Topolobampo 1, us, nothing.

Not withstanding my respect for Rick Bayless, I have already explained why I won’t be returning to Frontera. You can now add Topolobampo: we won't be back again.

The Lovely Dining Companion and I went this evening for our anniversary dinner. We had an early reservation (6:15) because I dallied. We were shoehorned into our table on time and had the pleasure of being served by a combative, arrogant, server who rushed from one place to the next all evening. She seemed offended when we declined to order martinis to start and the evening went downhill from there. Every few minutes, I was bumped or stepped on—other patrons, servers, busboys, you name it—so many times that I truly lost count. The food was excellent; I’ve never had a bad meal from Bayless anywhere. But the commercial empire has taken over. Loud, packed, rushed, and oh, did I mention that you couldn’t have squeezed a sardine into the place? Notwithstanding our impatient server, we determined to make the best of it. We did enjoy the food, as I suggested. And though the prices have risen beyond what I find reasonable, we didn’t dwell on it. But it’s hard to relax and enjoy yourself when you can’t hear across a two-top (I can’t even imagine what they do in Frontera: hold up cards? use sign language? Oh, no. Now I remember: they shout!)

I remember way too many years ago when it was still only a couple years old, going to Topolobampo was such a relaxing, pleasurable, experience. Not anymore. I don’t know if his commercial ambitions have taken over. Based on the high quality of the food, I can’t say so. But based on the apparent desire to turn over as many tables as possible, and the desire to cram as many tables onto the floor as possible, I have to wonder. I don’t think it’s too much to expect not to be stepped on or have to move every time a diner at an adjacent table adjusts their chair. For crying out loud, servers and runners and busboys had an intricate ballet each time any two of them were even near each other. I don’t think the “fine dining” experience need include truculent servers. I don’t think a nice evening out means I should have to strain to hear or be heard. Did I mention that it was way too crowded?

Most of all, I don’t think we need to return just to pay for the privilege of doing it all over again. What a shame. What a genuine, completely avoidable shame.

Gypsy Boy,

My sympathies. I ate once at Frontera, miserable experience outdoors, can't fault Bayless for the weather, but for everything else, yes. Some things best not mentioned.

My one experience at Topolobampo was at lunch, a friend's suggestion. When we were ushered through the flimsy curtain separating the two and placed at a two-top about 12 inches away, I was a little apprehensive. My apprehension was spot on, we ended up with the noise of Frontera, (which apparently can be considerable even at lunch), the prices of Topo, and the arrogant service which seems to be a common denominator.

The food, can't remember any complaints about quality or taste. Although I think in terms of general honesty, Bayless should quit pretending he serves a meal and instead just go to an a la carte menu altogether. Both times I've eaten at his establishment, the sides were so small as to be essentially garnishes. Had I known that going in I would have been more likely to order several apps, since my preference is not for the "hunk o' protein on a plate is dinner" approach, and at his prices adding even a salad boosts the bill more than a tad.

Agreed. Went with GF couple months back and the place was beyond hectic. The room was just way too loud and just not worth the hassle. Haven't been to Frontera but won't be back to Topo.

My experiences at these establishments have been different but in the case of Topolobampo a good while back and in the case of Frontera, just one visit which was more recent but then for a late lunch, at a time when the restaurnat was neither crowded nor noisy. That said, I doubt none of the reports above but wished just to comment on or muse about the reasons for the bad (and worsening?) conditions.

It is surely possible that Mr. Bayless is directly responsible and that Gypsy Boy's speculation regarding commercial ambitions may have some validity but -- and it is rare for me to be so optimistic -- might it be possible that the problem is not that he has grown greedy and wishes to fleece the customers in ever greater numbers for all he can but rather that at heart the problem arises from a (partially) altruistic or at least positive desire for his public? Mr. Bayless, thanks to the enormous exposure he has received on his fine PBS programmes and through his excellent books, has become an enormous celebrity. His status as such perhaps does not attain the exhaulted levels of Aemeril or Raechael Rae, who are popular with veritable hordes of people, but it is nonetheless considerable. Some years back, these restaurants were well known and very popular among people interested in excellent food and Mexican cuisine and among some of the well-heeled riff-raff that wants to be 'where-its-at'. Lots of those folks still (for the moment at least) want to go to the place but now in addition the potential dining public for the restaurants has grown enormously. Almost every 'foodie' and semi-foodie and even many a not-especially-foodie type who visits (or dwells in) this burgh wants to dine there. And is this not reflected in recommendations given to queries posted here?

