweet. Still compelling, but not like the Pegaus. 1983 Paul Jaboulet Aine Hermitage La Chapelle Absolutely at peak, with some sweet tannin providing dimension to the firm plum and spice and sweet earth and meat characteristics. The best bottle of this I've had, of the 4 I've had in the past 6 months. 1999 Burgaud Cote-Rotie A strapping hulk. Unapproachable, but open with lots of flavors, but stern structure. Goo-goo-gaa-gaa. 1982 Talbot St.-Julien Glorious. Perfect balance. Dark cherry, some plum, some spice, some cigar, nothing in excess. Decanted 5 hours and showing at absolute peak, given that decanting. 1986 Gruaud LaRose St.-Julien Some Gruaud funk, but still strapping and young. Perfect balance. 1988 Cos d'Estournel St.-Estephe A bit darker in profile, with even some blackberry poking through. Impeccable balance; a Cos that may never shut down. Pleasurable, but also with enough austerity to be food friendly. Nectars 1997 Renou Bonnezeaux Zenith Rich, thick, pretty complex. Far too good to have been made by the INAO weenie. Thirty years too young, almost impossible to comment at this time. 1997 Dr Parce Banyuls Rimage Soft and approachable, but very complex spice accents, no overripeness and succulent acidity.

At 6, it shouldn't be a problem. Much after that, however, and it gets dicey...I don't think they get a huge pre-game hit on Friday and Saturday nights compared to the normal Friday and Saturday nights.... Jake

Ay, there's the rub. Jake

Haven't talked to Chris yet...which one is he? I know manager Brian (and bartender Jorge) from Colvin Run Tavern, but don't know Chris. Limoncello can be either distilled (hard) or infused (easy). There are plenty of recipes for it on other boards, but all of them require good vodka, lemon zest, sugar and water. You infuse the vodka for a month, then sweeten it w/sugar syrup. It seems like some trouble, but it might also be a neat touch alongside the homemade phyllo and other time-consuming quality measures at the restaurant. If the Washingtonian reviewer went on Friday or Saturday night, I can definitely see how they might have issues. Not with the food, but with the whole cacophony. Not a bad problem to have, eh? Jake