Michelin Stars

[Suzi Edwards]

I was just reading a post in the Edinburgh thread about Martin Wishart maybe going for 2 stars and it struck me that I don't really know how one "goes" for more stars. I'm not a seasoned enough eater to be able to compare meals I've had at the same restaurant when it has had a different number of stars. But I'm sure I know some people who can! Any comments?

[sandra]

I can't answer your question tarka, but while you are on that subject, does anyone know how does it work when a restaurant changes, i.e. Pied a Terre, will it still have it's star after fire and refurb, etc...??

[Jon Tseng]

Generally stars do tend to follow chefs e.g. John Burton Race took two starts from Ortolan to the Landmark. Ditto Petrus' star.

Having said that the exception which springs to mind is Pierre Koffmann losing a star when he moved to the Berkeley, although I think he did double the number of covers so it wasn't a like for like move.

On that basis I think there's a pretty good chance Pied A Terre will keep its stars

J

[tony h]

How about turning this into a who'll get/who'll lose next year?

Tom Aikens must surely get a second star

Pied a Terre really should lose one - they've been very pedestrian recently

[culinary bear]

How about turning this into a who'll get/who'll lose next year?

Tom Aikens must surely get a second star

Pied a Terre really should lose one - they've been very pedestrian recently

←

I think, and I'm hoping, that the Establishment in Manchester will get one. Not having a starred restaurant in Manchester, unless you count Juniper in Altrincham, is a bit of a disgrace.

I have to declare an interest in that I've worked there.

[Jon Tseng]

Anthonys in for an upgrade? (does it have * yet?)

J

[Andy Lynes]

Anthony's only opened on 3 March this year so is not rated by Michelin as yet, but I think that they must get one (although I'm yet to eat there).

In terms of what distinguishes a 1, 2 and 3 star restaurant, I wrote this for an article in Olive magazine earlier this year, which got changed a bit when it appeared so I suppose I own this version:

"So what do the stars actually mean?

One star indicates "A very good restaurant in its category"

Two Stars are awarded for "Excellent cooking, worth a detour"

Three stars are for "Exceptional cuisine, worth a special journey"

Oh right, thanks for that. So what do the stars actually mean?

A very good question. The guide has never revealed exactly how it grades restaurants, not even to the chefs themselves. Although Michelin is notoriously tight lipped and rarely sees the need to explain anything it does, they did tell Olive that innovation & technical skill, the quality of the ingredients used, the wine list and value for money are among the things considered. Chef Heston Blumenthal told us that "A lot is said about the guide, but not much comes directly from them. I'm not sure they do themselves any favours by keeping quiet"."

I've eaten in a fair few starred establishments, and in terms of the food on

the plate, there isn't a massive difference. That may be why some people say that the length of wine list, the luxuriousness of the surroundings, a seperate bar, number of staff on the floor, the amount of foie gras, truffles and lobsters used and all that sort of thing is what sets the 2 and 3 stars apart from the 1 stars. None of which makes any sense when you consider that modest restaurants like Le Champignon Sauvage or the original Lettonie can win 2 stars and somewhere like Petrus is apparently stuck on 1 star. In short, and to quote Toyah, "Its a mystery, its a mystery, I'm still searching for a clue."

[confiseur]

Hmmm........Is there any truth in the rumour that 2 and 3 stars are given only on the say-so from Paris?

True or not, I have found in the past that 1 and 2 star restaurants in England are better (shock-horror our continental friends cry) than a same starred restaurant in France, or Switzerland. Is this just my imagination/over sensitive palate? or is there still an innate prejudice about British Food/chefs?

[culinary bear]

re: the mix of food/front of house...

Would it be heretical to thoerise that with a few exceptions, getting a star tends to be more about the food, and with gaining a second and third star the surroundings, ambience and 'luxuriousness' tend to play more of a part than in the original one-star grading?

I'm not being so simplistic as to say that the first star is for the food and the second and third the surroundings and service, but what does everyone else think?

[patrick]

Yes, I believe culinary bear is right to theorise that getting one star tends to be more about the food, whereas the second and third star awards take into account each and every aspect of the basis, as well as the level of cuisine. Saying that, Michelin seem to be quite keen on making sure the business is viable before awarding a first star.

