CJ reviewer reviews self, Joe's Older Than Dirt

[Robin Garr]

Joe's Older Than Dirt gets 2 1/2 stars. The reviewer does not give herself a star rating.

What do you folks think of this review?

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/en ... /27642073/

"I'm determined to find out why Joe's is going strong after almost 80 years in business."

Uh...because its a neighborhood bar that probably hasn't changed much in 80 years and everyone goes there to drink and see people they know?

Joe's is a fun place to watch games. However, I agree that their pizza is awful, much like microwaved cardboard.

While I can't comment on the food because we haven't been there this is one of her first reviews that actually makes me want to go to the restaurant she reviewed! She seemed to do a better job catching the vibe of the restaurant instead of drooling over how it was decorated or who did the decorations. She also didn't even mention who the chef (actually probably a cook in the case) and tell about how good his background was.

[Robin Garr]

She also didn't even mention who the chef ...

You stopped reading too soon, Mark.

Chef Chris Douso's other sandwiches include

Nothing about his culinary school credentials, though ...

There still seems to be a total disconnect between her review and the food. If the food is as outlandishly bad as she says it is in her review, how in the world does she give it 2 1/2 stars?

I have come to enjoy reading her reviews, as most of her writings are labeled as "comedy". I am sure she is a nice person though

I guess my thing is, I have never in my life heard anyone say "I'm going to Joe's for the food." I suppose if you are a restaurant you are fair game for review, but there are so many restaurants in this city, why choose this one to bash? Its not going to help or hurt them either way because 95% of their business is probably regular customers who won't even read or care about the review and the rest of the city never intended to stop in for a meal anyway. I mean its not like anyone is going there as a food destination or thought it was some hidden gem gastro-pub. If i was ever going to eat at Joes, which i never have although I have been there to drink multiple times, I would have low expectations.

Joes strikes me more as a neighborhood bar that also serves some food in case you need to soak up some of the alcohol while you're there. Its basically just a dive. People like dives and you can be a very successful dive serving cheap drinks and bad food because thats not why people are going there. Some dives DO have pretty good food, like the Granville, but I don't think its a requirement for success. People are there for the booze and the company.

Of course the reviewer did not like it because frankly, she doesn't seem like the type of person any patron of Joes Older than Dirt would want to hang out with. Just a pointless review in my opinion. I can see slamming a place if they are presenting themselves as something and not living up to expectations, but why go to a hole in the wall and then write "this place was a hole in the wall."

[Robin Garr]

I guess my thing is, I have never in my life heard anyone say "I'm going to Joe's for the food."

It's sort of like, "I read Playboy for the articles."

[Robin Garr]

By the way, am I the only one here who remembers that Joe's had a short-lived second location out Preston somewhere, maybe north of Outer Loop?

The reason I mention it is that they had really excellent barbecue. It could have been a destination, even though everything else about it was pretty much the same as the Lyndon branch (even the moose). But it didn't last six months.

I guess my thing is, I have never in my life heard anyone say "I'm going to Joe's for the food."

It's sort of like, "I read Playboy for the articles."

Funny you mention Playboy, as Joe's was across the street from Trixie's on Preston Hwy. It was actually a nice building and the beer was good and cold. Po Folks used to be right across the street from the Joe's location many years ago too!