Rating The Big Name Corporate Food Raters For 2004:    

0 Stars

If you have been reading my articles on any type of a consistent basis, you probably  concluded,  justifiably, that my ego is not small. However,  I am not so overconfident that I believe that as a food oriented person, you will only consult FrankAboutFood.com when making all of your dining decisions.

I would guess that most of you have on occasion checked out Zagat (even some of my best friends continue to rely on that ubiquitous pamphlet) and if you travel to Europe you probably bought and referred to the more famous Red Guide Michelin. (Just by coincidence Zagat, amazingly, is almost the same color.) Or, perhaps you chose the more detailed Gault-Millau.  

I am not going to rate AAA, Fodor or Frommer, because while these three might be able to guide you to the best Motel 6, their food reviews are rarely updated. It is apparent that much of their stuff hasn’t changed in 5-10 years. They just do not review nearly as often as the first group. Further, their guide books are oriented toward tourist sites and lodging, while dining is somewhat of an afterthought.

Let’s deal with the biggest name first, Michelin. Profit was not an issue. It is still published by the same company that makes the tires. The guide was created originally as a public relations tool designed to appeal to  Europeans who usually vacation by auto because of the small distances between tourist attractions even in different countries and for a long time have been more sophisticated about food than Americans. .

A long time Michelin food reviewer apparently  shocked by the sudden reduction in  the quality of information being provided, quit in rebellion and then decided to write a tell-all book. One cannot deny, however that enrichment may have also been a motive since it was rumored that he told Michelin, he would not write the book if he was paid a fee of $350 thousand prox.  

Michelin refused to pay.  However, as of now they have NOT directly directly addressed any of the allegations in the book which if accurate are rather shocking.  

Not only do the logistics seem impossible but the food capacity required for the job would require recruiting the entire Sumo wrestling population of Japan. In addition to the language barrier, those guys would quickly have their cover blown.

Under some pressure, Guide Michelin’s head man, Derek Brown, an Englishman (so what does he really know about food?) admitted that perhaps all the restaurants in the Guide were not visited each year although the book is issued yearly  and implies that all the restaurants are reviewed and a new issue is necessary. 

The only apparent move by Michelin into the 21^st Century is that they are beginning to understand that there is more to food than just French. Thus some recognition is being given to Asian Fusion and other cutting edge food adventures.

One should however, consider that it is easy to spend up to $500 for dinner for two in Europe. Thus it is certainly worth the $15 prox Michelin investment ( they also rate lodging) as long as you realize now that the Guide is really just that, only a guide and should no longer be looked upon as “The Final Answer”. It, in fact  may have lost a couple of stars.

The current scheme of the Zagat Survey may be even more deceptive. They essentially employ no professional food experts except for perhaps one local yearly preface writer to give the pamphlet some stature. He may even supervise what is essentially a popularity contest rated by amateurs.

Further, from what I have observed, there are serious questions about the culinary competence of Mr. And Mrs. Zagat. Their real expertise is as great promoters and collectors of suspect statistical data. They have cleverly turned the famous Tom Sawyer- fence painting episode into a multi million dollar no employee cost business.

Ratings are made on a 1,2,3 basis  each for food, ambience and service. Zagats then runs the data through a computer. (An energetic high school senior with a $500 e-Machine from Fry’s could easily do the job in about 2 days). They then multiply the ending average by 10 to give the whole thing an upper end look. That’s the hard part. Now restaurants can get scores in the high 20s along with the implication that there is a telling differentiation in 3 or 4 point spreads.

By now, you have figured it out. The folks that cook and serve all that food in Southern California are not all from farms in Iowa.  Many of them now go on campaigns encouraging their steady customers to vote. They provide patrons with ballots and in many occasions bombard patrons via mailing lists or e- mail.

Perhaps a very telling local example is that the restaurant most sophisticated diners think is clearly the best in Ventura County  did not get a nod. Yet the heavy attitude, overpriced  Saddlepeak Lodge, that turns chefs over faster than Brittney Spears announces a new bedmate is ranked up there very close to Patina, Valentino’s, Chinois,Matsuhisa and Spago.

Again, considering the current cost of dinner for two and a bottle of wine the few bucks for Zagat may be worthwhile. However you will find little information re the Conejo or Ventura County nor even the "Dreaded Valley".

Again there is that obvious better and free choice. But you know about that. 

Dining out is more than just finding an expensive restaurant and putting $100 per oz.  Beluga caviar on your tongue. It should be a pleasant, enjoyable relaxed experience. Gault Millau has made it so serious that that a famous French 3 star chef committed suicide over a potential rating drop from 19 to 17. You can only get 20 pts. Max from them as opposed to 30 from Zagat.

Of course, you have again figured out the final punch line. The obvious overall guidance choice any where in the world, but especially in the United States and very especially in California is yours  free.