Bux

That's a subjective obfuscation of the real argument that we're a meat and potatoes country with no finesse in our diet. This is not to agree with Simon, but to say that just because you're not interested in what he misses, doesn't refute his point. If anything it supports his contention. It can be a little confusing at times, if scanning the article quickly, to remember when Simon is speaking and when Steinberger is talking and it may even be less clear when Victor has to paraphrase Steinberger quoting Simon -- I'd urge readers to read the original if it's still on public view -- but a critic is always on dangerous ground in a foreign country when his experiences are in rapid succession. Worse yet, I'm not sure Steinberger made the best defenses. Murray's, for instance, has some wonderful cheeses and stocks some of NY's best restaurants with those cheeses, but I'd expect a "world-class cheese shop" to educate their customers and not to be content pawning off over the hill selections. I can still go into towns with a population far smaller than that of the neighborhood a block or two around Murray's and get first rate advice, albeit of a smaller selection of types of cheese, when I'm in France. Steinberger is bound to fail if quality is not part of world class in his defense. As for Simon, I don't know how familiar he is with American ways or how comfortable he is traveling in the states. I can't begin to guess how educated a traveler he is in this country. I've been traveling on and off in France and have friends and relatives who live there as citizens and aliens. I'm finding it harder to get a good meal and easier to get an inedible meal these days than ever before. I don't think it really pays to compare America and France without taking several things into account. The U.S. is so significantly larger and far more diverse than France. Both countries are dynamic and moving in different directions in different areas. In general food is getting better in the U.S. and I don't think it's unfair to suggest it may be getting worse in many ways in France today. For all that, some things are getting worse and some things are getting better on both sides of the Atlantic. The other day I had a rather slovenly prepared fast food meal in which the ingredients on offer were said to be from growth hormone free animals. In fact the pork was Niman Ranch and the chickens were Bell and Evans. Was this a good sign or a bad sign that crappy food was now prepared from healthier ingredients or that fine ingredients were put to such use? I don't know, but some comparisons are very difficult. The worst of it all for those who want to dispute either writer is that we don't exactly know what it was that Simon found disappointing about Per Se, Daniel or le Bernardin or what his expectations were. We've had several threads about what the French can learn from the U.S., and what they have learned in terms of food and dining. I recall one specific thread in which I contributed a story about a young French chef who had recently opened a restaurant in St. Jean de Luz on the Basque Coast. He went to culinary school in France, but came to Daniel in NYC to apprentice. He told me the attention to detail there was superior to what was expected in France and he was impressed by the quality of the produce. He worked with Payard, who was then pastry chef at Daniel, and fell under his influence. One of the first things he did when he opened his moderately priced restaurant in France was to make all of his desserts in house. It seems that just about every other restaurant in this tourist town orders theirs from a wholesale supplier of finished products. The other thing he did was create a menu that didn't copy the cookie cutter philosophy of almost all the restaurants in town. The big question is whether the locals will pay a couple of euros more for interesting food. Do they care? While we were speaking to him, one diner came over to tell him how delighted he was to find this place. Can I determine that Americans have both the better restaurants for teaching and the more discerning diners from this anecdotal evidence, probably not any more than Simon can state the opposite. In the end, Steinberger doesn't do such a bad job of straddling the fence, which may be the most defensible place to be. He writes ". . . haute cuisine is dying in France, and along with the Spaniards, it is us, Americans, unburdened by tradition and always receptive to new ingredients and new ideas, who now have all the energy and creativity at the stove." But he also quotes Alice Waters when she those stories are "presumptuous" and that "We are still learning. I think the real issue here is movement -- up or downwards movement -- and I don't know that either country is at it's peak right now, or that the movement is uniformly up or down in either coutnry either. Note that he refers to "us, Americans." It appears he is an American.

I suppose it would depend on whether one has tried it lately and found it as true as it was. It has had two locations and two names at its current location.

These days, that might be a long time for a fine restaurant. Some might say the bar for fine dining has perhaps been raised even higher by Per Se, if not ADNY, but there's at least one restaurant I've considered in Daniel's class that was there before Daniel and is still doing well to the best of my knowledge. That's le Bernardin.

Balthazar, Pain Quotidian and Sullivan Street Bakery all have products at which they excel in making and with any artisanal product, there's going to be some variation from day to day. It's possible to prefer one bread to another, but I don't know that Balthazar beats Sullivan Street objectively. Those pizze are wonderful, but what I prefer to do is get some of the bianca and top it with something and cheese and put it under the broiler for a minute. Caramelized onions and shaved pecorino cheese may well be my favorite.

