Sneakeater

I am looking forward to trying this with equal parts sweet and dry vermouth. (I.e., Carpano Antica and Vya Dry) (cuz that's what I have around).

This is of more interest to me than to any of you, but having obtained a cocktail shaker (and an ice crusher), I just made my first shaken cocktail: a Negroni. 1.5 oz. Junipero (cuz that's what I have) 1 oz. Campari 1 oz. Carpano Antica orange slice (next time I'll burn a twist) All I can say is, I am fucking great. (OTOH, I'm not planning on stopping hanging out at the Pegu Club.)

Thanks for that, too!

Also thanks! (I don't know how long politeness requires I thank people for responding.) (I've never done an "ISO" internet post before.)

Thanks!

That's great. Thanks.

(In case anyone's going to recommend it, I don't think Happy Ending is open then, either.)

Can anyone recommend a good cocktail lounge-type place on the Lower Lower East Side (i.e., below Delancey St.)? Don't want a rock bar like Fontana's. The catch is that it has to be open at about 7 PM on Sundays. The obvious choices -- Milk & Honey (which I can't get into anyway) and the East Side Company Bar -- apparently aren't open that early on Sundays (unless anyone can tell me differently) (in which case: can anybody help me get into Milk & Honey?).

The kind of gussied-up Asian food they serve at Spice Market and Kittichai in New York (the latter is much better than the former) goes much better with the cocktails on their lists than with wine.

I had the impression that that's what this place is. Is it not? Granted, I haven't been there myself, but the impression I get from pictures and comments is that it's "updated red sauce Italian-American." ← It's less "red sauce" and more "updated" than the other Arthur Avenue restaurants. The veal dish GAF shows, which looks positively awful and incompetent in its pool of water with soggy veal breading and what seems to be incompletely melted commercial sliced cheese, is one of the very few red sauce-ish dishes on the menu, and it's not exactly in a traditional Italian-American gravy. I also don't think the generalizations, stated throughout this topic, about the entrees are correct. My take on it is that there are two weaknesses in the Roberto's menu, and I say this based only on a few visits several years ago at the old location but I think I decoded it back then and I haven't heard anything new: the veal cutlet and chicken cutlet dishes are poor. I do think there's something of an analogy between these dishes and the token Chinese-American dishes on the Grand Sichuan menu: they're offered to meet customer expectations, and also I think the kitchen may have a slightly lax attitude towards those who order the generic selections. I'm not defending the practice, just reporting it. The other secondi, at least the ones I've had, are strong: the veal chop, half-rabbit (too much rosemary, but that's just my taste), pork chop, baccala and osso bucco. I also agree that the pastas are the core of the menu. The pasta is made in-house and the fusilli in cartoccio (fusilli with clams, mussels, shrimp and fresh tomato cooked in foil on the grill) is terrific, though the presentation in foil is kind of lame. I'd say Roberto's is inconsistent but not nearly as bad as GAF's report indicates. I'm also sure, unless the restaurant has taken a really bad dive, that GAF stumbled on a bad day at the restaurant -- I think he properly intuits that the lunch crew is not supervised by Roberto and is not well-trained enough to be left unsupervised. I imagine this explains the soft-shell crab debacle as well. The chef at Roberto's, by the way, is Roberto Paciullo. He's from Salerno, though it's not clear to me that he's serving cuisine particular to Salerno. ← Trying not to sound too syncophantic, but: What a great post. What a great analysis. Thanks.

Thanks, BTW. Seriously.

Do you know what precedes the famous line in (I think it is) The Pickwick Papers that "the law is a ass"?

OK. Then let me put it this way. Again, not to be argumentative (when a lawyer says that, you know you should stop reading there and then -- I really apologize if I'm being obnoxious). At least as I read them, your posts list exactly ONE dish that you'd recommend avoiding (I'm not talking about your warning of small portions, which (a) wasn't what gaf complained about and (b) sounds like they'd be a relief by the time you got to the secondi there). They make Roberto's sound like a generally good -- even excellent -- and generally reliable restaurant. They don't make Roberto's sound like the kind of place where you have to order carefully, and avoid certain whole classes of dishes, to avoid disappointment. So I'm still puzzled by Jason's response to gaf's post. Obviously, this is a bigger point. It just bothers me when people post honest reviews of places and then get castigated for "ordering wrong". From your posts, I don't see how gaf should have had any idea he was "ordering wrong".

What about what NOT to order? Say you're presented with a big blackboard full of specials. What kind of thing should you avoid? What kind of thing don't they do well here?

I hope it's clear that I agree with that COMPLETELY.

Well, now I'm just gonna follow you around and order whatever you order, I guess.

But the thing is, I'm not trying to play "gotcha". I just think it's unfair to criticize someone like gaf for giving his honest impressions of a place on the ground that he should have known better than to treat it like a normal restaurant, when in fact the extant reviews present the place as a normal first-rate restaurant.

