Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Maybe they just looked at your pictures and decided not to go?

Or it may mean that the board is biased because of features unrelated to the food*. There's nothing wrong with such a bias because we know restaurants are not about food, but Wilfrid and Instagram tog

It wouldn't have occurred to me but for the similarity in techniques and presentation. Saddle/breast stuffed and served as medallions; in one case a broth, in the other a reduction; then the braised legs served with an "expression" of onions/ramps. I wasn't expecting the similarities at all when I placed my order.

 

To make it perfect, Olmsted should have served the wings with some of the sauce (I bet that would have been good).

 

The morels, of course, trump turnips and rubbery carrots hands down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I venture that every opinion posted on MF is backed by experience.

Well, no, not necessarily. But certainly the overwhelming majority can be described as "n=1".

 

After all, "n=1" is just a way of saying "you say," which is a bit childish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I venture that every opinion posted on MF is backed by experience.

Well, no, not necessarily. But certainly the overwhelming majority can be described as "n=1".

 

After all, "n=1" is just a way of saying "you say," which is a bit childish.

No. It's a way of saying that your experience does not accord with the broad sample on the board (there is some agreement with you on the chicken-rabbit). It means that, given the other evidence, you may be drawing too broad a conclusion from a limited sample. We all do it - we all have to do it, time and money are limited - but it should also stop us from doubling down too much when our opinion appears to be an outlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adrian my dear, n=1 means what it means. Is there a broad sample which rates the LeC rabbit over Olmsted's guinea fowl, because how else can my view be an "outlier"? It has to outlie something. I didn't notice. How am I "doubling down"? I ate both and have a view.

 

Or is "n=1" the new, but snarkier YMMV?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adrian my dear, n=1 means what it means. Is there a broad sample which rates the LeC rabbit over Olmsted's guinea fowl, because how else can my view be an "outlier"? It has to outlie something. I didn't notice. How am I "doubling down"? I ate both and have a view.

 

Or is "n=1" the new, but snarkier YMMV?

No but man n=1 is taion saying that your judgment seems way harsh given the other opinions out there. maybe it's imputed tone but you're really down on this joint and it's reading all defensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remain confused as to how to compare rabbit and guinea fowl.

First count the legs...

 

If Nlegs=1 then you're in trouble.

 

N=2 tastes like chicken

 

N=4 if tastes like chicken and/or mushy, send chef to school. Otherwise rabbit.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I venture that every opinion posted on MF is backed by experience.

Well, no, not necessarily. But certainly the overwhelming majority can be described as "n=1".

 

After all, "n=1" is just a way of saying "you say," which is a bit childish.

No. It's a way of saying that your experience does not accord with the broad sample on the board (there is some agreement with you on the chicken-rabbit). It means that, given the other evidence, you may be drawing too broad a conclusion from a limited sample. We all do it - we all have to do it, time and money are limited - but it should also stop us from doubling down too much when our opinion appears to be an outlier.

 

 

Or it may mean that the board is biased because of features unrelated to the food*. There's nothing wrong with such a bias because we know restaurants are not about food, but Wilfrid and Instagram together make a good point to me that even if ex-rabbit execution is very good, this is a kitchen of limited ambition (also the chef says as much but he could just be managing expectations).

 

n=1 is always obnoxious - if used for your own opinion then it is a way to excuse yourself from having your opinion questioned (because hey guys, it's just n=1, ymmv, fingers in my ears la la la) and when used for someone else's opinion then too (I don't care what you say, fingers in ears, and so on)

 

* and of course we all know the dynamic - an initial wave of extremely positive reviews fueled by opening prices, schmoozing, etc. followed by skeptics and then settlement somewhere in-between.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no opinion of this restaurant, and surely much of the initial praise may just be typical opening praise but also a bad meal may also just be a bad meal. Both are credible. i have no horse here but this thread does read like an attempt to determine who is right vs. an attempt to figure out just how good this restaurant is, or a respectful disagreement over preferences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the disagreement seems to be partially about skill and because some people are very sensitive when it's suggested that their opinions are just the result of personal preferences - perhaps we should extend the no politics ban to a no debate ban. :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Limited ambition" strikes me as an insulting term for a man who had great success feeding people in Paris in s small place and has now taken on the challenge of a huge place in a city he has not cooked in before.

 

If you mean he is not looking to create culinary benchmarks with creative cuisine, well yes. He seems to be aiming at a large market with better versions of food he knows a lot of people like to eat.

 

People I know with very "educated" palates think very highly of his cooking. That one of the posters here had less than satisfactory dish should be accepted and not seen as a takedown of the place. I am now five for five with raves from parties I sent there, and these are not culinary lightweights.

 

Obviously LC was not intended to challenge 11MP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...