Michelin 2006 results for France

[pim]

The London forum has got a thread predicting Michelin results of 2006 already, and I thought why not get the fun started for us over here too.

I'm going out on a limb to predict that Michelin awards the final -not to mention well deserved AND long overdue- star to Olivier Roellinger at La Maison de Bricourt.

Que pensez vous?

[John Talbott]

The London forum has got a thread predicting Michelin results of 2006 already, and I thought why not get the fun started for us over here too.

I'm going out on a limb to predict that Michelin awards the final -not to mention well deserved AND long overdue- star to Olivier Roellinger at La Maison de Bricourt.

Que pensez vous?

←

Very astute and reasonable calculation. I'd predict as well that Senderens holds on to some star(s); Gaya + Dominique Bouchet, the latter, despite his statements au contraire, will be rewarded and maybe, just maybe (despite my strong thought waves) Benoit + Auguste will, respectively, hold on or get one for differing reasons.

But to play the grouch, who cares?, except their investors; I would hope our habits will not change. Also we've got 4 more months if it's released as it usually is in March, unless of course some unthinking stockperson puts copies out in Corsica a week early as happend last year. Much can happen before then. On verra.

[ulterior epicure]

side question... why isn't l'os a moelle even listed in this past year's edition? am i missing something??

u.e.

[Bux]

The London forum has got a thread predicting Michelin results of 2006 already, and I thought why not get the fun started for us over here too.

I'm going out on a limb to predict that Michelin awards the final -not to mention well deserved AND long overdue- star to Olivier Roellinger at La Maison de Bricourt.

Que pensez vous?

←

I rather expected it in 1998 after our 1997 meal. I fear that Michelin has withheld that third star for so long that giving it now would be an admission of wrong doing as well as possibly require them to rethink Bocuse.

[Bux]

I didn't realize Benoit had a star, either that, or the experience of our meal there last year wouldn't allow that information to penetrate. It may even have dislodged the information that led to my choosing Benoit. Now I better understand why I don't understand the one star choices in NYC. On the other hand, I rather expect Ducasse to be able to earn a star. I've been a fan of Aux Lyonnais.

[Carlsbad]

I think Bocuse will die or retire with three stars. It was as memorable when we went there in 1989, and the menu is almost exactly the same as it was then. It was about tradition then and obviously still is. My wife refuses to return because it might ruin the memory of one of the best meals we've had.

I really enjoyed my meal at Aux Lyonnais, nothwithstanding some difficulty with the people we were with. However, in my opinion, if it should have a star, there are a number of worthy other bistros that should, also. Maybe the Ducasse connection will cause it to happen, but then don't you have to also give one to Mon Vieil Ami?

[degusto]

Even if Michelin’s ratings are getting more and more enigmatic and the guide’s value rapidly is being diluted beyond being just a good collection of opening times, addresses and telephone numbers, I would be extremely surprised if Michelin would send a place like Aux Lyonnais to stardom. I have eaten there several times and it is the typical restaurant where a large part of the food is wholly or partly pre-made and most of the time prepared with not even good ingredients (for example dried morels with their nasty taste of smoked dirt served at the height of the morels season) and where it is often evident that the food has been “sitting” around for a while before being reheated or served. I have always felt that there was a pretty clear borderline between stardom on the one hand and the over-practising of that kind of cuisine. Some may of course argue that that borderline has been erased with the renewed interest in sous vide cooking at the haute cuisine level but that is really a different story. Aux Lyonnais is ok as an inexpensive bistro that may merit a bib gourmand but a star makes no sense.

I never thought Roellinger would get the third star. Obviously since he now is an espoir, Michelin does indeed consider him. On the other hand, the espoir class looks rather ridiculous with the inclusion of l’Oasis in La Napoule. It would be quite laughable if l’Oasis would be promoted to 3-stars. On the other hand, why not? Michelin’s ratings are about as messed up as they can be already.

[pim]

Maybe the Ducasse connection will cause it to happen, but then don't you have to also give one to Mon Vieil Ami?

←

?

But Mon Viel Ami isn't a Ducasse place.

