Random Daily Banter

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Our local one lasted 4 years before he shut it down. We tried it just in time. Wrong place, not quite enough customers willing to regularly from £500 on a night out for two, I would guess. Seems to me that many of these places suffer from costs going up just as fast as reputation.

The sweet spot for me is the 2 or 3 rosette level. You are less likely to come away starving hungry and penniless, and the food in some cases to be pretty much indistinguishable to my unsophisticated pallette. Less so in others mind you...

That said, I've yet to break open the piggy bank required to fund a two star night out.

Yes, around 5 years tends to be the make or break point, and I think you are right the cost vs location does for many of them.

Good point on 2 and 3 rosette level, there are many that are star level but for sone reason Michelin don't agree. As they don't have one they can't charge the prices which keeps them good value.

Obviously it is subjective but I think there is a noticeable step up to the second star, less so from 2 to 3.

 

[Pblakeney]

Our local one lasted 4 years before he shut it down. We tried it just in time. Wrong place, not quite enough customers willing to regularly from £500 on a night out for two, I would guess. Seems to me that many of these places suffer from costs going up just as fast as reputation.

The sweet spot for me is the 2 or 3 rosette level. You are less likely to come away starving hungry and penniless, and the food in some cases to be pretty much indistinguishable to my unsophisticated pallette. Less so in others mind you...

That said, I've yet to break open the piggy bank required to fund a two star night out.

I wholeheartedly agree on the 2 or 3 rosette level. The standout exception was Gordon Ramsey's 3 star in Chelsea when Clare Smyth was the chef. That was truly exceptional and worth the expense.

 

[First Aspect]

So I think you can filter out locally based on word of mouth and experience.

Still none the wiser when you are travelling. We used to use TripAdvisor, but that's weighted by families who like chips and chicken kyiv. And "££££" seems to be £30 for a main. Google, as PP has noted, is similarly algorithmed into uselessness.

Best we are able to do is try those and then read some reviews and look at the pictures. If someone is giving a bad review because the staff don't react well to waving your arms around and shouting "garcon" or because the atmosphere is too quiet, it is probably quite good.

 

[Pblakeney]

So I think you can filter out locally based on word of mouth and experience.

Still none the wiser when you are travelling. We used to use TripAdvisor, but that's weighted by families who like chips and chicken kyiv. And "££££" seems to be £30 for a main. Google, as PP has noted, is similarly algorithmed into uselessness.

Best we are able to do is try those and then read some reviews and look at the pictures. If someone is giving a bad review because the staff don't react well to waving your arms around and shouting "garcon" or because the atmosphere is too quiet, it is probably quite good.

Agreed. All too often the level of review is proportional to the portion size. Quantity over quality is rarely a good thing.

 

[First Aspect]

Top tip for steak lovers, look for reviews where someone says the staff were rude when they asked for it well done.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

I wholeheartedly agree on the 2 or 3 rosette level. The standout exception was Gordon Ramsey's 3 star in Chelsea when Clare Smyth was the chef. That was truly exceptional and worth the expense.

I ate there 25 odd years ago when it was a 2 star and it was massively underwhelming. I always had the impression that Clare Smyth transformed it. I would like to try Core at some point. The Ledbury is also incredibly good.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Tripadvisor is generally useless. The best thing to do when travelling is read the menu and have a peek through the window to look at the food and then follow your instinct!

 

[laurentian]

I find the best thing to do when travelling is to ask the people serving you a drink, the people running whatever accommodation you're in, the guy in the shop etc etc,:

". . . if you were going out to eat, where would you go . . ."

This rarely results in a poor experience.

(I also often ask the waiter what they would choose from the menu . . .)

 

[Pblakeney]

(I also often ask the waiter what they would choose from the menu . . .)

I find that this often ends in over priced disappointment though. I have stopped doing this.

 

[C R]

The sweet spot for me is the 2 or 3 rosette level. You are less likely to come away starving hungry and penniless, and the food in some cases to be pretty much indistinguishable to my unsophisticated pallette. Less so in others mind you...

That's your problem, you should try using you palate for this purpose.

 

[laurentian]

I find that this often ends in over priced disappointment though. I have stopped doing this.

I think that may depend on the type of establishment but agree that this is a potential issue. However, I keep a mental tally in my head of the "best five" meals I've ever had and one of these was from asking the waiter this very question . . . so perhaps I'm biased . . .

 

[PurplePenguin]

Agreed. All too often the level of review is proportional to the portion size. Quantity over quality is rarely a good thing.

Nor is leaving a restaurant hungry.

 

[PurplePenguin]

I still think a lot of people just pay for the experience rather than the food. Much like instagrammers.

I'm lucky in that I dislike the experience (waiter: "still or sparkling, sir" me: "tap is just fine" waiter: scowl) and am very happy with many cuisines from around the world that also happen to be much cheaper and come without the charade. I've even eaten in places that don't have alcohol which is unthinkable to many.

 

[Pblakeney]

Nor is leaving a restaurant hungry.

Most people I have encountered with this complaint do fall into the quantity over quality category.
I am yet to leave a restaurant hungry.

 

[First Aspect]

I still think a lot of people just pay for the experience rather than the food. Much like instagrammers.

I'm lucky in that I dislike the experience (waiter: "still or sparkling, sir" me: "tap is just fine" waiter: scowl) and am very happy with many cuisines from around the world that also happen to be much cheaper and come without the charade. I've even eaten in places that don't have alcohol which is unthinkable to many.

I think people sometimes forget that they are also paying for the experience as well as the food. If it is just about the food, just get a ready meal.

If I am spending £300 plus between two of us, I'd expect to be there 2 1/2 - 3h. If I am doing that I don't want to have to choose my food, because I want the chef to know more than me. In some cases the same applies to the wine.

I can do without a sommelier, or a waiter doing the same thing. Keep it brief. Very brief.

The more "American" the serving style is, the more I hate it. I particularly detest being asked how things are part way through a course. If you don't know from the far end of the room whether I'm unhappy or not, you are in the wrong job.