Curiously, my last post was about the Flo chain. I'm not as critical of them as others and suspect they've saved a few nice brasseries in Paris from extinction. I haven't been in any of their attempts to export the concept to other cities or countries.I fondly remember a pizza at le Safari. Perhaps it wasn't really a memorable pizza, but I enjoyed it as if it was.

We've both been fans of Aux Lyonnaise. I just want to let you know I definitely noticed a small drop in quality between my first visit in 2003 and the one last September. It's not great enough to keep me from still recommending Aux Lyonnaise highly, but the potatoes with my calves liver were superb the first time and disappointingly appearing as tired and reheated the second time. Everything else that came out was first class and we had a couple of tough critics at the table with us. If you're a fan of boudin noir, that which was on the menu last fall is as good as one is likely to get outside of the Pays Basque, which apparently is its provenance.

Croissants seemed to have peaked quite some time ago in NYC. My wife says she can't remember the last time I raved about any croissants I've in NY and I can hardly remember the last time I was willing to give one of my local places another try. There was a time I raved about Ceci-Cela's croissants and even looked forward to them again while traveling in France. When they changed, I found Pain Quotidien satsifactory for a while, but finally they too proved inconsistent at best and I forgo the disappointment, by avoiding croissants as if they never existed in NY. The pity is that great croissants arrived after great bagels disappeared. I'm waiting patiently for croissants' replacement.

Is this the same Granada of which we both spoke so disparagingly of last year?

The pity is that cable TV was supposed to offer "narrowcasting" or many channels, each to appeal to a more limited group of viewers. Wait, there's the internet.

I recall a thread about his daughter, who was a student, I believe at Harvard, at the time of Lionel's death, taking over the reins at the bakery. I can't find the thread and haven't heard much about her or the bakery since. The operation seems to continue and the bread is still respected and sought after.

Eight years ago to the month, I had pibales at the Haut St. James, where Amat used to cook across the river from Bordeaux. I believe these are the same baby eels known as angulas in Spain. I don't recall having the opportunity to have them ever again. They were always seasonal and rare. Now they are very rare even in season. Nowadays, if I see them listed, I either assume they are not the real thing or that I cannot afford them. They were not inexpensive then, but it seems as if the curve has been getting steeper each year. If you find them and can affored them, try them. They will not be cheaper next year. Amat served his in a small ramekin of warm olive oil with a bit of piment d'Espelette. He had one star at the time, having lost his second star. He eventually lost his restaurant and inn. I thought it was a pity. I thought he was under rated.

Both Michelin and Campsa award a star to the Lido in the Las Dunas hotel. (Note that the latest Michelin I have for Spain is 2003. 2004 for Campsa.) This is an exceptionally upscale and expensive restaurant and perhaps not what you'd want for the day of arrival. Campsa lists six other restaurants, all around 25 or 35 euros for dinner. La Menorah is the one with a recommendation. Octopus salad is one of the specialties along with stews and fish.

There are few, if any, absolutes, but a product made with care and attention by a craftsman with pride in his work, is likley to be better and more reliable than one made by a businessman interested in fast profits. There are in fact, economies of scale that would enable some practices including those that might make a safer product, to be employed at a larger factory. In practice, I will place my trust not necessarily in the smaller producer, but in the one who excercises greater care and interest. The producers of the tainted cheese in France, were apparently convicted of criminal charges -- a fate perhaps more severe than being the subject of a civil suit.

We are the court jesters of the "semi-upper middle class." "Fool" is the other word they use.

