rich

That's interesting, Matt. In the scenario you describe a website actually loses business for a restaurant. From a consumer (and maybe a journalistic) standpoint, a website is certainly a good thing. From the restaurant's perspective that might not always be the case.

Sapori d'Ischia is having a special truffle dinner this Sunday afternoon (11/13) that includes wine with each course. There will be some brief lectures and discussion about truffles. It's $95 per person. I'll be there.

Does a restaurant website improve business? Has anyone gone or not gone to a restaurant because of its site? Do restaurants have websites because it's the expected thing or do they serve a real purpose? I've always wondered why a restaurant would bother with a website - I don't think you can taste or smell the food, even with a state of the art desktop. I guess it's just good PR and another place to list menus (which are never the same when you arrive), phone numbers and addresses.

This is getting tiresome, but there's something that must be said before I retire from this thread. The Michelin Guide is simply another guide to restaurants that is purely based on a business plan that hasn't changed in 100 years. Unfortunately for them, the rest of the world has. That it warrants this much attention is frightening. For any person who has dined in NYC over the last ten years, the mere fact that the Tasting Room was omitted from its "Top 40" list should have immediately rendered this guide as virtually useless except as a phone directory. If it didn't, then there's nothing more that anyone can say - it's time to turn out the lights and go home. The Tasting Room could arguably serve the best food in NYC with a wine list that is far and away better than anything in this country outside of Bern's. Yes, it's cramped, at times uncomfortable and very tiny, but I defy anyone to say they have tasted significantly better food anywhere in this city on a consistent basis. Granted, I don't care much for ambiance and I know there are many who do, but to leave the Tasting Room out of the top 40 is pure nonsense. Any guide on any subject needs credibility to gain acceptance and survive. Michelin NYC has no credibility and doesn't deserve this kind of space. Maybe it has a place in Europe where it's operating with a home field advantage, but it's first attempt as a visiting team has been a complete failure. I have left the building.

Catch-22 theory of logic.

Next thing you know, Mobil will be coming out with a food guide for New Yor City - I can hardly wait. Stars for everbody and everybody for stars. Actually, I think they rate by fire chief hats.

Michelin: "We make tires and maps..... oh, and determine the best restaurants in the world... because we can - who cares what you think - you just eat there - what we think is more important." ← Most of the time, their taste in tires is much better than their taste in food. Why all the fuss about a rating system that's been obsolete for at least a quarter century? Everyone in the food industry knows Michelin is just a huge political joke - no one really takes them seriously anymore. Michelin (the food not rubbers) is simliar to a family patriarch. You bow with courtesy, but everyone knows the power lies with the matriarch.

Rich, If there is a guide or site that classifies/rates by "thong" I would be very curious to see what the subject matter is. Pls divulge. ←

One more point to continue with the baseball analogy. Leaving the Tasting Room out of the top 40 is similar to leaving Lou Gehrig out of Baseball's Hall of Fame.

Very funny you should say that. No sport has more ways of breaking down and classifying things than baseball. Baseball, of course, breaks down its classifications to numbers. So does Michelin (so-many stars, so-many knives and forks). Baseball gives out highly subjective awards (MVP, Cy Young, player of the month, rookie of the year, selection to the All-Star Team); so does Michelin. ...and... Those two comments suggest that you, too, are classifying restaurants. Otherwise, on what basis could they be right or wrong? ← Totally off the mark. Baseball players must produce "real" numbers to be considered for those awards, not subjective menus. There can be statistical oddities, but generally speaking the top numbers get the top awards. I classify by what I like not with stars, which mean nothing unless you know my (or anyone's) very subjective tastes and preferences. I classify with words not stars or forks or boats or pleated skirts or thongs or pillows or drums or kidney pies or even frequent flyer miles.

What do you mean? ← If those were the four Staten Island restaurants Michelin choose worthy to include, they missed the boat with three. I can think of many more that are more worthy than three they chose. The Michelin people probably looked at a local Chamber of Commerce list and made a random selection.

Well, I can assure you, they got three out of four wrong on Staten Island.

To classify is human. We will no sooner stop classifying things than we will stop eating. If you don't think Michelin's classifications are sound, then whose are? If you think that everybody's are wrong, that's fair enough, but rather irrelevant. Human beings are going to classify. It's what we do. ← That's why baseball and horse racing are the two greatest games on earth - no classification. You either put up the numbers or go home. On the restaurant front, I have long been an advocate of the no-star system. It just leads to endless, meaningless debates like this. Write a review, say what impresses you, what doesn't, put your pen away, turn out the lights and go home for the evening. Stars, spoons, forks, knives, touches, plates, chicken livers or anything lese people use to rate restaurants mean nothing. Chefs live and die for them, people endlessly search for them. In the end, just enjoy the food, drink the wine, have fun and make sure you pay the bill. Just as an aside, how could anyone take seriously any list of the top forty or so restaurants in NYC that doesn't include the Tasting Room? Nothing else needs to be said.

Most of the time (there are rare exceptions), companies should stick with what they do best. In Michelin's case, they do good tires. However, they don't do food well. Rubber and food is a lethal combination - it should never be mixed.

Likewise, I find your post gratifying. It's proof of the relative strength of this medium. ← I wholeheartedly agree.

I'm very happy and gratified that Michelin published this book. It's the best proof yet that the star system is truly a worthless pile of doo-doo bung.

Just to note - there were two dinners last night. I was there at 7:30 p.m. and had Chestnut Soup with Honey to start instead of Potato Soup and had Loin of Lamb instead of Hangar Steak. I understand they ran out of the Chestnut Soup and Lamb by 8:15. I was told they were very busy early.

I was there last evening as well. Would agree with your description. But subtle truffle flavors are how I prefer a dish to be prepared. I don't want to be overwhelmed. If that was the case, I would by a truffle and eat it like an apple. And the dinner was excellent - best $50 I spent in a restaurant in a long time.

What I found most interesting is the "poor" review and then a list of five recommended dishes. If I could find five dishes to recommend, I would not call any restaurant "poor." But then again, logic is not the NY Times or said reviewer's strong suit.

I live in LIC - I can't wait to go! ← Having lived in LIC for the first 29 years of my life, I envy you living there now. There have been some great restaurants opening on Vernon Blvd. and moving north to Astoria. Enjoy the Hideaway - you'll have great time.

Depending on an amateur cook's level, she can help, but that's not the true purpose of her shows. She's there as an entertainer who knows her way around a kitchen in an "everday" sought of way. The travel show is pure entertainment and people enjoy watching her. If she's too simple at your level, there are a few shows on the Food Network that might help (Brown, Mario and some of the Moulton re-runs) and many more on the PBS stations. If TVFN programmed just for teaching, it would have been off the air in six months or less. A wide audience and varied demographic base guarantees sponsors that guarantee income etc, etc.

Just to note - Queen's Hideaway fits very nicely into my year-long plan of eating only at places where the chef is female.

The name is actually from the chef-owner, Liza Queen - not based on the location. ← I knew her name was Liza, but never knew her last name - thanks. Actually it works with the location as well - on the small side street on the Brooklyn-Queens border, just a stone's throw from Long Island City. Either way - terrific food, funky, yet attractive place.

And marketing is what it's all about. She has found something that works, has fun at it and is hugely successful- all of us should be so lucky and talented to achieve that goal.

Just to ask a question that combines two of the current major threads, do you think Doug Psaltis and John Mariani are good freinds?