mogsob

There is high comedy, and then there is Tommy. Point taken on ethnic restaurants in Queens that may never heard of Riedel or Spiegalau (sp?). The problem I have is when a group of guys show up at GT, demand BYOB and then produce their own glasses. Totally for show. Now, I can understand if you have a '64 Latour laid down at home, or a wine you think would be absolutely perfect for one of Chef Tom's dishes and want to try it out, but most of the BYOBing I see around town is the product of cheapness and/or ego (members of this board excluded for obvious gastronomic motives which I accept fully). Moreover, when people BYOB, they reduce table profit and contribute to price creep on the food.

Trying to read a bit into your post. I've never had cause to complain about the size of a pint in England, given that they are Imperial pints to begin with (20 oz. vs. 16 oz. in the states) and half the price anyway. Also, as I recall Brasserie 8 1/2 had a lot of Belgian beers, which are supposed to be poured with a thick head -- pouring beer down the side of the glass does not release flavors properly and is the unfortunate product of Miller executives wanting to make beer pouring appear more elegant in a TV ad. Sounds like they are pouring the beer correctly.

BYO, wine, glasses, peppermills . . . where will the madness stop?? I am a regular at a place with a really great wine list priced at retail and the best stemware money can buy. It's called eating at home. For better or worse, I take restaurants on their terms, not mine. There are plenty of restaurants with overpriced wine lists, inadequate stemware etc. Some even have wretched food and incompetent service. The simple solution is not to patronize those restaurants, or complain and hope for a change. Living in two cities with combined dining option reaching into the thousands, I have not found any trouble in locating several in each with good wine lists and good stemware.

I hear that you can get really good homemade brownies there.

Steve P -- I think French cuisine, due to its sui generis nature, naturally gave birth to what we call haute cuisine. Countries without great gastronomic traditions have copied French techniques to create their own version of haute cuisine. Italy, however, has a great gastronomic tradition and therefore resists the intrusion of seemingly ubiquitous French techniques.

This has got to be the most interesting discussion ever on eGullet. I agree entirely with Tony's prior post -- haute cuisine is increasingly its own reference point. But perhaps the reason that Italy has had minimal effect on the development of haute (French word) cuisine (French word) is that the very definition of "haute cuisine" appears to be defined by Michelin (French publication) based on subjective criteria that emerged in early 20th century France. Perhaps another question is why French cuisine has had little relevance to Italian cuisine, given its profound influence elsewhere in the world. All the same, I still believe that French cuisine demanded, and still demands, the constant modification and perfection of technique, while Italian cuisine, due to its inherent simplicity, does not. Thus, the techniques of haute cuisine are French. But I think the Italians have influenced haute cuisine in focusing on pristine ingredients.

Whites are uniformly a poor match with white truffles, as their aromas seriously clash. A white wine drinker, however, may prefer a lighter, more perfumed pinot noir, which also complements truffles quite well. Chambolle is a good choice, but, if you can get it, my absolute favorite wine pairing for white truffles is . . . a J. Hofstatter Pino Nero, Sant Urbano. Make sure it is the Sant Urbano bottling, as the less expensive bottlings are not worth buying. This bottling is indeed special -- the wine actually tastes like white truffles.

So true. But it is worth noting that the "industrialization" of Bordeaux has had benefits as well. Take Lagrange, for example. It wasn't too long ago that they were producing crap from crap vines. Now, thanks to significant foreign investment, Lagrange is producing pretty good wine these days. The wine business is simply following the economics of taste. Today, Robert Parker's taste for big and lush wines predominate. I don't agree, but his influence has led to the significant improvement of standards worldwide. But taste is fickle, and it is not out of reason that a new trend could emerge (one hopes). Parker is mortal and his influence will not endure forever.

It seems to me that many top chefs outside of France and Italy are (1) putting increased emphasis on sourcing top notch ingredients and (2) trying to produce and develop a regional cuisine. Even in France, I would dare say that the top chefs today pay far greater attention to their ingredients/suppliers than they did 30 years ago. Perhaps that is the influence of our Italian friends?

Gordon, I like the list, but it is far too extensive. The point is to narrow down CA to a "top 5" type first growth tier. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but I believe the criteria that should be applied under 1855 standards is only price and availability of the prestige wine of the house.

Agreed. I assumed that the event would feature current releases. I think the cost is extremely reasonable.

Adopting the dubious price/availability nexus used in 1855: Caymus Diamond Creek Dominus Opus One Pahlmeyer Joseph Phelps Shafer Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars

Although I'm not a huge fan of New World wine, I would say that the deck is a bit stacked against California here. Spottswoode and Montelena are no match for Gruaud Larose and Lynch, which are two of my absolute favourites. There also do not seem to be good matches from the CA side against Guigal and Jaboulet, depending upon which wines the latter two show up with (one would hope CR and Hermitage, but it might be CDR). The most interesting match is Peter Michael vs. Marquis d'Angerville, pitting one of the best CA producers of Burgundy varietals against one of the absolute best from Burgundy. I think Peter Michael will do very well here, as his wines are a bit more showy.

LOL! I'll use that the next time I'm in Germany. But, seriously, this comment and Steve P.'s Gagnaire post on the France board raised a question: Is food art?