Budget is certain a factor in our case as well, but not nearly so much as the fact that we're luck to spend a week, if that in Paris each year. Between the old places to which we've never been, the ones we've enjoyed and want to experience anew, and the places that have opened since our last visit, lies a sea of frustration. I find it hard enough to compare two dissimilar restaurants let alone pretend to have an opinion of where they belong in the grand scheme of things.We ate at Pinxo and Chiberta. Both of these were decent enough places and certainly not bad buys by Parisian standards, but both were a bit disappointing in ways I've already mentioned when I came back from Paris. I thought the food at Pinxo lacked a spark. It was what it was and I expected some transformation of the ingredients or some spark that I didn't find. By comparison, a lunch at Aux Lyonnaise was memorable. Aux Lyonnaise wasn't a new restaurant, but it had undergone a change of chefs and was reportedly inferior to what it was last year. This year we were with a group of five and had a better chance to survey the dishes. I had almost the same menu I had the previous year and suffered the only disappointment of the group. The potatoes accompanying my calves liver showed signs of reheating and were definitely inferior to the ones served at our earlier visit. The blood sausage from Iparla in the Pays Basque was vaut le voyage. Largely, this is good old fashioned French food. Overall a notch down from last year, but still an excellent value, and if anything I'd expect improvement. For me, it beats the pants off Benoit at half the price although it aspires to simpler and more rustic food. The food at Chiberta was excellent and a fair value. Too many tourists in the room took an edge off the meal. I don't think it was as much that they spoke English as it was that they were so unfamiliar with the style of the meal. It's hard to explain and I think it's an early warning reaction to the fear that a restaurant can only be as good as the clientele demands. The real objection perhaps was to what I thought the restaurant wanted to be -- a place to get good food for the modern traveler and Parisian alike who didn't want to spend the entire night dining. We were rushed. The pace was much too fast and tables turned faster than they do in Manhattan. I like to savor my food and spend a few minutes talking to Mrs. B between courses. The food at l'Astrance was surprisingly sedate and conservative compared to our visit a few year's back. It was hardly old fashioned or traditional though. Prices have risen, though not particularly unexpectedly and it was a genuinely satisfying experience though less creative than we expected. This is not a new restaurant, but it seemed a different one for us.

You may disagree with the implication that artisanal products made with "love," but that's not what I implied. From my point of view, they are made with care by professional craftsman. Love of what you are doing doesn't make you an artisan. Pride has something to do with it, but skill is what makes a person an artisan. The factory producer is the one more likely to cut corners for profit. The larger the scale of operation the greater the incentive to save a few cents on each cheese. There is no question that pasteurization will kill bacteria in contaminated milk. There's no question that it's much more expensive to keep the milk free from contamination. Raw milk cheeses are therefor likely to be more expensive. The problem as I've said is that both the milk and the cheese can become re-infected or contaminated after pasteurization. I've located the Fall 2001 issue of the Art of Eating. Although Jean Berthaut's father made raw milk Epoisses, Jean no longer did. His milk is heated below the point of pasteurization for the French market and pasteurized for the American market according to Ed Behr. In 2001, Jean hoped to make raw milk Epoisses again. Perhaps he does, or will. Epoisses was an old cheese that was no longer made when it became more economical for the dairy farmers to sell the milk. Jean's father, according to Behr, made the cheese he remembered from his childhood. It was the Berthauts who applied for the AOC and it was granted in 1981. That same year a new producer came to town, set up his fromagerie and was granted the right to use the AOC. It was only later that it was revealed that he was using milk from outside the approved zone. On the same day that the court decreed this new producer could no longer use the AOC label, it was announced that two cases of listeriosis were traced to the interloper. Two deaths were attributed to Epoisses cheese, although in fact the courts had just decided that the fatal cheese was in fact no entitled to be called Epoisses. It was never determined if the contaminated cheese was made from raw milk or pasteurized milk, but the effect of the attention and pressure was enough to cause Jean and many of the others, I assume, to cook their milk. It's also interesting to note that the red rind which imparts the flavor came from a wild red mold in the air. With greater attention to cleanliness, that mold now has to be artificially introduced from molds that have to be bought by the cheesemaker. Undoubtedly, contemporary cheeses are a little safer and a little more consistent, but a bit less interesting than they used to be. Is there a fair trade off? I don't know the answer, I can only say that even the most banal block of factory cheese presents some risk. It seems as if we give up flavor and character, without any guaranty of safety. Perhaps we could legislate a safer car more easily than a safer cheese. By the way, three people were incarcerated for the crime of manslaughter in connection with the listeriosis deaths.

All of NY west of the Hudson River is part of the midwest as are parts of Connecticut. You can hate me for my pseudoprovincialism, but you might have to agree that when a field or medium become popular, the standards are lilkely to be lowered. Food on TV continues to suffer that fate. Mass taste is driving FoodTV's programming. If it were aiming to be cutting edge, it might be Spanish chefs who would be replacing the French. It's really not so much that Americans are replacing the French, it's the Americans who are being chosen. Look at Bourdain who was moving in one direction while FoodTV was moving in the other.