Mr. Bayless is, I'm sure, trying to make money but I don't think the bad experiences above are necessarily to be explained by nefarious motives. Rather, I suspect he and they are trying to accommodate as much of a crush of a dining crowd as he and they can. It's the Check-Please effect on a national and nuclear scale. Perhaps, in fact, one can also be surprised at the degree to which the quality of the food has remained as high as it has, no? Of course, raising the prices is something else again...

Does the One-Plate-at-a-Time effect justify anything? No; bad service is bad service. Does responsibility for the toleration of rude or arrogant waitstaff not fall on the shoulders of the boss? Yea, verily. But I can also imagine that in the crush of business, some very efficient service people who also may be known to be a bit crusty may be retained for the good work (and volume thereof) they do and despite the bad. Some servers who by nature are as sweet as the the cajeta of Celaya perhaps are occasionally driven into black moods by the endless hordes of folks clamouring for tlacoyas.

Anyway, I sympathise with you and LDC, Gypsy Boy, and would be similarly unhappy with the treatment. I'm just inclined to wonder if the causes for the apparent problems are not partly (at least from some perspective) innocent. (Of course, if 'innocent' they nonetheless could be characterised as the result of incompetence, in the narrow sense that the restaurant staff is no longer competent to handle the volume of business being accepted.) The fact is, Frontera and Topolobampo are restaurants that are in a unique position, I think, for Chicago, perhaps comparable more to Mario Batali's places in New York than anything else here with respect to the sort of mass audience that is now interested in visiting.

So then, there's more than one reason I generally prefer to cook and eat at home... The waitstaff here is impeccable, the fellow diners of the finest sort, and I don't have to leave a tip.

Polly-Annatonius

Gypsy Boy wrote:I remember way too many years ago when it was still only a couple years old, going to Topolobampo was such a relaxing, pleasurable, experience. Not anymore.

Gypsy Boy,

Every meal I've had at Topolobampo has been memorable. In early days, in particular the 4-years running we celebrated Valentine's Day at Topolobampo's lovingly recreated Like Water for Chocolate dinner, were memorable for food, service and overall ambiance.

More recently Topolobampo has been memorable for both food* and, as you so aptly put it, being shoehorned into a table. The last, and I do mean last, time I was at Topolobampo we were so incredibly close to the neighboring tables on either side it was lucky I was taught to eat with my elbows in or I would have been constantly nudging, bumping. As a bonus, I learned pretty much all there was to know about Chrysler mini-vans and where to get the best deal on same in Schaumburg.

I'd compare dining at Topolobampo with being served a 4-star meal in the coach row directly over the wing seated between two defensive linebackers.

Enjoy,
Gary

*I am of the school Rick Bayless is a chef/teacher of vision and deserves every accolade he receives

While I agree with estimations of Chef Bayless's cooking and teaching, and recognize that his restaurants are indeed, suffering from the Check Please! effect turned up to national or nuclear levels, I still think that, as owner, he bears ultimate responsibility for the dining experience at his establishments.

Allow reservations at Frontera, perhaps. Take out a few tables. Speak with the waitstaff about the importance of attitude on the dining experience (perhaps devote some time to it on his well-known staff "retreats" in Mexico:-)

Until some such steps are taken, I must believe that the dining experience at Frontera and Topo serve his purposes, be those what they may. But not mine.

PS: I suffer additionally from the reminder, when visiting, that on that block was a restaurant I still mourn, where I first tasted mole, La Posada del Rey. Not fine dining, to be sure, but notable in its time.

