Michelin '03

[fresh_a]

Philippe Legendre at Le Cinq in the Four Seasons Hotel George V Paris will get three stars.

[cabrales]

fresh_a: Legendre is also being tipped by Bonjour Paris:

"Gastro gossip says Alain Ducasse recuperates his *** at Louis XV and Philippe Legendre is a strong contender for *** schhhhh."

http://www.bparis.com/newsletter1464/newsl...m?doc_id=140923

(see bottom of article)

If there is the Parisian receipt of a three star, Legendre might be a worthy recipient. I believe L'Espadon at the Ritz, Paris, deserves two stars (apologies for placing this on the UK board), not that the restaurant is likely to receive it.

[fresh_a]

I'm not a very big fan of bonjourparis, although they seem to have knowledgeable food reviewers...

Legendre will get it.. he has a lot of pull in Paris, and a lot of good vibes

Also the Vice Champion Sommelier, Eric Beaumard, is the restaurant manager, and their sommelier is the Best European Sommelier, Bernardo... they have a friendly and impeccable service, and seem to have everything going for them...

[Tonyfinch]

i suppose i use it more for destination restaurants or when i'm abroad

I find Michelin far more useful abroad than in the UK, especially in countries like Spain and Portugal, as well as France of course. Maybe its because there's far less restaurant diversity in those countries so you don't feel that the guide is wilfully ignoring whole swathes of cuisines like it appears to do here.

Personally I am not a fan of the mystique it creates around its judgements. If people's livelihoods can stand and fall by its verdicts then I think the way it arrives at those verdicts should be open and transparent.

As for MPW-don't forget he and Nico "handed back" their stars on the grounds that the criteria needed to maintain them were "no longer relevant to the needs of modern diners in the UK"

[Lord Michael Lewis]

As for MPW-don't forget he and Nico "handed back" their stars on the grounds that the criteria needed to maintain them were "no longer relevant to the needs of modern diners in the UK"

Actually the reason you provide was given by Nico who 'handed' his stars back first. MPW quickly followed suit and was heavily criticized by Nico, amongst others, for publicity seeking. Marco, it seems, felt that he no longer needed rely on Michelin for publicity.

[cabrales]

With MPW's then plans for reduced involvement in The Oak Room, there's an argument he could have been demoted sooner or later anyhow.

-- Financial Times (London), April 13, 2002 ("Nor does he [Derek Brown, head of the Michelin guides] see any sign that Michelin's influence is waning in France and abroad. The decision two years ago by a pair of top British restaurateurs, Nico Ladenis and Marco Pierre White, to relinquish their three stars was widely portrayed as a slap at Michelin.Brown insists that, in fact, Ladenis and White were taking their restaurants in new directions and thought it best **pre-emptively** and publicly to disown their stars.")

-- The Evening Standard, January 22, 2001 ("Gordon Ramsay ... wasted no time in denouncing Marco Pierre White and Nico Ladenis as 'totally immature' for having handed back their three stars last year and retired from the kitchen. ... [Ladenis responded: 'I gave up my stars because I was retiring from the business - that is not immature.'").

[Basildog]

Personally, i think if they dished out stickers/plates or something, it would not do them any harm.(yes i love stickers for my window)

Edit IGNORE quote.. i read cabby wrong.If you miss the comma, it makes all the difference

Edited January 6, 2003 by Basildog (log)

[Gary Marshall]

I hear a rumour that michelin are informing restaurants of their ratings at the moment.

Any further updates on the public announcement of the stars?

cheers

gary

[thom]

Michelin's webiste sheds a little light on this matter:

http://news.webmichelin.com/nofrm_affich.j...e=1&news_id=394

Nice memorable web address, I know.

Apparently the guide is published on the 17th of Jan (tomorrow), and each establishment listed now gets a short description.

There are 16 new one star awards, and Pied a Terre (where I had a stupendous meal earlier this year) has claimed it's second star.

Bizarrely, Hakkasan has been given it's first star. I find this inexpliable, as having eaten there yesterday, I was struck by how the exciting sounding menu actually led to food barely above the level of any other 'decent' Chinese, and certainly well behind Manchester Yang Sing. The actual quality of preperation, ingredients and service all fell short of what I would expected from a one star.

It reinforces my opinion that Michelin feel slightly railroaded into modernising and recognising non traditional French style restaurants, but their lack of appreciation or familiarity leads to tokenism, doling out stars on the basis of buzz/press coverage. It could be said their recent awards to Japanese and Indian restaurants were equally contencious and did not always represent the best in class.

Incidently, in Arena (normally a magazine there is little reason to read) their is an interesting interview with four top chefs (Including Ramsey) on their views on Michelin. There is also a well justified argument from Peter Harden (of Harden's restaurant guide) as to why it simply isn't relevent.

I await the full list with a gnawing feeling I may be disapointed, but based on personal experience I would like to see Juniper and Hibiscus get a second star.