As Andy says, there are many criteria that a restaurant must meet to achieve the second and third stars, but originality, determination to source the best produce and the ability not to follow the crowd are paramount, as is the all important CONSISTENCY.

I expect Anthonys to get one star in January, and Tom Aikens to get the second star.

[daw]

Anthony's is one Leeds establishment in the running for the New Year, Number Three York Place is the other.

Only time will tell, I have eaten at a variety of starred places, almost exclusively in France and both would seem to measure up.

By now of course the decisions must be made and the red books willl be in production at some secret printing location.

David

[daw]

A further question: what difference does that star, be it first, second or third make to a place?

If like Anthonys they are already full well in advance (at least at the weekend) and probably charging what the market will stand what difference will it make, can anyone enlighten me, (examples?)

David

[alexw]

From what I can gather first star is the benchmark, 2nd star doesn't seem to make a huge amount of difference ( I could however be extremely wrong here), but quoting a long forgotten article from many moons ago, (which I have forgotten where its from), he said that with the third star came a whole new breed of clientelle, ones who all of a sudden knew exactly what they wanted from their food, and how it should come.

This mould is of course being pushed by the FD, and also if you note that the FD had a 2 knife and fork rating, (which is how they grade their comfort and surroundings), I had 2 knife and forks when I used to work at Marchesis in Broadstairs, in kent and we served better than average restaurant fayre.

I don't beleive the stars have much to do with the restaurants surroundings, It is mainly for the quality of what you get to consume. Everything from the shopping to the visual execution of each dish, this would include the service staff and quality of china etc.

[Paul de Gruchy]

I do remember one chef handing in his stars and bemoaning the fact that you need to bake several types of bread and petit fours to keep Michelin stars. And that's the nub I guess - getting 2 or 3 stars means that you have to have a large brigade doing everything from scratch. Whereas from my point of view, I rarely eat bread in a restaurant that is as good as an ordinary loaf from a French village bakers. I think it would be better if more emphasis was put on the three courses of food, and less on the ancillaries, but at least you know that if you go to a 3 star restaurant you get an all-round experience. In my limited experience at that level, I generally prefer the food at a 1 star rather than a 3 - 1 stars have to take risks but 3 stars tend to be conservative. I think this is discussed on another thread.

[paulbrussel]

The difference between two and three stars doesn't seem to be big, in my opinion. Three stars are usually given to restaurants that have an overall very high two star standard during a very long time (mostly several years).

About three stars, the direction in France always decides.

Last year, thanks to several publications (Morteau, Olivier: Food business, Rémy, Pascal: L'Inspecteur se met à table) and interviews with Derek Brown, a bit more transparency in Michelin's policy was given.

One star is not too difficult to get, but also not too difficult to loose. Every year, restaurants do loose stars given the preceding year, even if there is no change to be noticed.

Move of a starred chef sometimes could be a reason to reconsider stars.

Another remark: in Holland, a two star restaurant (Inter Scaldes) was closed due to fire for almost a year, but nevertheless, it kept its two stars.

[Andy Lynes]

In terms of Pied a Terre for the 2005 guide, I think I'm correct in saying that the fire happened after the guide went to press so the fire shouldn't affect their rating this time around. The fact they they will only have been open for a few months before the 2006 guide goes to press sholdn't make much difference either, unless they have problems get back into the swing of things.

[tony h]

what sets the 2 and 3 stars apart from the 1 stars. None of which makes any sense when you consider that modest restaurants like Le Champignon Sauvage . . .  can win 2 stars and somewhere like Petrus is apparently stuck on 1 star.

←

How about talent - Wareing to my eye anyway just does cut down rip offs from Ramsay. He may do them very well but they lack originality. (may have changed - haven't been there for a while). I know I'm still gushing from my last visit to LCS but there's nothing modest about the cooking.

getting 2 or 3 stars means that you have to have a large brigade doing everything from scratch. 

←

there's only a couple of people in LCS kitchen - which shocked the hell out me when I was there particularly given the complexity of some dishes

[tony h]

The guide has never revealed exactly how it grades restaurants, not even to the chefs themselves. Although Michelin is notoriously tight lipped and rarely sees the need to explain anything it does

←

Just wondering - is is possible to sue Michelin? I've been to several 3* places looking for exceptional meals/experiences but left feeling sorely dissapointed & ripped off. Grand Vefour for one, Martin B another. Frankly, I wouldn't have gone without their promotion of these establishments. Do you think a few lawsuits would help them become more transparent?

