ulterior epicure

I thought this was one of the most significant parts of the review. I do think Daniel serves three-star food, but Bruni acknowledges this shortcoming in effect and nearly explicitly gives extra/bonus points to the decor. ← Well, someone's got to justify the expense incurred by the Tihany make-over.

Bruni reaffirms Daniel's status as a four-star gem.

What would be the fun in that? Then all of us would have nothing to talk about!

Yes, that is my impression too (steamed quality of the scallops at l'Ambroisie). Knowing that you prefer your scallops of that consistency, I can see why you like the preparation at l'Ambroisie.

It's supposed to mean that they are at the top of their current star status and are in serious contention of achieving the next level. However, this isn't necessarily indicative of whether that restaurant will actually be promoted. Le Bristol (a 2-star in Paris) has been a rising 3-star for a few years now, if I'm not mistaken.

I'm not sure whether or not the scallops were required. It was an aesthetic decision, I think - textural and flavor - that I cannot question. But the point I was making is that the scallop was not the star of that dish, whereas, at The Sportsman, it was. Therefore, to me, the two dishes really are incomparable.

Terminally anal here. I echo MobyP - that was a great meal shared. Moby - I'm not sure how the scallops incarnated on your plate at l'Ambroisie. I had them with white truffles and broccoli (click). I'm not sure I appreciated the scallops at l'Ambroisie - I mean that quite literally. That dish (for me) was all about the truffles and, strangely, the broccoli. The scallop was really backseated. In contrast, the scallop dish at The Sportsman was all about the scallops (both of them, actually). And, though I tend to like my scallops closer to raw (like Aaron), I'd have to say I liked the scallop with seaweed butter at The Sportsman better. (And that was some mighty fine seaweed butter - I agree with Aaron that this was a MUCH more successful dish than the one at l'Atelier de Joel Robuchon). But the two dishes are really incomparable. For one, the price of the scallop dish at l'Ambroisie alone could pay for me to eat at the The Sportsman thrice.

mbernstein - I've had a few "truffled truffles" and truffled desserts and they've all be really enjoyable to me. But I'm particularly susceptible to the pungent aroma of truffles (white, especially). I know that some are not particularly keen on the ingredient or smell. As I wrote in a recent blogpost about such a dessert, "White truffles take well to cream, and I suppose it is only natural to pair it with white chocolate, however absurd that might sound." At any rate, it thanks for posting this - I've been meaning to visit Providence for quite some time and you've provided one more reason. I'll have to make sure I go during truffle season.

And am I to assume that the late opening/conversion of Marcus Wareing accounts for his absence from the board? ← I think he opened in September, and got two stars, so clearly got in before the cut off. ← Oh, I hadn't realized he received two stars. I haven't actually look at the starred restaurant list, only the list of new stars reproduced above. Since Marcus Wareing at the Berkeley is technically a new restaurant for 2009, I figured it would be listed as a new awardee. My bad.

← Wrong café ! Judy Rodgers, Zuni, San Francisco. Ruth(ie) Rogers, River, London. ← Good for nothing copy-editors! Terribly embarrassed. I'm sure Ruth Rogers wouldn't appreciate me giving away her husband, Richard, to Judy Rodgers in my blogpost! Yes, yes, move along, nothing to see here. Momentary crossing of the wires in the gray matter upstairs. It's been corrected on the blog. Thanks!!

And am I to assume that the late opening/conversion of Marcus Wareing accounts for his absence from the board?

*snicker*

Here's an excerpt from my blog post about a recent meal at The River Cafe. You can read the rest of it at the ulterior epicure.

Oh boy, here comes the circus. Congratulations to l'Ambassade de l'Ile for picking up its first Michelin star.

Call in the translators. This Yankee needs some help.

Ah, but it's an event over which the bystanders can have no possible influence and chasing its source seems irritatingly pointless.

no i didnt know to be honest i thought it wouldnt happen here ← Congratulations!

I just don't understand the enthusiasm for l'Atelier de Joel Robuchon. Granted, I've only been to the one in New York (twice), and I think it's barely justifying its one star status there. But then, New York is a whole different beast.

And so no demotions, for either Mr. Ramsay or others?

This brings up a point I've been wanting to raise. It's probably been raised on the St. John thread. Does it deserve a star (or as Mr. Grant suggests, does it deserve the star it has just been awarded)? I don't know. Was my recent dinner there great? Well, some parts, yes. Was it just "good?" Not, it was better than that. Partial to its kind of food, I would give it a star for the cooking. I suppose I'm indifferent on the matter. St. John, for me, has achieved a non-commercial level of branding that is so unique unto its own that it really doesn't require Michelin's approval (whereas so many other places seem to rely on and seek Michelin status). The River Cafe might also be in that same category. ← And then, maybe I'm utterly naive and unworthy.

This brings up a point I've been wanting to raise. It's probably been raised on the St. John thread. Does it deserve a star (or as Mr. Grant suggests, does it deserve the star it has just been awarded)? I don't know. Was my recent dinner there great? Well, some parts, yes. Was it just "good?" No, it was better than that. Partial to its kind of food, I would give it a star for the cooking. In the end, I suppose I'm indifferent on the matter. St. John, for me, has achieved a non-commercial level of branding that is so unique unto its own that it really doesn't require Michelin's approval (whereas so many other places seem to rely on and seek Michelin status). The River Cafe might also be in that same category.

He's talking about EVERYONE we know! ← Michelin is sport, one that I (and many others) indulge in shamelessly. No ranking – football, college, business, or otherwise – is anything more. Is Michelin the gospel truth? Clearly not, as many of us have voiced our confusion and disappointment. It's exactly the fact that the ranking is an event "over which the participants can have no possible influence" that makes the game all the merrier. Be safe, aim well, and happy sporting.

Either I'm not reading this correctly, or I'm not reading this correctly. oakapple: This is supposed to be a list of NYT 3 stars that Eater hedges will close (as in shutter, as in go kaput) this year (2009)? All of them? ← You aren't reading this correctly. That is to say, that the original post on Eater lists all the 3* restaurants as above and guesses that some of them will likely shutter, but doesn't guess which ones. I was gonna say... Thanks for helping out the stupid here, doc. I can be a little dense sometimes.

Guilty as charged?

Either I'm not reading this correctly, or I'm not reading this correctly. oakapple: This is supposed to be a list of NYT 3 stars that Eater hedges will close (as in shutter, as in go kaput) this year (2009)? All of them?