FG -- Your assessment of US Italian restaurants is basically right on point, at least from my experience. I had one absolutely dreadful experience at Babbo, but there are so many good reports to the contrary, I will take those as evidence that Babbo is indeed an exception. In recent years, I have had some very good meals at Scalinatella, Il Postino, Il Nido, Lusardi's and some other UES joints (a lot like Zianni in London). But these restaurants smack more of NY than Italy. I describe them as being like a decent trattoria in Venice at twice the price. Draw your own conclusions. Rich -- I am reminded of Marriah Carey's comment when asked by the Roman press what her favourite Italian dish was. "Chicken Parm," she replied.

French haute cuisine developed out of peasant cooking -- any protestations to the contrary simply overlook historical fact. The question is why the same evolution did not take place in Italy. Some regional cuisines in France rewarded the gentrification and perfection of technique. From those traditional regional traditions sprang modern haute cuisine (ok -- 100 years does not a spring make, but you get my point). But for most Italian cuisines, the reverse is true. Most Italian dishes are prepared today the same way they have been prepared for generations. The has been no need to evolve technique, so traditional dishes stay, well, traditionally made. And that is a good thing. Look at all the tears shed in France over losing their traditional grounding. I think most of France would trade Passard and Gagnaire for a few more traditional bistros.

Gastronomy has always been francocentric, for better or worse. Most of the top tables worldwide are French (outside of Italy, of course). In fact, I would venture a guess that an honest poll of top restaurants outside of France and Italy would find, historically, that nearly 90% were French and that the percentage hasn't dropped much over time. French technique has always been superior and the French willingness to expand their flavors and incorporate techniques from other cuisines has set them apart from the field. Perhaps this is why France is more "relevant" in modern gastronomy -- the superiority of technique. This is, perhaps, why Italian chefs fail at updating their cuisines. If the touchstone of your cuisine rests on simplicity, how complex does your technique need to be? But Italian chef's shouldn't have to apologize for not being French. And as for being relevant, I really could care less. I love eating in Italy and for me, that's what counts.

Peter, please allow a born and bred NYer to respond: 1. Pizza was NOT invented in NY, but rather in Naples. The first pizza was made at the end of the 19th century for the King, and the colours were chosen to represent their flag (red tomato, white cheese, green basil). An Italian named Lombardi brought the recipe to NY and set up shop on Spring Street (the original Lombardi's was a few blocks down from its present location). His two students went on to found Totonno in Coney Island and Patsy's in Harlem. That said, the pizza board from Naples came to try NY pizza back in 1992, took a bite of classic NY-style slice pizza and said "Delicious. Lasagna." So much for international comity. 2. The days of ordering "Chablis" in a US restaurant have been replaced by ordering either "chardonnay" or "merlot". Americans, by the main, will never get wine because they have no concept of terrior. 3. There are some very good farms in Vermont making excellent cheddar, although England still leads in quality and quantity by a country mile. The cheese revolution in the States is but a few years old, so give us some time to recover from Velvita and Cheese-wiz. 4. While I agree that US beef is the best, I have had very good Scottish beef and, of course, great Chiana beef from Italy. The problem seems to be in the butchering and ageing. Great steak can only be made from huge slabs of sufficiently dry-aged beef. Europeans, in the main, do not sufficiently age their beef or cook sufficiently large steaks (Simon M., notwitstanding). Take for example Sophie's Steakhouse, supposedly based on NY and Chicago steakhouses. Most of their steaks are 8 to 10 oz. You simply cannot cook a great 8-10 oz. steak, as it lacks the thicknesses needed to produce a good crust while leaving the interior rare. As for Rome, it is one of my favorite dining destinations. Matthew, if you didn't eat well in Rome than you have no one to blame but yourself for not doing enough research. Rome has many great restaurants, but they are not easily found.

I'm a big fan of Scalinatella and Il Postino (sister restaurants on the East side). They remind me of a decent, but not great, Roman or Milanese trattoria at twice the price (of Italy, which is far less considering time and expense of air travel).

While Gewurtztraminer is my first choice as well (the presence of a Leon Beyer Gewurtz on London's Hunan's wine list is much appreciated), a Spanish Albarino also works well and can be lest costly.

I love labradors, but wouldn't want to drink one! Seriously, where do these critics come up with these descriptors? Fortunately, Bandol neither tastes nor smells like a wet dog (btw, do labradors smell any different than other dogs?). Rather it tastes like red wine, and, more specifically, Southern French wine. If you like Cahors, Chinon, Coteau du Languedoc, you will like Bandol. Moreover, 2 day decanting is a bit severe -- in a wide bottomed decanter an hour or so is fine for a 1998. Here are a few producers worth considering: Tempier Pradeaux Pibarnon Terrebrune Figure on $15 to $20 for a very good Bandol.

I also had a very fine meal in Cafe Roux back a few months ago. The food was excellent and the sommelier exactly as you describe him. The only disappointment was the room and the other diners, who seemed too casual in the somewhat formal room. It didn't help that a loud man from Texas and his, um, newly acquainted female companion, were seated directly behind us. Quite good value for the money, but I much preferred Bordweijk (sp?) in the Jordaan -- see my post below.

My suggestions: Dinner: GR/RHR, Hunan, Roussillon, Zaika Lunch: The Capital, Le Gavroche, Sweetings (weekdays only), The Dorchester (Sunday)

Ah, for the old days of Manny Wolf's . . . S&W is no substitute, but you can get a pretty good prime rib there.

In London (and at Waitrose, no less) La Cuvee Mythique sells routinely for 4.99 GBP and Dr. Thanisch's Berkanastler (sp?) Doctor Kabinett sells for 7.99 GBP. In NY, those same bottles sell at Sherry Lehman for $15 and $28 respectively. Needless to say I bought quite a bit of each.