[Clerkenwellian]

Just wondering - is is possible to sue Michelin?

[Marlyn4k]

It's a big year for Michelin...the publication of the UK pub guide must have taken alot of resourse, the Michelin web site says that the food was reviewed by the same inspectors as the red guide.

With a change in GM (European) and the difficult times caused by the former inspector there maybe some surprises in 2005. I believe that a couple of european countries already have their 2005 edition published - any feedback from them?

Personally, their lack of transparency is a benefit - its their recipe and its a secret - and whatever their faults, the award of stars still means more to chefs than any other accolade.

[Gary Marshall]

A further question: what difference does that star, be it first, second or third make to a place?

If like Anthonys they are already full well in advance (at least at the weekend) and probably charging what the market will stand what difference will it make, can anyone enlighten me, (examples?)

David

←

i think anthony's is the exception here being as you say, very busy already and well known to a national audience rather than a regular, local fan base. I would say usually a star will bring in more 'out of town' custom.

i have heard that stars can add 20 -30% to a restaurants business. It is often cause for raising of prices too, but i think the general eating out market is so cut-throat that is less likely nowadays, i remember ramsay saying he actually cut his prices when he got 3 stars as a thank-you to his customers.

Hibiscus was already full on peak services with one star, when they gained 2 claire said the main effect was the quiter services and lunches started to sell out too as well as the friday and saturdays.

i expect anthonys to get a star, i doubt it will have much effect on the business but will justfy the work they have put in this year and keep tony happy, if nathan outlaw's got one tony won't be happy until he's got one!

Given the ambition i wouldn't be suprised to see it quickly gain 2. They are already working on the bits and pieces that you would expect to see in a 2 star.

I also expect number 3 to get one too, they have worked extremely hard to build a consistent, highly enjoyable restaurant that to me is a text book one star michelin, denis has always worked in one and two starred places so knows what buttons to press.

cheers

gary

[Bapi]

Hold on a tick- who is this posting in Gary's name? A 1.49pm post on a Friday and you expect us to believe that you are not actually in No 3 stuffing yourself instead?

Don't quite agree with what you wrote about Anthony's . I remember that Tom Aikens, was also fairly well booked up prior to them getting their first star. I also seem to recall that he was disappointed that they didn't attain two stars straight away after his wilderness years on that documentary that played earlier this year.

Everything I have read elsewhere and heard you say and write suggests that Anthony's is right up there with other 2* places already. Do you think it might just make it to 2* first time round? I think it unlikely.

[Gary Marshall]

Hold on a tick- who is this posting in Gary's name? A 1.49pm post on a Friday and you expect us to believe that you are not actually in No 3 stuffing yourself instead?  

Don't quite agree with what you wrote about Anthony's . I remember that Tom Aikens, was also fairly well booked up prior to them getting their first star. I also seem to recall that he was disappointed that they didn't attain two stars straight away after his wilderness years on that documentary that played earlier this year.

Everything I have read elsewhere and  heard you say and write suggests that Anthony's is right up there with other 2* places already. Do you think it might just make it to 2* first time round? I think it unlikely.

←

been on the christmas sherry have we already baps?!

not really comparing like for like here are we?

tom aikens was the youngest chef to get 2 stars (pied a terre?) and was already well known/infamous in the industry, he is also in central london.

Tony was essentially unknown outside of the chef world, and is in central leeds to have people already flying in from america/heading to leeds especially to eat there is pretty remarkable.

think ta denied the 'expected to get 2 stars' as far as i'm aware no-one starting a restaurant from scratch has got 2 stars (transfers yes, but not unstarred chefs).

so i agree it's very unlikely it'll get stars out of the box but as i say, given what they've accomplished in 9 months, it's feasible they could get 2 the year after.

let's face it they gave the fat duck 3, anthonys should be on course for 4 haha!

cheers

gary

[slacker]

Could someone just look in the guide and pst what Michelin expect of a 2 star joint?

[Pweaver1984]

How about Simon Rogan up in L'Enclume??

Don't believe it has any?