Fat Guy and I have a very similar approach, though as he notes he's just a philistine, while I've refined my appreciation of life by rising above my baser interests in the physical things a materialist can collect such as art, and by rejecting those things one can enter temporarily such as architecture in favor of cultural aspects with which one can literally become one -- the food. The thing about obsessive people is that their obsessiveness is always relative to the people judging it. We've had many members who live in small communities where their interests in food is seen as obsessive and who come to the eG forums with a sense of relief as they realize they spend far less time and energy thinking about food than the average member here. As for that article, the subjects were chosen for their value in making a point. Would anyone pay much attention to a couple who lives well and has a good meal when they travel? If you were a good journalist, you'd find the most obsessive subjects or you'd find a way to make them sound obsessive. In either case, we all generally tend to think those who pay less attention to food than we do, must not care all that much about food, and that those who pay much more attention, must be abnormally obsessive. I've been told I couldn't possibly be as interested in food as I think I am if I hadn't eaten such and such a dish when I was in some particular place, or if I hadn't barged into so and so's kitchen and demanded to have him teach me his secrets. More often, I'm just told to relax, it's only dinner. Sometimes I feel I'm the only one who knows how to reach a happy medium. I will relate one story I find amusing, although you may not all come down on the same side in reaction. Years ago, my sister insisted it would be a good idea to travel with us in Italy. So we set out, Mrs. B, myself and our young daughter, and my sister and my niece. One morning in Florence, my sister and I both arrived for breakfast at the same time, each of us with a guide in hand to help plan the day. My sister looked at her guide book and suggested a few sites and sights to see, asking which I thought were most interesting or most important for us to see. I looked up from my restaurant guide and told her not to worry, this was Florence and that I was sure we'd find a world class monument, museum or edifice around the corner from wherever I chose for lunch. Bear in mind that on my first trip to Florence as a young student of architecture, I stretched a visit planned for six days into one of eight days simply because I hadn't been able to make arrangements to get to Michelangelo's Lorentian library and I had to wait through Sunday to see it on Monday. But I can excuse that to the frivolity of youth. By the time of the trip in question, I was beginning to form more mature values. My mature and sophisticated writing style also eschews the use of smilies for good reason.

Knives in the hold are not likely to be a problem. Explosive powder on the other hand, may well be a problem. It's been my experience that licensed importers have a harder time with raw milk cheese than individuals. Things may be changing since the time Steingarten wrote about the subject in Vogue, but his experience was similar to mine. The government feels it has a different responsibility towards the importation of food stuff for sale to the public, than to worry about an individual eating one more portion of the same stuff he's been eating for the last week. The concern about cheese is in regard to the possibility of listeriosis which will affect the eater. The concern about meats is not in regard to the consumer of the meat who may or may not get sick or die, but of the small chance a disease that will affect livestock be spread. It's not so much the percent of risk but the potential damage. Listeriosis is not confined to raw milk or raw milk products. It can contaminate all cheese, especially soft fresh cheese. It can also be a problem in deli meats, (charcuterie to us) smoked fish and other products. Frequently pregnant women are advised to avoid many of these products. The odds of contamination are small, but the risk to a fetus, older people or those with an immune deficiency are most at risk. Pasteurization will kill the bacteria at the source, but the risk of contamination is there at all stages before the cheese is eaten and we've had outbreaks of listeriosis traced to pasteurized milk cheese in the US. For all I know, we've had a greater problem with pasteurized milk cheese than the French have had with raw milk cheese, but it's much easier for the FDA to hide behind easy to pass regulations than hard to enforce standards of cleanliness at the source, especially in a land where most "cheese" is factory produced with little love or care and where a single product could affect hundreds if not thousands before it's recalled. Much has been said and written about raw milk Epoisses, some of it in this forum, and I've not got a photographic memory, but the gist that sticks in my mind is that Epoisse was made from raw milk by small producers. A relatively large producer set up shop in the area using milk imported from outside the region, but applied for, and was given, permission to use the AOC Epoisses over the protests of the artisanal producers. There was an outbreak of listeriosis eventually traced to this industrial producer and sales of everyone's Epoisses fell off tremendously. I don't know if by law, or by agreement, all of the producers started to cook the milk. They could just not afford another incident. Safety became a concern greater than quality. I said they "cook" the milk. There are temperatures below that of pasteurization that will remove most of the risk from bacteria. These cheeses are neither from pasteurized milk, nor what we think of as raw milk, but technically they meet some legal definitions of raw milk for better of worse. Most of this was covered some time ago in an article in Ed Behr's the Art of Eating. Berthaut was the producer whose view was most heard in the article. If I recall correctly, there was an implication that truly raw Epoisses might be coming back.