PPS: Antonius wrote: "[is it possible]... at heart the problem arises from a (partially) altruistic or at least positive desire for his public." If his desire for his public exceeds his capacity to provide such public with a pleasant dining experience, perhaps he might consider politics:-)

annieb wrote:While I agree with estimations of Chef Bayless's cooking and teaching, and recognize that his restaurants are indeed, suffering from the Check Please! effect turned up to national or nuclear levels, I still think that, as owner, he bears ultimate responsibility for the dining experience at his establishments.

Annieb,

There is certainly nothing in my post that expresses the view that he is not ultimately responsible; quite the opposite, in fact. Nor do I try to deny or minimise the problems reported. My point concerns simply a possible motive and I remain inclined to doubt that the problems are the result of a calculated strategy to fleece people. Of course, that does not mean that I am so naïve as to think that profit is not of interest to Mr. Bayless, but I do feel certain that his passion for food in general and Mexican cuisine in particular is genuine and sufficiently deep as to incline him not to take such a purely mercenary attitude toward his restaurants.

I think it more likely that the problem is, as I suggested above, that he wishes to accept as much business as possible in his restaurants, for business reasons and perhaps even for reasons of vanity but also out of a simple desire to accomodate more of the people who want to visit his restaurants. But it also seems clear that, in light of the complaints expressed above, to some (considerable) degree at least they are doing so incompetently, as I said above. That is, they have not found a way to serve as many as possible and at the same time maintain the appropriate level of service and comfort that they did when the restaurants were less in demand.

Of course, the motives of another cannot be known for certain and perhaps don't matter from the standpoint of someone who is visiting a place and being treated poorly. Perhaps the only way the question can be answered to any degree is with the future development of the restaurants. Will Bayless eventually see and correct the problems? Or will the place turn into a sort of touristic site where repeat business is of no real importance. Time will tell, but I hope that at least some of the long-time fans of these two restaurants who have had especially bad experiences there in more recent visits will let Bayless and his staff know of their dissatisfaction.

Antonius

Antonius wrote:It is surely possible that Mr. Bayless is directly responsible and that Gypsy Boy's speculation regarding commercial ambitions may have some validity but -- and it is rare for me to be so optimistic -- might it be possible that the problem is not that he has grown greedy and wishes to fleece the customers in ever greater numbers for all he can but rather that at heart the problem arises from a (partially) altruistic or at least positive desire for his public?

Pollyonius hits close to the mark, as always. That should teach me not to post right after any meal; my less charitable side may be in evidence. However.

However, no one is forcing Mr. Bayless to shoehorn in as many people as he can. And he is responsible--solely responsible in my view--for deciding how best to serve his public. Assuming, as Pollyonius reasonably does, that Mr. Bayless wishes to share his enthusiasm and his good cooking with as many as possible, the fact remains that he has lost track of the front-of-the-house experience. People, whether from Tuscaloosa or Tashkent (or even, gasp, Chicago), who know him and his reputation, and want to share in the good eats, are most emphatically not served by an experience such as we had last night, the high quality of the food notwithstanding. I agree wholeheartedly with annieb here: it's his place. He is responsible. Period.

Replace that silly curtain with a wall and a door. Or at the very least do SOMETHING about the noise level. Take out a third of the tables so that people can breathe out. Teach the staff that no one--absolutely no one--is served by attitude. (It is worth adding a short note here: I am not suggesting our server was typical; the other staff--those who brought the plates, filled the water glasses, poured the coffee--was, if not warm, certainly much friendlier. Yes, I know; they have fewer official responsibilities. I simply don't buy that argument: serving the public is serving the public.) Let the food speak as it was intended to. Who can possibly enjoy great food when, as Gary aptly notes, it's like "being served a 4-star meal in the coach row directly over the wing seated between two defensive linebackers"?

What's so ironic is that as LDC and I walked to dinner, we passed the site of the late, (un)lamented Spago. Which prompted a discussion of why it closed. One of the points we agreed upon was that top-notch food is simply not enough. The happy dining experience is top-notch food PLUS so many other things from great service to wonderful atmosphere to ... other imponderables. Little did I know or expect that we were about to experience precisely that disconnect: great food in a completely undesirable setting.

