David Clancy
Foodie
730
Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:09 pm
A couch in Andy's house.
David Clancy wrote:I wonder if he needs to simplify just a touch for the benifit of the dining audience? Just a thought........
Ron Johnson wrote:Not to restart the debate on the star system, but to me Jack Fry's is the perfect example of a 3.5 star restaurant. Everything is great, but they aren't quite attempting the same degree of difficulty and the same super-luxe atmosphere at Corbett's, 610, or Oakroom.
Ron Johnson wrote:Here is an example of how I think some well known Louisville restaurants would rank in the NY Times star system. And, keep in mind that one star means good.
1 Star: Cafe Lou Lou, Baxter Station, Uptown cafe, Vietnam Kitchen, Palermo Viejo
2 Star: Havana Rumba, Seviche, L & N, Lilly's,
3 Star: Equus, Le Relais, Jack Fry's, Proof
4 Star: Corbett's, 610, Oakroom
Ron Johnson wrote:a four star system is too imprecise when it is expected to span everything from terrible to outstanding restaurants. That's why I prefer the NY Times system, where stars one through four denote only good to extraordinary restaurants. In this system, most restaurants covet a one star rating and very few even attempt to soar to a four star rating. Then there is plenty of room in between to accurately rank all of those that are turning out great food in a variety of styles and atmospheres. And, that is as it should be.
Here is an example of how I think some well known Louisville restaurants would rank in the NY Times star system. And, keep in mind that one star means good.
1 Star: Cafe Lou Lou, Baxter Station, Uptown cafe, Vietnam Kitchen, Palermo Viejo
2 Star: Havana Rumba, Seviche, L & N, Lilly's,
3 Star: Equus, Le Relais, Jack Fry's, Proof
4 Star: Corbett's, 610, Oakroom
Jay M. wrote:What happens if the critic does not believe the place warrants even one star? Do they not bother publishing a review or publish the review text but with no stars?
Robin Garr wrote:Jay M. wrote:What happens if the critic does not believe the place warrants even one star? Do they not bother publishing a review or publish the review text but with no stars?
I just don't see the advantage in The Times' system, which starts with an arbitrary decision whether a place fits into "fine dining" (and thus competes for stars) or if it doesn't.
Ron Johnson wrote:Robin Garr wrote: I just don't see the advantage in The Times' system, which starts with an arbitrary decision whether a place fits into "fine dining" (and thus competes for stars) or if it doesn't.
This is not the case. Many non-"fine dining" restaurants have been awarded stars. One, Momofuku Ssam Bar, was named on the Time ten Best Restaurants of 2007.
David Clancy
Foodie
730
Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:09 pm
A couch in Andy's house.
I never said I didn't like Marty's reviews (indeed, I think he is spot-on)......I just came across a word I didn't know and it vexed me. I don't want him to "dummy down" but I do think his command of the English language is being flaunted just a touch. (disclaimer: I don't read or subscribe to the CJ and get all the news I need from NPR and KET) On a side note, I'm with Ron on the rating system though I would probably plunk Seviche up in the second or top tier as one of the vanguard.....(degree of difficulty should mean something)JMHOC. Devlin wrote:I like Marty's style, and I like too that he doesn't write down to his readers. The man writes well, has a wide-ranging vocabulary, and he isn't afraid to use it. Transubstantiation?... For me? Good (well, lapsed) Catholic girl?.... Yeah, I know what to expect, and that can only be a good thing (um, channelling Martha Stewart for a minute, but anyway).... We enjoyed dinner at Jack Fry's for the first time last weekend and were really pleased. Loved it. The only quibble, their espresso which was simply bad. Everything else? Wonderful.
Ron Johnson wrote:I don't think the NY Times is a two tier system, unless you are speaking about the Under $25 Column that it does in addition to the regular restaurant reviews.
Users browsing this forum: Claudebot and 5 guests