Cheers

Thom

[Gary Marshall]

Hi Thom,

thanks for that, i couldn't find it on the michelin site.

it looks an exhaustive list if you delve further so i fear no 2 star for hibiscus or petrus which does surprise me. pied a terre the only upgrade and no new 3 stars

For me it now means a trip to the devonshire arms which has done well to get a star but the chef is from the formerly one starred micheals nook and to the Yorke arms, i've seen the website and it looks very good.

Guellers hit and miss luck continues, losing their star as does the box tree, a place i'd really like to try again with their new chef, although friends who live locally have had some shocking experiences there (for a restaurant in that category)

[Matthew Grant]

WOW! Am I reading this right, La Tante Claire lost its 2 stars but the closure of the restaurant isn't noted? Can't believe that La Trompette didn't get a star. I wonder how BP and NPM feel about that?

As for Hakkasan, I had Dim Sum there on Monday, following Jon's post. We thought the Dim Sum was outstanding, delicately made and well balanced flavour combinations, shame that a glass of beer was £4.50!

Edited January 16, 2003 by Matthew Grant (log)

[Jon Tseng]

WOW! Am I reading this right, La Tante Claire lost its 2 stars but the closure of the restaurant isn't noted?

Nah, looks like they only mentioned it had closed because it was included in the guide. Don't think it indicates TC would have lost its stars if it hadn't closed.

ie cheznico and oak room also listed as losing stars but not closing, although they have.

Interesting Cliveden lost its star given Clive Fretwell (head chef at Waterside for donkeys years) recently moved in.

Overall rather dull this yr

cheerio

J

[Andy Lynes]

For "Clive Fretwell" read "Mark Dodson" : http://www.thisisbuckinghamshire.co.uk/lei..._good_life.html.

Mr Fretwell is executive chef of the Le Petit Blanc chain and former head chef at Le Manoir.

[thom]

Matthew,

Youre right, I was probably oversimplifying my criticism of Hakkasan.

(Possible new thread warning)

I had spent the taxi ride there discussing the current state of Chinese restaurants, and why so many of them seem to have identikit gloop. It was interesting to make parallels with other modern cuisines, where technique and quality of ingredients are much more central to the cooking (whether it is high style, or 'peasant' style) - French, Italian and Japanese all spring to mind.

Could someone deconstruct Chinese cuisine, and reinvent it with fresher more subtle flavours and exciting combinations of ingredients? A flippant analogy, but I'm thinking of the swinging change from hearty, heavily sauced Italian food in 70's trattorias, to River Cafe, Locanda Locatelli (please don't mention the 'real Italian' thread) et al. See also flock wallpapered 80's curry houses against Tamarind, Zaika etc.

Considering the depth of culture in China, and the artistic indulgences of it's historical ruling classes why did it's cuisine not reach the levels of refinement and luxury seen in other societies? Maybe it has, but has it never been exported? People who have eaten a lot more Chinese food in China than me tell me that is not the case.

Anyway, it was with this bubbling brew of thoughts in mind that we entered Hakkasan. Nice place, very hip, very now. Great menu... Surely if anywhere is going to answer the questions above it would be here?

The dim sum were actually very good (for me personally I have always felt dim sum are the most delicious and inventive element in any good Chinese restaurant), but they still lagged behind the Yang Sing - I'm spoilt.

The main courses sounded excellent, but this is where Chinese restaurants normally fall down. It's all too rare to find a main course in a Chinese restaurant that is inventive, or makes you want to rave about it. One in particular - "Organic Pork with Sweet and Sour and Pomegranate" - did excite us though , as we had just discussed Sweet and Sour Pork as one of those horribly abused Chinese dishes which - if done properly - can be wonderful.

Anyway, the pork (plus other very intriguing sounding mains - fried soft shell crab, scallop and prawn cakes) arrived and...

They were fine. But on the plate, and in the mouth, they were little different to any other decent Chinese meal I had had. To pick on the pork in particular, the quality of meat was not discernably different to uhmm... normal pork, and the sauce tasted not disimilar to ohhh... a normal sweet and sour sauce. The sliced peppers added little, and the pomegranate was muted. It even had chunks of (ironic?) pineapple.

The whole dish, showed no sign of having striven for perfection. The prep, ingredients, presentation and taste were fine. They just didn't say "Cutting edge Chinese cuisine worthy of a Michelin star".

I felt really let down...

Maybe there is no 'new' Chinese (or even 'old' Chinese) above and beyond what we normally encounter. Maybe it's too late and Thai has filled the gap that 'Modern Chinese' could have mutated into. David Thompson is the sort of guy you would love to let loose on Chinese food, maybe he could have given it the kick up the arse it needs.

Cheers

Thom

[Tonyfinch]

Thom. Why not start that new thread?

I was right about Locatelli then (I love to say I told you so).

Dreary and predictable-that's Michelin for you.

[cabrales]

I noted the follwoing from the press release, among other things:

-- John Burton-Race at the Landmark recently closed. Any member updates on this development?

