marcus

I don't agree about Bussola, its actually made from Elenka, which is a commercial base, this base was used at Il Gelatone as well. Both places were equally mediocre. I tried to question the owner of Bussola about this, and after insisting that it was made on premises, which technically it is, he virtually ran away when I tried to ask more probing questions. The guy who originally developed Ciao Bella, and then sold out to commercial interests, is the owner of Il Laboratorio, which has been getting generally favorable, but somewhat mixed reviews, I haven't tried it yet, nor have I tried cones, which to my understanding is really more of a conventional American ice cream in construction, not a criticism, but not gelato either. In my view, Meredith Kurtzman's gelato at Otto stands alone in NY, and is the only gelato that merits comparison to Italy. It's too bad that the rest of the food at Otto is so mediocre, but you can go there at off hours just for the gelato.

The cathedral of Reims is one of the 3 great high gothic cathedrals of France along with Chartres and Amiens. It has the finest and most harmonious exterior of the 3 along with the finest high gothic sculpture. The interior is great as well altlhough unforunately it has lost its stained glass. There is also a fine museum associated with the cathedral. This is a must see, and at least for me of more interest thant the Loire chateaux.

I think that it was actually $50.

This appears to me to be an insider oriented view, that often overrates the importance of internal politics, and in some sense misses the forest for the trees. In this case the key lever, the forest, is access to the public, and unless Zagat can keep Michelin out of the retail channel: bookstores, Amazon, etc., which they will not be able to do, all else will become moot. Michelin is a powerful brand, the Michelin guide is widely recognized, and their superior product will prevail. Not that people can't buy both as well. The industry will find a way to cooperate with Michelin, because it will be to their benefit, restaurants are really going to crave those Michelin stars and bib gourmands, and Zagat will not be able to prevent it. Virtually every industry is already littered with companies that believed that they had a unique stranglehold on the market, only to discover that there is no good answer when your competitor has the superior product.

Cafe Chauveron, gone these 25 years or so, my favorite classic haute cuisine restaurant in NY. Incredible sauce Perigourdine with say pheasant. Their amazing chocolate cake, I forget what they actually called. Moved down to Bal Harbour, never as good down there, and closed a few years later. A true legend.

If one ignores the Spice Market debacle, I think that her reviews have been quite consistent and generally on target. She's what we used to call a tough grader, and I think that if she did this job over an extended period of time, you would find that she averages about a half star lower than her predecessors. Unfortunately, I don't believe that she will do it, but for me the touchstone review would be l'Impero. Asimov, sitting in for Grimes, but with, I believe based on subsequent statements by Grimes, his tacit approval, gave this restaurant 3 stars. To me this is a quintessential NY restaurant, that for some imponderable reason, New Yorkers like better than its actual merits.

Each red guide is written in only one language, for example, the UK guide listings are in English. However, its really not necessary to be able to read the listings because the majority of the important information is conveyed in symbols and numbers. The symbols are explained at the beginning of the book in a variety of languages, French, German, English, Spanish, Italian, I don't recall seeing Japanese. This is different than the Green Guides, which have significant textual content, and are published in multiple language editions. You can buy the French edition or the English edition, etc.

I think that the importance of the New York Times and its restaurant reviews are overstated. When the NYT compiles its restaurant listings into a book, which is the relevant comparison to Michelin, it doesn't sell very well. The NYT hasn't reviewed a number of its 4 star restaurants in years and years. Most NYT reviewed restaurants are reviewed only once, period. Despite the fact that some restaurants aren't reviewed more than once every 18 months by Michelin, its still far better than the NYT, and Michelin stated that 3 star restaurants are visited at least 12 times a year. I would say that Figaro and Le Monde are more active and do more and better restaurant reviewing than the NYT. Zagat is an inferior product and ripe for the taking. In my view, the US will be a very open and welcoming market for the Michelin red guide, because it will fill a void. The US is probably the only country that Michelin has entered where it isn't facing a strong national indigenous restaurant guide. The Good Food Guide in the UK, Gourmantour and another in Spain, Gambero Rosso and Espresso in Italy. We have nothing equivalent in the US that is serious and respected. In France itself there is Gault Millau, Bottin Gourmand, and others. Zagat is a joke by comparison.

That would be hysterical! All Michelin red guides are published in the native language of the country under review. There are multi-lingual explanations of the symbols, which are the real language of the guide, at the beginning.

I think that the problem only applies to starred restaurants, they are quite willing to list ethnic restaurants without stars. If you look at the guides to Paris and London, you will see many examples of Asian, Italian, and other ethnic restaurants. In London they even give a star to a Chinese and 2 Indian restaurants as well as to the London branch of Nobu. Where the polyglot problem really manifests itself is with multi-starred places. Although I also find that, though they will give one star, they don't have a process for doing it that they are quite comfortable with, and they tend to jerk these ratings around quite a bit.

