L.A. Times article on Zagat

[hollywood]

hollywood, you can say the same thing about any guidebook.  But the problem is that when I'm travelling, I'm essentially a dummie for that city and a guidebook is a good place to get up to speed.  Before I go to a city, I generally look through Chowhound and eGullet, Mobil, Zagat, and local newspapers, if they have anything useful.  Cross-referencing there can be a good start.  If I ignored Zagat, though, I might miss some things that wouldn't be recognized in Mobil (or Michelin in Europe) as "starworthy".

I agree with your approach. I'd say either the LA Weekly listings or Chowhound are most useful in ferreting out overlooked places in LA/OC.

[ExtraMSG]

I agree with your approach. I'd say either the LA Weekly listings or Chowhound are most useful in ferreting out overlooked places in LA/OC.

Problems is, you can't carry Chowhound or eGullet with you or buy it in whatever town to carry around. Zagat, in that case, can be the best of a bad situation. In a new city if I haven't researched adequately or find myself somewhere where I want something to eat but don't have time to look for some Chowhound rec, I usually use Mobil (in the US) for dinner and Zagat for lunch. I don't really trust Zagat enough for high end places, but Mobil doesn't cover the low end places well at all. Fodor's, Frommer's, and Lonely Planet give little indication why I would choose one of their recs. I wish more good weeklies, like your LA Weekly probably is, or The Willamette Week is here in Portland, would publish guides with both a top 100, say, and a cheap eats section. Our paper does both, but they're given out once a year in the paper. I'd like a Zagat-sized guide I could buy somewhere, even if off the internet, before I go.

[hollywood]

Problems is, you can't carry Chowhound or eGullet with you or buy it in whatever town to carry around.

A rationale for getting that PDA?

[Malik]

I agree with ExtraMSG, Zagat is much more useful than people on this board are willing to give it credit for. Yes their food rankings are not all that reliable, but then again, who's are? I have Zagat To Go (the Palm version) with DB's for various cities across the world, and just the listings with addresses and phone numbers make it worthwhile. The ratings and haikus are just bonus info on top. I never use Zagat anymore to choose which restaurant to go to in San Francisco (though I used to when I first moved here), but it's a god send when travelling, especially if it's a short trip to a city that I don't know very well.

I find that with Zagat, as with all guides, you have to be aware of what their strength and weaknesses are, and take that into account when using their reviews. For example, I find that for the most part, Zagat guides do a poor job rating ethnic restaurants, as the best ones are often either ignored altogether or severely underrated. They do a much better job on European and American cuisines.

A major problem with the Zagat methodology is the narrow scale they use (the article said 1 to 3).  I think such a scale is designed to prevent real differences in quality from being reflected in the final results.  (A scale of 1 to 10 would be much better.  They could then multiple the average by 10 to produce a final score on a scale of 1 to 100.)

I have filled out a Zagat survey in the past, and I agree that I found that restriction to be by far the biggest shortcoming. I definitely think that being given a choice of 0 to 10 would be much better than the current 0 to 3, as it's almost impossible to differentiate restaurants properly on the smaller scale.

One recent concern I do have with Zagat guides is that they seem to be abandoning smaller cities (Portland was dropped in 99, no new guides on Hawaii since 00, Vancouver or Dallas since 01), which is precisely the places where I find their guides useful. The guides on large cities like LA, San Francisco, New York, London, Paris have much more limited value to me, as I can find many more sources of information for these. I wish Zagat would stop trying to produce guides on Movies and Music, and instead try to broaden their geographic coverage.

[ExtraMSG]

Thank you Malik. I agree with everything you've said. 1 down, 12837 to go.

[Malik]

Moreover, as far as I know they have never subjected their methods to an independent audit, and I doubt they ever will.

Who cares? Would you really trust Zagat ratings more if they were subjected to an independent audit? Enron and Worldcom were audited (albeit one could argue about the indepence of their auditors), and look where that got them. It's just a food guide after all.

I think that experienced diners will know what to expect from a Zagat guide regardless of what the Zagat methodologies are exactly and whether they were audited or not. Granted Zagat has a disproportionate influence in the marketplace in the US, but then again so does the Michelin guide in France, the New York Times in NYC, etc...

[mixmaster b]

I agree with ExtraMSG, Zagat is much more useful than people on this board are willing to give it credit for. 

I really agree with you. I was looking at the LA Gayot's online, and I found it actually less helpful/accurate than Zagats. People slam the haikus, but often they give you a much better sense of the overall ambience at a restaurant than a more traditional short review.

The main shortcoming, in my mind, is the lack of sophistication of much of the general public/Zagat voter. But honestly, that is a problem with the “democratic process” in general—again, look who we just voted into office!!!

(But knowing this shortcoming, you can adjust for it in much the same way you adjust for the taste of an individual restaurant critic. And this is a convenient adjustment, as you don’t need to acquaint yourself with a multitude of regional critics’ tastes.)