-- I forget whether there was a two-or-three-line commentary for restaurants in the UK prior to 2003. If not, the commentary would be somewhat interesting.

-- The new "wine glass" symbol would be helpful (denoting a good selection of quality wines by the glass)

[Gary Marshall]

i'm not surprised the landmark closed because i read john burton-race was spending 6 months away from the kitchen in france filming a tv series.

ps all real italian fans don't miss locatelli on telly tonight

[cabrales]

While I thought JBR's cuisine was weak among the London two-stars, I don't think he was aided by the majestic (in a negative sense) space he occupied at the Landmark. The height of the ceilings, for example, added to the perceived formality of the place. I never ate JBR meals at The Ortolan.

Edited January 16, 2003 by cabrales (log)

[Tonyfinch]

So a city the size of London has only one three star and three two star restaurants-all French. Michelin's parsimony has less to do with maintaining rarified standards and everything to do with its failure to comprehend the tastes and needs of restautrant goers in a modern non French city in 2003.

As said above ,one feels its star to Hakkasan to be a token and belated gesture towards recognizing the importance of Chinese cuisine in London restaurant life for the last thirty years. One senses that non-French restaurants get stars through gritted teeth.

[cabrales]

Tony -- While Michelin (being a France-based guide) may well prefer French cuisine, everybody knows that and can take that into account in utilizing the UK guide. It's not as though Michelin has been "hiding the ball". If readers don't believe that it's reflective of their own assessments of the London restaurant landscape, they could choose not to rely on the guide.

Giving one star to Hakasan cannot be called belated. While there are some exceptions (e.g., L'Astrance, Hiramatsu in Paris), it often takes a while for a restaurant to receive a star. Hakasan has not been around for more than two or three years, if I recall correctly. I appreciate your point related to belated recognition of Chinese cuisine in London. Which restaurant would you have had Michelin accord the star to before Hakasan, however, given Michelin's standards for service and cuisine (with all respect to Chinese restaurants)?

Edited January 16, 2003 by cabrales (log)

[thom]

Cabrales,

I think it would be a pity if Michelin did openly admit that they favoured French cuisine, and basically said 'thats the deal, if you don't like it go elsewhere'. I like to think that they would recognise any French bias as a potential problem, and are trying to evolve to ensure Michelin does not become a less potent brand amongst restaurateurs over the next 20 years.

Hakkasan has only been open around a year, but I think Tony was saying it was included as a belated nod to the Chinese (or possibly Asian) restaurant scene generally, rather than to Hakkasan specifically.

Your point about 'which Chinese restaurants' would have merited a star is a fair one. Chinese restaurants don't really achieve (or even strive for) the standards of service and atmosphere which Michelin (rightly or wrongly) believes are needed to achieve a star rating.

But what about expanding that question out, maybe to other Asian restaurants? Japanese would be an obvious one, or maybe closer to home with Spanish or Italian. I think the point Tony was making remains - restaurants which theoretically reach Michelins standards for cuisine, atmosphere, service etc have not been awarded stars, most probably (whether willfully or not) because they do not offer French cuisine; some of their recent awards smack of rash and misguided overcompensating.

Cheers

Thom

Edited January 16, 2003 by thom (log)

[Tonyfinch]

Which restaurant would you have had Michelin accord the star to before Hakasan, however, given Michelin's standards for service and cuisine (with all respect to Chinese restaurants)?

Cabrales, I can think of three that could /should have qualifed-Ken Lo's Memories of China, Mr Chow and The Oriental at The Dorchester Hotel. I've had wonderful meals in all three although admittedly not in the last five years.Some say China House in Piccadily is as good though I've never been there.

These restaurants easily meet the Michelin criteria for luxury decor, furnishings ,service etc., while many others could easily compare for food alone-but presumably that's not enough.

I do have a problem with Michelin not being upfront about its criteria and not stating its preference for French cuisine. You say"everybody knows it" but there may well be thousands of visitors to London from all round the world who know no such thing and there is nothing in the guide itself which admits to such a bias.

[cabrales]

Tony -- That's a good point. I have never eaten at the described restaurants, but have heard second-hand accounts of some of them. The Oriental at the Dorchester Hotel definitely had the decor.

On clarification of ratings considerations, why would Michelin have to explicitly state anything if most users of the guide understand how Michelin rates and what its preferences might be?

[Jon Tseng]

On clarification of ratings considerations, why would Michelin have to explicitly state anything if most users of the guide understand how Michelin rates and what its preferences might be?

Because if most of them do understand that means some of them do not.

PS BTW I thought the Oriental did have a star a few years back.

[Tonyfinch]

On clarification of ratings considerations, why would Michelin have to explicitly state anything if most users of the guide understand how Michelin rates and what its preferences might be?

Cabrales, the question to ask is why would Michelin NOT state that it is biased towards French cuisine? Can you think of a single reasonable answer to that question?

It wouldn't matter a jot to those who know already and to those who do not it tells them where the guide is coming from.

What would be the problem?

Edited January 16, 2003 by Tonyfinch (log)