Michelin has always maintained a high degree of secrecy, so it's difficult to really know. I believe that they consider their methodology to be a trade secret. Reading between the lines over the years, I've come to believe that they hire highly qualified inspectors, put them through an apprenticeship, and that they have scoring sheets, much as Consumer reports does, to insure a level of common criteria and consistency. I believe that they also often visit restaurants in pairs, and this helps the various inspectors to learn to look at things in largely the same ways. How they get to a final judgment, I'm not sure, and there have been many rumors. However, having a number of skilled inspectors who work together with a common methodology seems to me to be by far the most rigorous approach in the industry. I also think that the results, particularly in France, have been quite credible and largely speak for themselves. I haven't actually counted, but my impression is that among eGullet posters that visit France regularly and frequent the starred restaurants, there has been a strong consensus that Michelin has yielded overall the best ratings.

To continue the dialog: I've heard many New Yorkers say things like a one star in France is better than any restaurant in NY. That's actually an overstatement, but does indicate an understanding and even appreciation that Michelin's stars represent a more stringent rating than NYT stars. My own view of New Yorkers is that they are realists, and that they will welcome and won't be put off by the truth. If this were Texas it would be a different matter. With regard to who the inspectors will be, I don't think that they will need a huge number, most likely fewer than 10. The job will be desireable, so with some careful selection, testing, and training, finding inspectors should not be insurmountable. The training in the Michelin methodology will make the key difference, versus the cacaphony of people who have opinions about restaurants, and political agendas as well. With regard to who will buy it, I think that Zagat has already demonstrated that there is a market for NY restaurant guides. Michelin has a similar but superior product, and should be able to tap into and expand that market. A large number will be sold to visitors, whose motivation to purchase is clear. The others will be sold to New Yorkers, many knowledgeable, but still obsessed with finding that extra bit of information. I consider myself to be in that group. I would anticipate that I will buy it.

This discussion is becoming very hypothetical and I don't see a conclusive resolution. One can argue, but my bottom line opinion is that Michelin is a well respected priemium brand in the US and they have paid their dues. Their tires are well known, and their guidebooks have been available in most every bookshop forever. There was no outcry when they expanded the green guide to various US locations many years ago, I'm sure that most people saw it as a natural evolution and welcomed an additional option. I think that the red guide, while it will be more controversial, will be welcomed as well. That people are already familiar with its appearance and format will also help. I believef that the problems that Alain Ducasse had in breaking into the NY restaurant market were unique and shouldn't be universalized. They related to his particular reputation and to mistakes that he made in introducing the restaurant. I agree that one can argue that he wasn't treated fairly, but I wouldn't personally extend that to all French chefs and all French businesses. Ducasse is controversial in France as well, and you can also find Ducasse haters over there, however you may disagree with the merits. Time will tell as to the anti-French aftereffects of 9/11, but my guess is that they will be short lived, particularly in NY.

Fat Guy's is the first credible review that claims that Wolfgang's steaks are as good as Luger's. I've seen more than half a dozen that say that it isn't. As steaks are very variable, I think that we need more data points before we jump to conclusions, and in particular we need FG to make a few more visits.

I think that Michelin, whatever its warts and shortcomes, remains the gold standard for rating restaurants, particularly French restaurants. Whether this translates successfully to NY remains to be seen. No one else comes close in terms of time, effort and investment. I do agree with Cpalms that their Italian guide is poor, and as I mentioned previously, I agree with FG that solving the polyglot restaurant challenge is the key issue. We need to recognize that the guide will have 2 audiences, travelers and locals. For travelers the benefit is clear. I think that locals, such as ourselves, will also find it useful. Yes, we know what the leading restaurants are, but a Michelin rating will provide additional perspective. In addition, there are bound to be surprises, restaurants that we've never tried for whatever reason will get a Michelin star and become more interesting. AD/NY was poorly planned and inroduced and having problems in NY long before 9/11. These problems were of its own making and not because it is French. Daniel, Jean-Georges, Le Bernardin are all French, as NY's best restaurants have always been, and they are beloved by New Yorkers. I also don't think that there will be lingering anti-French after-effects of 9/11. Look at the giant store that Louis Vuitton has just opened on 5th Avenue.

I believe that it will be a great success. Knowledgeable New Yorkers are hungering for a credible guide other than the lightweight Zagat and the idiosychratic NY Times. Gayot is beneath mention, depending on second tier reviewers and little process. I also think that the idea that the guide is French based will be a plus, the French have great credibility with food and the term imported has always been a positive selling point in NY. It should also be noted that Michelin has always recruited its reviewers from nationals in the country of the specific guide, although there is undoubtedly a significant level of common methodology across countries. I also see their guide remaining very viable and credible in France, and I think that its continuing success goes well beyond inertia. I continue to personally find it very useful. The key point where I agree with Fat Guy is that Michelin has never adapted well to a polyglot dining culture. That is their challenge in developing this guide. The fact that it will not be published until 2006 indicates that they recognize this problem and want to take some time to work it out.

