Wilfrid

I always like to show up on these threads and remind people about olfaction, which is a little different from smelling. When food is in your mouth, and on its way to your throat, chemical compounds volatilize from it and make their way up into that big cavity, back of your soft palate and up behind your nose. This is encouraged by chewing, or in the case of wine and other liquids, by sloshing it around your mouth. You can almost get your tongue in there if you try (be careful). Up in that cavity is a fantastic set of chemical receptors, way more numerous and smart that the boring old taste buds on your tongue. This is your olfactory gear, and it's responsible for our ability to distinguish flavor notes above and beyond sweet/sour/salt/bitter/meaty. It's why we have problems when we have a cold, and doutbless you can also screw it up by playing with your nose while you eat. Of course, odours taken in through the nostrils end up in the same place, but there are two different processes going on here which are worth distinguishing. As for the original question, I suspect heavy smoking was not uncommon among famous French chefs of the past, and indeed recent past. I can offer Alexandre Dumaine as an example of a legendary chef who was a heavy smoker. As for drinking, I assume nine out of ten chefs are tosspots. Yes, I doubt these factors matter nearly as much as knowing how to cook the food in the first place.

Of course, if we want to get onto the one or two stars (yes, I was just looking again), those lists do seem to be moronic. Orsay, Solera and The Tonic better than Della Femina, Osteria del Circo and The Tasting Room? You could just reverse that opinion without anyone blinking an eye.

First, Marcus's post sent me back to double check. Union Square Cafe and L'Impero do indeed have three stars, but they are not on what one might assume to be the NYT's list of three stars - see for yourselves. So the list I posted earlier in the thread is deficient. Blame them this time. L'Impero - I hadn't read that review before, and I thought less of the restaurant than Asimov. But then, if Asimov thinks the kid dish tastes like lamb, even "in overdrive", I despair. GJ: Good examples. I repeatedly said that Fleur de Sel was comparable to Veritas in the first year of it operation, with Renaud in the kitchen every night - for cuisine, anyway. I need to go back and check Veritas, but I would say F d S has, sadly, slipped. Veritas was always more luxurious. Tocqueville? It's close, I agree. I did say "most of the two stars". I'll stick by La Caravelle being a big step up from F de S or Toqueville in cuisine, setting and ambitions. I'm aware that most members who've posted about it seem to have had a miserable time, but I can only go on my own experiences.

The list is indeed the current list of three stars from the Times site. I haven't double checked Union Square Cafe, but I shouldn't be surprised if that's another example of editorial untidiness at the web-site. I agree I would have doubts about that being a three star, and I also agree about Ilo. La Caravelle and Veritas I would defend, on the basis of several meals at each. They're a significant step above most of the two stars. Now, if we could have half stars, we could certainly make some distinctions here - but if we take the NYT system as a given, I still don't think this is a bad list overall. AZ I ain't been to.

At first glance, I thought the list of three stars looked reasonable; the problems start further down. I attach the list below. There are some I've not been to, but the only ones I'd strongly feel should be demoted are JoJo (post-refurb), Pico and 57 57. There are others I'm in two minds about, but I'd hardly throw out the list and start again. Aquavit AZ Babbo Café Boulud Chanterelle Craft Danube Felidia Fiamma Osteria Fifty Seven Fifty Seven The Four Seasons Gotham Bar and Grill Gramercy Tavern Honmura An Ilo Jo Jo Judson Grill Kuruma Zushi La Caravelle La Côte Basque La Grenouille Le Cirque 2000 March Montrachet Next Door Nobu Nobu Oceana Olica Park Bistro Patria Peter Luger Picholine Pico San Domenico Sushi Yasuda Tabla Town Union Pacific Veritas

I wonder. I've had uneven meals at Craft, but assuming the validity of the NYT system, I wouldn't argue to downgrade it to two stars. I'd only argue to downgrade Lespinasse if the meal I had there was representative. The NYT ratings are so constrained that I think you could have quite a poor experience in a restaurant without disagreeing with its star rating (or vice versa). It's not like saying Babbo should get 23 for food in Zagat and not 25 (or whatever). With the NYT, above the 1/2 star distinction, you're really saying a restaurant is radically different from what it holds itself out to be if you want to take a star away. That's supposed to be a prompt for discussion, not an assertion that I'm right - just my first thoughts.