I have a friend who defines gourmets or food lovers as those for whom a good meal will inspire them to talk of other meals. I'd find it weird to look at a painting in a museum or a gothic cathedral and talk about food, just as I'd find it weird to talk about art when in the presence of good food. Of course I'm being facetious, but I do believe food can be the subject of good conversation and of intelligent conversation and what better place to have that conversation than at a dinner table with fellow enthusiasts. There are also restaurant meals that are so riveting that they almost demand attention and response, just the way there are films that you just want to discuss -- or at least there were those kind of films in the 60's. There are people who love to eat, but not that kind of food just as there are people who enjoy reading books, just books that create a need to talk about them. Those people in the article may take it to the extreme, but maybe by attempting to create a gastronaut icon that represents all people whose travel focuses on food, the author makes it appear more like that. I see a bit of myself in all of those people, though I'd not necessarily want to eat with any of them. It's interesting that busboy posted about people who "cross the line from dining for pleasure to food as status." I'm sure we've all known representatives of a similar group who visit museums as if each was a notch on their passport. They've been satirized in the movies and a good many of them might get as much out of a well done travelogue as from being there. I've seen the disappointment on their faces when they're not stamped crossing a border. A passport is a temporary tool. It gets one across borders, it is not the reason we travel. If you want a gut reaction to the local culture, you've literally got to eat the food and you'll get a greater sense of being there from it, that from just looking at the sights. I've spent a long time on travel newsgroups reading posts from people who want to eat quickly and cheaply, so they have money for comfortable beds and time to see the sights. They see the Culture and miss the culture. Mrs. B and I have been traveling on and off for more than forty years. Food became important early on and eventually a central reason for visiting any place. Think of food as an art or a craft. Think of chefs and cooks as artists, artisans or performers. If a friend said he was taking a trip to hear a famous orchestra, a rock star, or opera company would anyone think he's eccentric? I doubt it.

cmling, the latest GM I have is 2003 and it didn't provide a chart, so I had to leaf through the volume find at least one of each of the 12 through 20 classifications, but that's what I thought I had found at a quick glance. It seemed a bit odd at the time but I was sure I saw a 12 with a toque and a fourteen with two. On more careful observation, you're correct -- "13-14 points: one toque, 15-16 points: two toques, 17-18: three toques, 19-20: four toques." FG, there's no question that a guide and a daily newspaper, or even the weekly dining edition of a daily newspaper are different, but it's been mentioned that the NY Times stars were fashioned after those of Michelin. Therefore the differences are germane to the discussion. I don't however, agree that the reviews are really at all topical in the way the "news" is topical or even in the way that almost all of the other reviews -- theater, music, film, tv, books, etc. -- are topical. Almost all of the other subjects are reviewed far more topically than restaurants. In a way the Diner's Journal is the topical news and review rolled into one and it goes out of it's way to be less judgmental, if only by avoiding stars. Anyway, my point might be that newspaper restaurant reviews are in a class by themselves and it's a very artificial situation where the reviews are usually not news or even topical and not a thorough survey of the dining scene. The one purpose they seem to serve is that they sell newspapaper to some extent and advertising to a larger extent. oakapple, it's true that most reviews are favorable on the whole, but if five to twelve are not, that's ten to twenty percent or more that are not. That's not inconsiderable. When one considers how many restaurants there are in NY, one might wonder how well we, as diners, are served by the whole process anyway.

In fact the names seem to have been used interchangeably on both sides of the border. From the Cheese of the Month Club site and sadly under the heading of Banned in the USA: "Both the French and Swiss have been making Vacherin Mont d'Or since the eighteenth century. Vacherin Mont d'Or is named for a mountain in the Jura which startles the Swiss/French border. Although most of the Mont d'Or region of the Alps lies in France, both countries called their cheese Vacherin Mont d'Or until 1973. Then, to the outrage of the French, the Swiss quietly arranged to commandeer exclusive legal rights to the name. The French responded with incredible restraint, and today French Vacherin Mont d'or is either labeled Le Mont d'or or Vacherin du Haut-Doubs." There's more at that link regarding listeriosis and about a Faux Vacherin -- Edel de Cleron -- made in France from pasteurized milk. The facts seem to suggest that one should be able to buy Swiss Vacherin Mont d'Or in the US. I'd also allow a cheesemonger or waiter to suggest that a cheese made from raw milk is quite different from one made from pasturized milk, but only if he wasn't rude. Of course, it could be said that every individual cheese, like every bottle of wine is different from its brothers, even those in the same case. I don't think that's what he meant.