As for Babbo, I've already had this discussion in the Babbo thread, so I'll refer to that. I'll just say here that, on this website, you often see people saying they intend to visit New York, and asking for recommendations. Babbo is often suggested as one of the best, if not THE best, Italian restaurants in the City. With no caveat that you shouldn't order anything beyond the pasta. Indeed, you often see people posting that they are about the visit New York and stating specifically that they want to visit Babbo, the famous Mario Batalli flagship and the celebrated best Italian restaurant in NYC. You don't don't see people warning them not to order anything beyond the pasta. You frequently see people posting here that Babbo was a great restaurant experience, one of the best they've ever eaten in. With no warning not to order anything beyond the pasta. When Frank Bruni's review of Babbo was published, there was a lot of discussion here about whether it was unfair of Bruni to deny Babbo four stars because of the kind of music they play there. No one questioned whether a restaurant deserves even three stars if the only way to have a first-rate meal there is to avoid an entire segment of the menu. In other words, it's true that you might get the idea, from SOME people's comments, that perhaps you should avoid the secondi at Babbo. But nevertheless, the general impression you get about Babbo here is that it's an excellent, first-rate restaurant. I think it's completely misleading to present Babbo as a first-rate restaurant if you have to avoid an entire segment of the menu to get a good meal there. And I think that anyone who points out that the secondi at Babbo don't work deserves to be applauded for their honesty and discernment, rather than criticized for "ordering wrong", as if it's their fault that they followed the menu, as you would at any first-rate restaurant.

Again, I'm really not trying to start a fight, but how is it "well documented" that gaf should have known not to order anything beyond pastas and risottos?

Then, these:

In this thread, first this:

Again, it's not that I want to start a fight. But to go beyond the precise subject of this thread, and to elaborate on some of the implications of gaf's last post here: You commonly see exchanges here, where someone says something negative about a restaurant that's other people's favorites, and the proponents of the restaurant tell the critic that he "ordered wrong," in a way that implies that his disappointing experience was his own fault. In some cases, I think that's clearly correct. When people order Cantonese dishes at Grand Sichuan International, I think it's clearly their own fault for not heeding the place's obvious specialization. This is a bit less obvious, but when you're somewhere that seems best equipped to handle simple dishes, it's perhaps your own fault if you're disappointed by a more elaborate preparation. For example, experienced diners would probably -- not definitely; that's why this is a harder case -- be able to intuit that you do better not ordering off the "cooked fish" menu at the Grand Central Oyster Bar. Or, to use a friend's favorite example, if you're at one of the multitude of Serbian-run Italian pasta places in the Village, you probably deserve what you get if you order the $14 salmon dish off the menu that mainly features $10-$12 pasta dishes. After all, $14 would hardly cover the cost of a decent piece of salmon plus mark-up. But then you run into what I'd call the "Babbo Problem". Babbo is touted as one of the best restaurants in New York, if not the country. But then people go there, complain about the main dishes, and are told they "ordered wrong" -- they should have stuck with the pastas. How is anyone supposed to intuit that one of the nations' premier dining spots has a hole in its menu; that you can't order any of the secondi? How is anyone supposed to know that, at a restaurant touted for its general excellence, there's a whole portion of the menu that can't be expected to be satisfactory? That the restaurant really isn't any different than an upscale version of one of the Serbian-run pasta places? So, too, here. People say all sorts of good things about Roberto's. You'd think it's a restaurant that's good they way most good restaurants are good: you can order anything on the menu that sounds appealing, and have some expectation that it will be well-prepared. Gaf in fact did that -- and then is catigated for complaining, because he somehow should have known that only the pastas and risottos excel here. If that's the case, this is a seriously flawed restaurant. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. You can have very good experiences at seriously flawed places, if you know about their flaws and how to navigate around them. But places like that should be presented as what they are: seriously flawed restaurants that have to be approached with care. They shouldn't be touted as generally good restaurants, without any warning about their limitations. And when diners run aground on their limitations, they shouldn't be castigated, as if it's their fault they had a poor experience. At least not when they weren't warned. From the reviews I've read, I'd have thought that Roberto's was a generally good restaurant, whose entire menu could be ordered from with confidence. Now, I know that isn't true. I'm glad I found that out before I schlepped up to the Bronx to eat there. But I think I'd be justifiably resentful if one of the people who induced me to schlepp up to the Bronx castigated me for "ordering wrong" if his reviews didn't do anything to warn me of the place's limitations.

OK, how would anybody know that?

I don't want to try to start a fight, but what is there in this thread that suggests the secondi at Roberto's aren't worthwhile, and that you should just stick to the pastas and risottos? Indeed, what is there to suggest that in your own previous review, quoted above? How would anyone visiting Roberto's for the first time know that? So how can anyone be accused of "ordering wrong" ("period") if they go beyond the pastas and risottos, as if it's their fault they had a mediocre meal?

Just to pile on, I think that Il Matterello is one the best Italian restaurants I've eaten in in any country, including Italy.