Mobil Five-Stars

[kirsch]

http://mobiltravelguide.howstuffworks.com/fivestar.php

Not sure when this came out this year...may be old news...but, what do you gentlemen think about the restaurant listing?

--Chris

[palmer]

To me, the list seems rather conventional. I doubt that you'd have a bad meal any of the restaurants listed, but you also might not have the best meal in town. For example, I assume that the Dining Room in San Francisco is the Dining Room at the Ritz-Carlton. It's a lovely restaurant, and Ron Siegel's an excellent chef. But there are plenty of other restaurants in San Francisco on at least a par with the Dining Room. Although I don't always agree with Michelin, a look at its San Francisco guide illustrates my overall point.

Given the prevelance of brand name hotel chains (Ritz-Carlton, St. Regis, Four Seasons) on the list of best hotels, I wonder whether the restaurant and hotel listings have more to do with name recognition -- or perhaps advertising dollars -- than absolute quality.

One last point: In my opinion, all lists are fun to debate, but they're no substitute for finding what you like on your own (or on the basis of advice from people you trust).

[Cufflink79]

I wholeheartedly agree with Palmer. It is fun to find things on your own.

While a list of restaurants, hotels, haberdasheries, and other activities are helpful they can't make up for what you can discover on your own.

Remember it's your money, you should decide what provides the best value for your hard earned income.

Best Regards,

Cufflink79

[Guest]

The hotel ratings seem to be a hybrid of subjective Michelin-style ratings and objective European "Ministry of Tourism" ratings, such as the system used in France or Romania. The restaurant ratings are Michelin-style (subjective), but are at best incomplete. For example, Vetri, universally recognized to be one of the most important Italian restaurants in the USA, goes without 4 or 5 stars. I can only speak to Philadelphia.

[kirsch]

I very much agree with you guys.

It's kind of boring to see the same restaurants again and again on these lists. I assume The Dining Room will be there for a long time (if it's not been already). And, I mean, I can usually assume that a restaurant at the Ritz is going to be good. Don't really need a list to tell me that.

So are there any "off the beaten path" - type lists available (for restaurants)?


chris

[iammatt]

The Dining Room at the RC in San Francisco is actually an interesting case. For several years in the late 90s early 00s, it was truly the best restaurant in San Francisco. After the chef left in 03 or 04, it went back to what it had been before, namely a pretty good hotel restaurant.

I would not look at Michelin for San Francisco. They either do not understand the restaurants of the area, or they did not actually show up to eat. Anybody who would award two stars to Michael Mina, a bridge and tunnel nightmare with awful food, isn't doing their job.

[Guest]

Chris, I have a lame answer for you, and that is that each city has its own source of the most au courant criticism. NYC's is undoubtedly the NYTimes, but in Philly the Enquirer is the best. In Twin Cities, the Pioneer Press was the best generally.

The problem is that guides published in one city can never really be up-to-the-minute since they need one year to gather reviews and one year to publish. Plus they have to use a variety of people, each of whom has his own point of view. Zagat's is a good example of a guide without any point or point of view, useless for any of the cities I have lived in.

Of course, perhaps the published guides are much better in Europe, I don't know.