Oh, and you're right about the packaging. Our chocolates were placed in a little clear plastic bar.

Thanks. Although I live in the neighborhood, and that puts me in proximity several relatively new and high end shops, my skepticism has led me to avoid them all. this thread arrived just in time to put a fine finish to our quiet little new year's even dinner. I selected some chocolates and my wife selected one less, although somehow that's not exactly how it worked after dinner. Life is full of little disappointments, I suppose. Next time, I'll add a few for emergencies and people whose stomachs are gibber than their eyes. The selection was very small, at least late in the afternoon of the day before the new year. All were excellent. The passion fruit was not out of balance to my tastes, but the passion fruit was forward with the chocolate playing a more supporting role. I didn't have a problem with that, but it's worth knowing in advance. For what it's worth, Mrs. B felt it was a bit our of balance, but it was higher on her list than mine of chocolates she'd buy again, which may prove that balance is subjective, or that its importance is subjective. The orange was very subtle. I'm not sure I could really taste the orange in the chocolate filling. The yuzu, on the other hand was bright, far more subltle than the passion fruit, but the effect on the palate was similar for me. It was the creaminess of the filling, if not the flavor of the fruit that put the chocolate in the background. For all that, I think they all shared a great delicacy. That delicacy extended to the chilli chocolate, which was something else in terms of chocolates, candies, bonbons, pralines, etc. I thought it was delcate, but I should also warn that there was a long after taste or sense of the hot pepper and that it was perhaps better suited to just one chocolate after dinner, that to a medley of chocolates. It was quite interesting and definitely pleasing, if a bit oddly so. It's well worth trying, but it's not an expected sensation.

Admin: An archive of "Bruni and Beyond" discussion from 2004 may be found here. As much as some believe the NY Times rating system owes a debt to the Michelin's star system, there are a few differences I think are very significant. The first is that when the Times adopted the star system, Michelin published no text at all about the restaurants, except to list three dishes and a couple of recommended wines (usually local-no wines listed for Parisian restaurants). Today, Michelin adds two lines about the restaurant, but not about the food. There are symbols used to tell you about the elegance or lack thereof, and other amenities such as parking, air conditioning, dogs allowed or not, etc. More importantly, and I think this is key, all of the restaurants are recommended, at least for their location and price range. The NY Times takes on the role of warning consumers about restaurants its reviewer deems unsatisfactory. Even exclusion from the Michelin guide doesn't necessarily mean a restaurant is unsatisfactory. There's long been a debate over the role of the reviews in a paper such as the Times, where they only print 52 reviews a year. I'd rather be steered towards a restaurant worth my time and money than warned about poor values. In fact, I could probably argue that I'd like to see the Times review the 52 best restaurants in the city. If NYC has 52 restaurants worth eating in, it's a waste of space to talk about one that's not worth visiting. I don't mind the stars all that much. To me, four stars signifies a restaurant that any earnest diner with sufficient funds, should visit once in his life, even if it's not his style of restaurant. Perhaps I should emphasize "sufficient funds" and maybe I even need to define "earnest." Three stars is a similar rating of less urgency, and so forth down the line. What I'd really want from most reviews however, is to get an idea if this is my kind of restaurant and some advice on how to make the most of my first meal there, or what I may have missed if I've already been there. "Missed" in this case doesn't mean any particular dish, but an understanding of the restaurant and its food. GaultMillau, another French guide that's had its ups and downs in terms of respect, but has had enough respect at one time to earn a place in the discussion of restaurant guides, uses a 20 point system that in effect, is really a ten or eleven point system. Restaurants from ten to twenty are considered worthy of one's trade and the lowest rating for any restaurant selected for inclusion in the guide is ten. GM also deigns not to discuss restaurants that are unsatisfactory. By the way, it also uses chef's hats as stars. Twelve and thirteen merit one toque; fourteen, fifteen and sixteen merit two toques, seventeen and eighteen get three; and four toques go to restaurants rated nineteen and twenty, although only recently have they awarded a twenty and then, in my personal opinion, it was because they needed the publicity such a news story would bring. This is an interesting system because it implies there are breaks at various points. In terms of the NY Times and the Guide Michelin, people often refer to different restaurants as being a strong three point restaurant or a weak three points. The difference between a strong two pointer and a weak three pointer, may be less than between a restaurant regared as a stong three point one and another regarded as weakly earning three points.