tommy

ok, so if i've already been to Al's Italian Beef, should i go to Mr. Beef next, having never been? or should i just go back to Al's Italian Beef. i'm only in town once or twice a year, so this is very, very important. thoughts? thanks.

you've been there twice.

Could you please provide some details of your experience there? Thanks. ← i'd like to compare it to avra or milos (NYC) or varka (ramsey), but i think it's not as "greek" as those places. they do serve whole fish, but it's not the simple preparation of olive oil s/p/oregano that i'm used to at the places i mention above. it's a very attractive restaurant to my eye. dark wood tones, clean lines, crisp white tablecloths, sparkly and decent stemware. i think they're still working on some of the dishes. but overall i'm very pleased with the place. peter is class act who's most likely been in the business since before i was born, he and his businesses have been part of the community for years and years, his son (who's now involved in the business) seems to have his sh*t together, the waitstaff is good, and the food is quite decent.

is 23rd street mid-towny enough? skip the chicago dog, for obvious reasons.

when i travel i like to experience food/restaurants unique to that city. with that in mind, the Oyster Bar (Grand Central) might be a good option. and when you're done you can walk down the stairs to the 6 train and be at 8th street (and otto) for gelato in about 15 minutes.

perhaps a suggestion that you'd not get from many people, but i would certainly consider pizza at Naples 45 (behind grand central), where they're trying very hard to duplicate neopolitan style pizza. or antipasti and pasta at Otto, which is not midtown, but not far. additionally, while i have enjoyed many many meals at grand sichuan "east", i've been liking wu liang ye on lex and 38th-ish even more. specifically any of their pork belly dishes, and their smoked duck with ginger. good luck and enjoy.

i guess i'll jump on the bandwagon here. i showed up for breakfa..., errrr, an early lunch on sunday, and had a very good experience. first off, bruce was born for the business. it shows. certainly the experience wouldn't have been as pleasurable had it not been for bruce behind the bar. although that's not to say that it wouldn't have been good, but, a good barman goes a long way any morning of the week. we all agreed that the ribs were excellent. we also all agreed that the sauce here is excellent. and we further agreed that the sauce on the smoked sausage was just wonderful. we didn't agree that the flinstone beef rib was excellent. some found it tough, while others found it tender and juicy. the sides were very good and all had a unique spin to my mind, setting them apart from what could have easily been run-of-the-mill sides. the black beans, for example, seemed to appropriately pay homage to the environs (in fact they are the brainchild of bruce's wife). bruce mentioned the possibilty of expanding the place. in my mind i see it becoming some sort of huge BBQ and bluegrass amusement park for me and my friends, with pool tables, rooftop eating and drinking, 2 stages with banjos and washboards and stand-up basses. i would think the owners have slightly different ideas, but that would be pretty cool for me.

Hope you're right. I'm skeptical. Same owners as Peter's Whale, which was very diner-like. But I guess the word "oysters" on their sign gave you pause. ← peter's whale was, at least at one time, related to peter's fish market in midland park, which was related to frank's fish market in glen rock (frank and peter were partners at one time, if my history's correct). since i respect both of these markets, i'm hoping that the new place will have some good fish. peter's whale, in that incarnation, just didn't serve the type of food i like, even though the fish may have been fresh-from-the-local-fish-market-fresh. i'm skeptical, but i'm going to do my best to make this place good. and i have to admit, the new sign is very sexy. ← I don't think that is true, Tommy. It certainly is true that Frank worked for peter before he went off on his own, but Peter's Whale, that used to be next to Frank's (which, BTW is under new ownership; Frank is quite ill) was not related to the best of my knowledge (living in Fair Lawn forever, here). Anyway, I'm excited to try it when it opens. The owner of Peter's Whale is a nice guy. Looking forward to hearing and posting more. ← thanks for the clarification. i gotta knock around my MIL for the bad info. nice guy or not i'm hoping the owner of peter's whale (and now, apparently oceanos) is interested in creating a destination restaurant. they've sure got the parking capacity. ← i spoke briefly with peter the other night. he reminded us of how peter's whale was once where jalapenos now is (we know that) and how he opened up a the fish market next to it. now, i think frank's was probably not related, but that explains the connection between peter of peter's whale and that fish market.

that's so important it bears repeating. or quoting. i think that, generally, people overestimate the importance of their posts on sites like this, or epinions.com, or we8there.com, or their blogs, or wherever. practically all of my friends are into cooking and going out to eat and they are discerning diners, but just about zero care about websites where they might read about or post about experiences. it's just not their thing. so, when people vent or post their reviews or complaints or whatever, i have to think it reaches a very very small group of potential diners. and even those who might read these posts (like me), well, i'll probably take them with a grain of salt. so yeah, talk to the restaurant, not to the internet, if you really want to make a change for the better. if i own a restaurant, i'm really not concerned with how everyone is a reviewer because of the internet, but i'll definitely pay close attention to those who speak to me face-to-face, or write a letter or email. or send a smoke signal with a return phone number.