[pim]

I never thought Roellinger would get the third star. Obviously since he now is an espoir, Michelin does indeed consider him. On the other hand, the espoir class looks rather ridiculous with the inclusion of l’Oasis in La Napoule. It would be quite laughable if l’Oasis would be promoted to 3-stars. On the other hand, why not? Michelin’s ratings are about as messed up as they can be already.

←

I agree with you about Aux Lyonnais, it probably doesn't merit a star. But I know we disagree on Roellinger. Is he an espoir too? I didn't notice.

And, based on what you and Vedat have said on l'Oasis, I'd be really surprised too if they get the third star.

Edited November 15, 2005 by pim (log)

[John Talbott]

Maybe the Ducasse connection will cause it to happen, but then don't you have to also give one to Mon Vieil Ami?

←

But Mon Viel Ami isn't a Ducasse place.

←

I assume Carlsbad is alluding to the fairness/unfairness of Ducasse's stars influencing the elevation of Aux Lyonnais to stardom; where to be fair Michelin might be tempted to have Westerman's three stars at Buereheisel influence Mon Viel Ami's fate. This is not very well written but do I make the point?; what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[pim]

I assume Carlsbad is alluding to the fairness/unfairness of Ducasse's stars influencing the elevation of Aux Lyonnais to stardom; where to be fair Michelin might be tempted to have Westerman's three stars at Buereheisel influence Mon Viel Ami's fate.  This is not very well written but do I make the point?; what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

←

Hmm...I'm still not sure I'm following the logic here. Even if they gave A.L. a star because of Ducasse, whose star-y touch is evident from Monaco to NY, why would they be compelled to give one to Antoine Westermann's Mon Vieil Ami as well. Plenty of three star chefs have a side bistro business to make money. I don't see too many of them with *.

[degusto]

That Aux Lyonnais would get a star is just surreal to me. It is an extremely well managed bistro with good profitability, despite very modest pricing, and Ducasse is not likely going to benefit by its elevation to stardom.

I really don’t understand how people can claim Aux Lyonnais to be more than what it is, namely a good place with an exceptional interior for a decent grub and a reasonably good selection of moderately priced wines by the glass but it will just never serve or be able to serve great food, unless the whole business concept changes and that is not likely going to happen. Aux Lyonnais’ food costs seem to be a bit below 30 % and with the modest price levels of its offerings, many short cuts in ingredients sourcing and food preparation must be taken in order to deliver food with the profitability Aux Lyonnais is showing. To me this is very evident from what is on the plates. It is not a restaurant in its early years run by an enthusiastic chef striving for recognition and establishment. If the Michelin guide starts awarding stars to this type of restaurants, it will do a much greater disservice to the gastronomy than their inexplicable and illogical methodology and standards for awarding 3-stars.

[Ptipois]

That Aux Lyonnais would get a star is just surreal to me. It is an extremely well managed bistro with good profitability, despite very modest pricing, and Ducasse is not likely going to benefit by its elevation to stardom.

I've had a very bad meal at Aux Lyonnais, other meals okay but not above average, one very nice meal at the beginning, and I wouldn't think it deserves a star.

If the Michelin guide starts awarding stars to this type of restaurants, it will do a much greater disservice to the gastronomy than their inexplicable and illogical methodology and standards for awarding 3-stars.

←

I think you are right. The Michelin is already absurd enough the way it is, it doesn't need to make its case worse.

[getxo]

many short cuts in ingredients sourcing and food preparation must be taken in order to deliver food with the profitability Aux Lyonnais is showing. To me this is very evident from what is on the plates. It is not a restaurant in its early years run by an enthusiastic chef striving for recognition and establishment. If the Michelin guide starts awarding stars to this type of restaurants, it will do a much greater disservice to the gastronomy than their inexplicable and illogical methodology and standards for awarding 3-stars.

←

degusto,

I appreciate your analysis. And I think it is applicable to many restaurants I have visited lately (i.e., Dominique Bouchet, pinxo, bouquinistes, espadon bleu).

The question is where do you find a a bistro (new or old) where the economics does not detract from the what is on the plate. There aren't any. Are there?