ADPA has a website which is quite complete with menu and prices. However, they have just changed chefs, and despite discussion of the Ducasse system and the interchangeability of chefs, this makes a huge difference, and I haven't seen any new reviews yet. Losing Piege is a non-trivial event, and I would personally follow him to the Crillion at this point in time, as Loufood has done, rather than stick with ADPA. ADPA also has significant service problems and a rather unattractive room.

Another thought is to consider the 2 star restaurants at the Crillon or the Meurice. I haven't tried either, but both are up and coming and candidates for 3 stars. Common wisdom is that restaurants are at their very best in the couple of years before they actually receive 3 stars. Both restaurants are reputed to have exceptionally beautiful dining rooms. The chef at the Crillon is Piege who was the chef at ADPA until the end of last year. The chef at the Meurice is Alleno who many consider to be brilliant. Both of these restaurants will be substantially less expensive. There is no doubt that they will leave Daniel in the dust.

I think that you are interested in the very best cuisine, so I would suggest Arpege or Ambroisie. Lunch or dinner in these restaurants is exactly the same, both price and menu. Arpege is somewhat more expensive, last I heard the tasting menu was 320 euros, which is staggering, but you will get to taste Passard's signature dishes and it is a very good survey of his cuisine. Remember that tax and service are included and that there is no need to tip at all. Ambroisie, where the food alone should be in the low 200s, is an extraordinarily difficult reservation for dinner and I doubt that you can get one as a single diner, but lunch is much less crowded and they generally aren't full for Saturday lunch. The menu is strictly a la carte, but I believe that they may be willing to prepare some half portions to let you taste more dishes, otherwise you're dealing with app, main, cheese, desert which is limiting. With regard to wine, you will need to economize, most places have some wines available by the glass or half bottles.

The NYT star ratings have always been impenetrable, because they include not just food, but service, decor, I assume ambience, with price taken into consideration. The Times has never provided any guidance as to how these factors are combined to produce a rating, and I suspect that none exists and it is just gut feel. Given that, if the service is truly dreadful, and the environment is really unpleasant during normal dining hours, and there seems to be a consensus on this, not just Hesser but all over the various food boards, then one can make a legitimate case for a one star rating, regardless of the food. Especially, since no one is actually claiming that this is 4 star food, probably not even 3 star.

I also found Borgo Antico to be excellent and they also offer some very old Barolo's, from next door Borgogno, at a reasonable price. What I would point out in addition is that they have excellent deserts, which is truly unusual. In my experience, and this held true in a week of Piedmont dining as well, deserts in Italian restaurants are the weakest course by a wide margin.

Le Tiboulen was written up very favorably in the Sunday NYT travel section by RW Apple in his article regarding fish restaurants around Marseille in 2002. It is evidently a restaurant that serves the freshest fish, simply and perfectly prepared. I was planning to go, but didn't have a car at the time, so can't speak from personal experience. However, even if this restaurant is everything that it possibly can be, I don't think that it would change the overall characterization of the local restaurant scene. My own opinion, having spent some time in Marseille visitng restaurants, is that I was marginally disappointed, especially based on my high expectations regarding bouillabaisse. However, I also regard jellybeans characterization of a gastronomic desert to be somewhat overstated from my perspective, but it's good to find someone even more critical than I am.

Normalization introduces the opposite problem: a seldom-visited restaurant that hasn't proved itself across a wide spectrum of voters might get rated more highly than it deserves. I wouldn't try to normalize. A restaurant needs to get at least N votes. If it has that many, and the average is 3 stars, then it's a 3-star restaurant. Zagat has a little symbol that it uses to designate restaurants that have had a small number of votes, to signal that the rating might be less reliable. Zagat's notation for restaurants garnering mixed reviews is also useful (i.e., where the range of votes wide, suggesting uneven food/service). Oakapple misunderstands my point. I stated that normalization would be absolutely required if the scoring system was based on the total number of votes cast, as with the Restaurnt Magazine survey, when those casting votes were only considering the subset of the restaurants in which they had dined. I continue to believe this, and it is unavoidable using that methodology. I further said, that normalization could be avoided if a scoring system were developed in which each restaurant was scored individually. I also said that this was an altogether better approach. That is what he's proposing, so we agree on this point.

This was undoubtedly true before anyone cast a vote. The list of restaurants to be voted on was, to begin with, a selection of fine restaurants. What the Restaurant Magazine survey purported to do as its value add was to organize these restaurants in "best" rank order. This is the real issue under discussion.

I think that the appropriate course of action if one doesn't want to forthrightly discuss a topic on a public website, is not to post at all. I don't think that stonewalling serves anyone's purpose.