confirming: open at 11.30 on sunday. i don't know why i didn't just call to begin with. the restaurant is almost always the best source of information.

are dey open on da sunday aftahnoonze?

the flip side of that coin is that diners have *always* had a voice and an opportunity to vent their frustrations and communicate their pleasure/displeasure with an experience/server/food: by talking to the manager or owner of chef. by mail, email, phone, or face-to-face. one might make the argument that those approaches are much more effective. JoRic, above, has already touched on this point, but i figured i'd mention it again in this context.

this will be my new favorite restaurant.

i would have knocked him on his ass.

i'm sure it's procedure to have the bartender open the bottle of water, or have it opened at the source (fridge i suppose), just as it is at practically every restaurant i've ever been to, including world-class restaurants. let's not get crazy and start comparing proper wine service to water service at a neighborhood restaurant. and let's remember we're only getting one side of the story. one person's "rude" or "dismissive" or "bothered" is another's "i didn't notice anything at all." additionally, we shouldn't confuse a restaurant's "policy" with the actions of a server. a totally expected reaction would be for the server to take back the bottle. while, if you interviewed the owner the next day (or even the server) and ask what should have been done, they'd probably say "i guess we should have just given the confused customer the bottle of water." hindsight: something seemingly reserved for and exploited by internet discussion boards, but rarely afforded to restaurant owners.

curious as to whether there are numbers supporting this, or if it's just a guess.

i'm annoyed just reading about how annoyed that server was. "still" water is not tap, though. it generally means bottled water without bubbles. no reason to get annoyed, though. it's just water. website? the *other* thread on this restaurant doesn't seem to have one either.

Could be Hackensack or Rochelle Park that early on... not Saddle Brook but I'll see next time I drive through if I can find it for you. ← well, factually speaking, it's in "jackensack"

if you make a cardboard cut-out of the state, you could probably balance it on a pin at that spot. and that's somewhere in "south jersey".

it's all relative.

we should hang out. i could teach you how to become a hard-to-please-pain-in-the-ass like the one i've grown into. i'm told i'm no fun to go out to dinner with, because i am always disappointed because i know i can do it better. and i know i have better taste (or at least a somewhat more informed and passionate taste) in wine than whoever is putting together the list (and that's not saying much). but yeah, stick with me and i'll make ya miserable. for what it's worth though, most of the wine i drink is btwn 7 and 12 dollars, and it's still more interesting than what most restaurants are serving. but back to the topic.

Mark me down as one of those who totally disagrees with your contention that there cannot be fine dining at a BYO. To me, it's all about the cuisine. Service and ambiance play important roles. Having a wine list is nice though for those, like me, who don't drink, that makes no difference. ← you do realize, of course, that with not drinking, you are in the minority, and therefore your views may not necessarily reflect those of most others. you are right though: it's not just about the food. atmosphere, service, are usually taken into consideration. i think an excellent wine program, one that is integrated into the food and experience, is a component for a top-notch experience. whether you choose to define that as "fine dining", or "four star", or "five star" makes no difference. those descriptions, after all, are usually just made up and are in the eye of the beholder (what is "4 star"? 4 stars from whom?) i submit tht if you have 2 identical restaurants, one with an excellent wine program, and one serving 2 kinds of chardonnay, i think it's safe to assume that by most criticial barometers, the one with the oustanding wine program will be more highly regarded. after all, the service will have to be that much more informed because of the wines. so, by default, that restaurant will have a more informed staff. +1 points for the restaurant with the wine program. luckily when i BYO to jean-georges, the staff is already top-notch and knows exactly how to handle my wonderful bottle. i can't say the same for the staff at, say, Blu, or Venue, or, well, just about any other BYO. and i won't even mention the stemware that one encounters at these places. so yeah, the restaurant with the wine list in our little comparison wins out. i'm sure the other place is very good, though. edited because i typed "wines out" instead of "wins out".

who can read that horrible mess of anger and bitterness? which post, in particular, are you referring to?

it's not good either way, because the stuff is going to have alcohol in it even after boiling, which is dangerous for some people. although those folks shouldn't be trusting the word of a restaurant anyway. i've never been, but i assume when he stopped serving non-boiled wine that he noted somewhere that the sangria would now be alcohol-free. i still wonder why anyone would drink that though! and i wonder even more why you wouldn't just bring your own wine and mix it with some unholy combination of sugar and fruit, as suggested upthread by rooftop.

did you read that somewhere? i didn't. not sure if that's a fair statement. although, yes, that would be horrible. almost as bad as selling an "alcohol-free" drink that actually had alcohol. quite frankly that's dangerous for some people.