Best,

Henry

[degusto]

many short cuts in ingredients sourcing and food preparation must be taken in order to deliver food with the profitability Aux Lyonnais is showing. To me this is very evident from what is on the plates. It is not a restaurant in its early years run by an enthusiastic chef striving for recognition and establishment. If the Michelin guide starts awarding stars to this type of restaurants, it will do a much greater disservice to the gastronomy than their inexplicable and illogical methodology and standards for awarding 3-stars.

←

degusto,

I appreciate your analysis. And I think it is applicable to many restaurants I have visited lately (i.e., Dominique Bouchet, pinxo, bouquinistes, espadon bleu).

The question is where do you find a a bistro (new or old) where the economics does not detract from the what is on the plate. There aren't any. Are there?

Best,

Henry

←

No there are not any, or rather there are not many. They usually exist in very short periods of time when a very ambitions and competent chef opens a new place and keeps prices down while trying to establish the restaurant. l'Astrance in its early stages was a good recent example of that. You may like the cooking or not or you may dislike the limitations in choices, but they did serve, and still serve carefully selected produce prepared with very professional cooking. It is not strange they became popular and subsequently started serving even more expensive produce and charging very high prices for it. Whether it today is worth the prices is an open debate. The demand certainly suggests that it is.

I have not yet been to Auguste but one would assume that the ambitions are high and the produce sourcing and cooking are on a very good level.

[John Talbott]

I have not yet been to Auguste but one would assume that the ambitions are high and the produce sourcing and cooking are on a very good level.

←

Auguste High ambitions, poor execution in my experience.

And adding to the comments about Aux Lyonnais + l'Astrance, I went a few days/weeks after they opened, liked them, went back with Colette and our best food friends of 45 years eating experience in France and both were very very disappointing to be kind.

[Bux]

I think Bocuse will die or retire with three stars.  It was as memorable when we went there in 1989, and the menu is almost exactly the same as it was then.  It was about tradition then and obviously still is.  My wife refuses to return because it might ruin the memory of one of the best meals we've had.

I tend to agree with you and your wife. As for Bocuse, I think it serves a different purpose now, than it did, or maybe it serves the same sort of purpose, but for a different sort of diner. The same may be said for Michelin and any star system. It's of more value when you're learning about food than it may be when you have experience.

I really enjoyed my meal at Aux Lyonnais, notwithstanding some difficulty with the people we were with.  However, in my opinion, if it should have a star, there are a number of worthy other bistros that should, also.  Maybe the Ducasse connection will cause it to happen, but then don't you have to also give one to Mon Vieil Ami?

←

I've been luckier than you in regard to my companions. I didn't even mind a fussy baby, although it meant I spent most of my second meal wheeling him around outside the restaurant. I've not thought that Aux Lyonnais deserved a star, only that Ducasse had the ability to staff a restaurant and make it worthy of a star if he chose to do so. Aux Lyonnais is what it is. I've enjoyed eating there immensely and many people, French people as well, never eat as well in their life and certainly not at Olive Garden or Buffalo Roadhouse or whatever it's called. However, I must apologize for being the cause of any discussion regarding its merit of a star, even though I've eaten less well at starred places. The system is broken, but awarding a star to Aux Lyonnais is not any sort of fix. It would simply add to the confusion.

Christian Parra used to make and serve a remarkable boudin noir at l'Auberge de la Galupe, his two star restaurant in the Pays Basque. Parra today runs a more simple rustic place closer to the Spanish border in the Pyrenées. I have reason to believe it's his recipe that arrives at Aux Lyonnais in cans and which is served to diners there. That would serve to illustrate degusto's points in regard to short cuts in preparation, but I defy anyone to find a better boudin noir in Paris, home made or not. "Short cut" is not synonymous with delivering an inferior product to the table. Still, I don't argue that Aux Lyonnais deserves a star. That I'd prefer it to Benoît implies that I don't think Benoît deserves its star.

[degusto]

I have not yet been to Auguste but one would assume that the ambitions are high and the produce sourcing and cooking are on a very good level.

←

Auguste High ambitions, poor execution in my experience.