It is such a shame. Such a completely avoidable shame. Why is such a talented, enthusiastic, excellent, nay beloved, ambassador for Mexican cuisine serving his very high quality, most enjoyable food in steerage conditions?

Gypsy Boy wrote:... Little did I know or expect that we were about to experience precisely that disconnect: great food in a completely undesirable setting.



It is such a shame. Such a completely avoidable shame. Why is such a talented, enthusiastic, excellent, nay beloved, ambassador for Mexican cuisine serving his very high quality, most enjoyable food in steerage conditions?

Gypsy Boy,

Please, not 'Pollyonius', rather Polly-Annatonius.

Well, true to my cheery spirit, I'll note that on the bright side, the food apparently hasn't slipped, so I do think there is hope and I do wish you and others would send them an email or a letter pointing out the specific problems. It is a shame and it will be more of a shame if these places end up, as I suggested above, as little more than tourist destinations. Don Riccardo and his two restaurants are -- as was discussed by a number of posters in another thread recently -- important and still central parts of this city's culinary scene and I would like to see them remain that for a long time.

Then again, what does it really matter. Everything is going to hell.

Antonius (Malus)

The road to restaurant hell is nearly always paved with the good intentions Tony describes: they add a table to please the demands they hear on the phone every day, that seems the norm, they add another table, that seems the norm, and over time a place becomes far too crowded, the servers far too harried, the tips go down so the best servers go elsewhere, and meanwhile everyone who runs the place is working there six nights a week and no longer has direct experience of what the standard of service is like elsewhere in town, so they think what they offer is normal.

I've never had an issue with the loud party scene at Frontera-- when I worked downtown I knew to eat there at 2:00 or pop in on a Saturday or lunch or whatever, and it was easier to get into and be comfortable in. But the point of Topolobampo, and my experience with it long long ago, was that it was the alternative to that-- if Frontera was too casual, pay more for a reservation, relative tranquility, and somewhat upscaled food. If that's no longer achievable, it's hard to know why you wouldn't stick with Frontera when you want Bayless' food; same experience, more appropriate atmosphere for it, lower prices.

Let us hope this is the rare occasion when Rick Bayless or someone on his staff reads what those crazies on the Internet have to say, and realizes that the crazies and the paying customers are-- astonishingly-- one and the same.

I wonder if a letter to the restaurant with aforementioned improvements for the dining experience might prove beneficial. If sufficient numbers write, things may change or at least it might be more on their radar screen. Since they're doing fabulous business and packing 'em in, these concerns may never really have been voiced sufficiently enough to the management. They probably think they're doing just fine with the current business model and that customers "don't mind."

I would agree, send a letter to them. Indicate clearly that you are NOT seeking free food or whatever, but think the management needs to know.

Gypsy Boy wrote:I remember way too many years ago when it was still only a couple years old, going to Topolobampo was such a relaxing, pleasurable, experience. Not anymore.

This "shoe-horning" practice
is definitely not something new.
It's been several years since
I've been to Topolobampo -
precisely for that reason.
The last straw was the guy
at our neighboring table
dragging his coat-tail/ass
through my wife's plate
while squeezing between
tables.

I've avoided it for another reason, namely that my last prix fixe dinner there a few years ago was fairly average in terms of food. None of the dishes were anything to write home about and the group of 4 of us all left disappointed, realizing that Chilpancingo (at that time) would have been twice as good at half the price.

Ralph Wiggum wrote:Chilpancingo (at that time) would have been twice as good at half the price.

Yes, Chilpancingo became our
go-to mole-centric Mexican place
as well. Always a beginning-to-end
great time there. What has that
location become now that Chilpancingo
is no more?

Zocalo.

But of more interest is probably the fact that Geno Bahena has the new Tepatulco.

If you like the Bayless food w/o the hassle, try his lunch kiosk at Macy's on the 7th floor. It is pretty good stuff, and the price is right.