Quote:
Originally Posted by KYHeirloomer  Putting aside questions of the reviewer's talents, a contributing factor to why there are so many bad reviews is budget.
The ideal review of a restaurant includes three visits. The first two are blind, and at least one of them should be done on a weekend. The reviewer is accompanied by his/her partner and another couple. And all four of them order different things each time. After the third visit the reviewer identifies him/herself, and asks to meet the chef and see the kitchen.
Because very few media are willing to pay for that process, and because the reviewer certainly can't afford it out of pocket, we most often get less than the ideal. |
When I was a lot younger I served an apprenticeship in the Essex House In New York. The chef was Swiss trained Erie Meier who reresented the Us in the culinary olympics in 1955. The director of catering came into the kitchen with a banquet manager who was an upcomeing star? They both proceeded to taste a pinkish colored sauce in the steam table They both said it tasted bad and they did not like it .The chef asked them do you know what it is? they said no. He said then how do you know it taste bad if you dont know what it is. I aquait this to some food critics and reviewers. Cant help it. No you dont have to be a chef to review but at least know what you are reviewing.