And adding to the comments about Aux Lyonnais + l'Astrance, I went a few days/weeks after they opened, liked them, went back with Colette and our best food friends of 45 years eating experience in France and both were very very disappointing to be kind.

←

It would be interesting if you could elaborate a bit on why you were disappointed. Poor ingredients, poor cooking or was it simply just a matter of taste?

[degusto]

That would serve to illustrate degusto's points in regard to short cuts in preparation, but I defy anyone to find a better boudin noir in Paris, home made or not. "Short cut" is not synonymous with delivering an inferior product to the table. Still, I don't argue that Aux Lyonnais deserves a star. That I'd prefer it to Benoît implies that I don't think Benoît deserves its star.

←

Short cuts and cost control the way it is excercised in these restaurants inevitably means inferior products on the table. To what extent it disturbs you is another matter. That the odd dish or two may be of high standards does not alter the fundamental problem with these restaurants, namely that you will never eat great food. It does not mean that you cannot enjoy eating there, but the discussion regarded whether the food merited a star or not and I have seen other people who have hailed the food as great on these forums. Serving dried morels during the peak of the morels' season, clafoutis massproduced much too long in advance, poor quality asparagus, lamb of second rate quality synomous with low cost produce and garnish prepared well in advance is taking short cuts that leads to an inferior result.

[Bux]

. . . .

. . . [Aux Lyonnais] is not a restaurant in its early years run by an enthusiastic chef striving for recognition and establishment.  . . .

←

I certainly agree with that. I'm not sure that's the sole basis for awarding one star, but I'll think about that. Part of Aux Lyonnais' appeal for me is similar to that of the original la Régalade, although I don't think it's as good or that the appeal is as strong, but it does remind me of the places in which I cut my teeth on French cooking. Oddly enough, I've had the opportunity to watch some of those original places decline to the point where they no longer reminded me of themselves, so it's not a false or misplaced nostaligia. None of those original places in which I ate as a student or just after we were married had, or merited a star, but those were different times anyway. Later visits to France involved starred restaurant in increasing numbers and those experiences built on a good foundation. I'm not sure that foundation can be as well had at unstarred restaurants these days. I see less of the continuity between the classes of restaurants, but I think Aux Lyonnais is the kind of place that upholds the traditions at the base level.

[Carlsbad]

I was referring to the Westerman connection, as M. Talbott indicated, and also to the fact that I thought his bistro was exceptionally good.

[ulterior epicure]

I know it's not a bistro... but does anyone have any comments on whether Table JR's star is "riding on the coat tails" of a named chef?

I haven't been to either Aux Lyonnaise or Table JR, so I really can't say.

[BigboyDan]

This talk only reinforces the importance of the Michelin Guide to France restaurants; debating their reviews methodology/value is academic.

[robert brown]

It took seversal years for Guy Savoy to receive his third star, so I wouldn't bet against Roellinger. What about restaurants that might lose a star? Le Louis XV recently went through a period of losing, regainiing, losing, regaining. Ten years go, this restaurant was as good as it gets. Now you have a better chance for good luck playing internet poker.

[Margaret Pilgrim]

It would be interesting if you could elaborate a bit on why you were disappointed. Poor ingredients, poor cooking or was it simply just a matter of taste?

←

Degusto, I realize that you were asking Robert Talbott, but since we had similar reactions, I will describe ours. We visited L'Astrance when it had been open about 6 months. We ordered off the carte, and were charmed by every course. We returned 6 months later, and, because of our previous enjoyment, ordered a tasting menu. To answer your question specifically, I would have to say that our disappointment was one of taste. There was nothing wrong with quality or technique, but a repeated silent questioning, "Why would the chef think that we would want to eat this?

I remember several courses as being simply uninteresting, and one that was actually unappealing: a puree of roast pork served in a small pottery coffee cup, topped with a searingly hot melted cheese (comte?) and cornichon ice cream. The cheese drew threads like pizza, making eating the combination almost impossible, the pork was disgusting. The ice cream was rather interesting, but could not by itself pull the dish together.

From what I have read, I believe that the kitchen has become stronger in its ability to provide innovation without the valleys of some of its early experimentation. We haven't been back to find out.