I agree, it's an excellent space of its kind.

I think I get it. Yes, a long list of classes, but not necessarily a long list of restaurants is my vote. I agree you can customize your searching to identify restaurants in a particular borough; my point was that, if we did this for NYC, I think I'd prefer a list of the best three pizza joints in Manhattan, the Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn (Staten Island if necessary), totalling - let's see - 15 restaurants - rather than a list of the best 15 regardless of which borough they're in. Maybe just me.

I think the idea is lots of lists, though. Am I right? Sticking with NYC, I'd love lists, divided by borough, which gave me the best 3 cheap Chinese, the best 3 expensive Chinese (if any), the best 3 pizzas, the best 3 burgers, and so on. If one resists lists of 30 restaurants, then stars and points, and arguably rankings are unnecessary. If one wants a long list, then even if one does without stars and points, ranking would be essential.

I agree the outcome achieved by Zagat is ropey, because of who reviews and how they do it (no obligation to visit the restaurants). I was wondering how we could improve the structure: Zagat does rank (and the rankings aren't absurd overall), it does to some extent break down cuisines by styles and fanciness. I guess this approach could be developed further.

I'll try a deft flip with a gentle utensil. Thanks.

Right, thats what I was hoping for. I figure that the consensus list created here will be a far more accurate reflection of which restaurants in NYC are worthy of 3 or 4 stars than anything the Times has done in recent memory. Problem is, there's not much disagreement between us and the Times. Picking the three and four star places is the easiest thing to do.

My problem is always that the batter - if I may call it that - tends to come adrift from the steak during frying. Over there, nice crispy coating, over here a naked steak. Any tips?

Part of which must involve figuring out why people don't want any of the lists currently available. I'm still unclear about that. What exactly is being suggested here that Zagat doesn't do?

Over Brooklyn Bridge, Gage & Tollner execute a decent version.

I wonder if the tortoises have come out of hibernation yet?

Sorry to hear it. Basildog has it right, though. It's a permanent fixture on every TV news producer's wall, like April Fool's Day. And I bet it featured on Blue Peter too, just as it did nearly forty years ago.

What I took away from Ron Johnson's thread is that there's really very little disagreement about the top two tiers in New York. I think we could go through all kinds of hoops, and come out with the answer that ADNY is in the top six and that Craft isn't, but it's in the next tier down. Another way to look at this would be: What's missing from the existing rankings? What's wrong with them? I agree that one gap that could usefully be filled - still for NYC - would be something like a best two or three lower cost restaurants, in a variety of categories, per borough. Like Steve, I think there's limited value in knowing what the best ten burger joints or Cantonese restaurants in Queen's are, but I'd surely like to know the best two or three. We have been doing a kind of haphazard version of this for Italian food on this old thread.

Shrove Tuesday is indeed a British tradition, colloquially known as "Pancake Day". Sweet pancakes with golden syrup or some lemon curd are the order of that day. Regrettably - unless, unlike me, you appreciate "fun" - the most visible part of the tradition is pancake tossing, which can get both competitive and messy. I do not know if Miss J will be indulging in any tossing, but sober minds believe it isn't the most efficient way to turn a pancake in a pan. I could probably post a lovely picture here, but by the time I've investigated the copyright angle, Lent will be over.

Interesting adaptation of an old technique in that turkey dish. I have read about (not eaten) veal sweetbreads larded with bacon and lemon peel; and I've read about, eaten and made fricandeau - veal larded with bacon. Adds flavor and moistness; what a good idea for turkey.

Another vote in, this time from the CitySearch reviewer. Uses words like "tough" and "unpleasant". Allison Austin's review.

There was that nice place down in SoHo used to do that. What was it called? Anyway, it's closed now.

Or just leave the open bottle on the table. That's what I do at home.

Thanks, that kind of advice is always welcome.

Ah, look what Babbo says: "Why not just pour wine by the single glass? For one, the quartino allows the guest to control how much wine to drink at a particular time. Part of the fun of drinking wine is swirling it around in the glass, smelling it, sipping and savoring it slowly. You can’t do that if the glass is filled up practically to the rim. The quartino puts the control in your hands." I didn't realize this had been a general Batali/Bastianich approach. (Well, what more can we say about WD50 until it opens?)