dropkickjeffy wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:Maybe this just proves the often-made point (about which I'm still on the fence) that even if a restaurant knows a critic is in the house, there's very little they can do to improve the dining experience. In the end, they are what they are. =R=

Maybe. Or maybe it means they have no clue who I am.

LOL . . . I guess we're right back where we started.

=R=

dropkickjeffy wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:Maybe this just proves the often-made point (about which I'm still on the fence) that even if a restaurant knows a critic is in the house, there's very little they can do to improve the dining experience. In the end, they are what they are. =R=

Maybe. Or maybe it means they have no clue who I am.

Admittedly, I'm not in the same position as Jeff. Obviously, I don't write for a regular publication (unless you count this forum), but some people do actually follow what I post. To illustrate Ronnie's point, I had a real head scratching experience just the other day at a fairly high profile restaurant. I am known to the chef. In fact, the chef came out and visited with our party when we arrived and sent out a dish or two for us to sample. Our food, though was just awful (as was the service). With just a slight bit more effort, we could have been served a stellar meal, but instead our food appeared to have been sitting out long enough to dry out and not look (or taste) particularly appetizing. One would have thought that a bit more attention to detail would have been paid...if, for no other reason, the chef took a personal interest in our table. I guess they just couldn't help it.