Hmm... I guess I forgot some of that, but compared to the Just Desserts show these A chefs are models of stoicism

JoelF wrote:Hmm... I guess I forgot some of that, but compared to the Just Desserts show these A chefs are models of stoicism

I knew there was a reason I skipped Just Desserts

From the TVGuide Interview:

I'm sure you've seen the fan reaction about how you were bullying Beverly, and even Padma called you the "Queen of Mean" in a voiceover. What was going on between you two? Was it just a case of personality clashes?
Heather: Yeah, and I think people made it seem worse than what it really was. I have a very direct personality and she does not. That's not bullying. I have no ill will toward Beverly. She wasn't a so-called target or anything. I am very blunt and to the point. I'm very honest and I say anything to your face. I never, ever said anything off-camera that I didn't say to you on-camera. And some people did! Other contestants said some very hurtful things I saw unfold while watching the show and some people have said some very hurtful things to the press about me during this whole process.

They called you a bitch.
Heather: Yeah! And honestly, it's very childish. It just goes to show you that some people are too cowardly to say something to someone's face, which I am not. I don't feel bad about the things I've said. I never swore at anybody. They never had to bleep me. I never called anyone any derogatory names. All I did was I spoke what I felt was right. If people thought I was abrasive, it would've been nice if someone said at the time, "Hey, I think you're being mean" or "You're not being fair to Beverly" or whatever. But people didn't. It's easier to talk behind someone's back to the camera than it is to their face. I made some great friends throughout this process. And it's a tough environment. It's hot! Everyone's under pressure. We're all after the same goal, but I do not regret one thing that I said on- or off-camera.

I would rather have people be straightforward and say things to my face than behind my back, and Heather made a good point here and I think she defended herself well in this interview.

Cathy2 wrote:HI,

As guilleless as I can be, I brought it for Hammond to try. Everyone else wanted a taste, too. If the front of the house guy had been dismissive or the Moto people declined to warm it (which was all I asked), the legend of the raccoon course would never have been.

Thank goodness people stepped up the plate and gave it a try.

(If you can find a link to the print article, I'd love to see it.)

Regards,

It was in a Redeye article called "meet the top chef Chicago contestants" or something, from early November. I looked it up online and the article is there but not the mini-interviews with the chefs. The roadkill dish was mentioned during the mini-interview with the two moto chefs. One of the chefs brought it up.

Moving this conversation away from Terhune/Sable, I really wish Chris Jones would focus on cooking good food instead of performing his culinary tricks from Moto. It seems like when he cooks Moto-style (cigar, Sweet potato fence) he just ends up looking stupid, but when he doesn't he seems to do fairly well. He needs to realize Moto tricks aren't going to get him to the finale.

sundevilpeg wrote:undead grandparents

Zombie grandparents? I'm a couple weeks behind but damn... Top Chef took a new twist.

sundevilpeg wrote:
undead grandparents


Zombie grandparents? I'm a couple weeks behind but damn... Top Chef took a new twist.

Perhaps that's why Sarah kept sobbing about them. . . that at least would have made sense!

TCK wrote:

sundevilpeg wrote:undead grandparents

Zombie grandparents? I'm a couple weeks behind but damn... Top Chef took a new twist.

It's a new Bravo/AMC joint project: "The Walking Chef: Texas", where 16 plucky young chefs try to make it from San Antonio to Houston in a post-zombie-apocalypse world, stopping to complete cooking challenges along the way. The last chef to survive wins $100,000 (a useless formality since all economies other than rudimentary bartering have long since collapsed), a Toyota Venza, and a zombie-proof bunker in the wilds of Canada stocked with a few years' worth of rations/supplies and a giant stack of Food & Wine back issues.

Actually, I would totally watch that show.

And the cheftestant cruelty continues.

I wish they would have aired Tom stating the reason for who won the Last Chance Kitchen cookoff. It made it seem totally arbitrary.

I agree that was one of the best Top Chef moments ever. That guy was douche and he ruined the other chef's dish by leaving her with a sliver of tenderloin. Such a great moment when Collicio just says "go home."

I really had higher hopes for this season based on the cook-off to start it off. I thought the skill level seemed pretty high. To this point in the season, I'm just not seeing it. Sure, Sarah and Paul have been the most consistent performers, but what they've shown seems to pale in comparison to other leaders at this point in seasons past.

Here's a hallmark of a lackluster Top Chef season: the drama seems a lot more prominent than the food. I know a lot more about how Sarah feels about Beverly than I do about where Spiaggia ends and her culinary viewpoint begins.

And I know I'm being kind of unfair here, because Sarah seems grounded in classical Italian techniques and we've seen some pretty inventive chefs do excel in this competition. But I have a hard time picking a memorable, standout dish from her and she's cooking #1 or #2 at this point. Just sayin' - the edits are letting the personalities shouting down the food, and I'm beginning to think it's because the food on display here doesn't have much to say.

I also think a big part of the problem has been forcing too many challenges into the Texas theme. Making the chefs cook chili, steaks, barbecue, enchiladas, etc. Does not allow them to showcase their skills or point of view.

This week's episode was immensely irritating in that way that only Top Chef can be . . . and so often is. As the second meal of Restaurant Wars came to an end, the judges' comments made it abundantly clear that they thought it was close as to which team should win. The men, they commented, had been better organized and put out a better service, while the women had served better food. Clearly, since it always comes down to the food, this sort of for-the-camera manipulation is a joke. So, even at that point, we all knew who was going to win. But beyond that, their comments made it clear that the competition had been close, even from a food perspective.

Jump ahead to Judges' Table and it was like an entirely different episode. The men's dishes suddenly went from being just off-point to total disasters. Suddenly, their entire effort was called into question. The judges, especially Tom, worked themselves into a lather finding points to criticize about the men's meal -- even their overall service -- which was, moments before, being pegged as the superior effort. In the end, Tom essentially thanked the mens' team for making it so easy to decide which team had been the losing team but then criticized them by saying that because they'd all done such a bad job, the decision of exactly who to send home was a difficult one. Huh?!

I also have to say that it seems a huge advantage to go second when the meals are 24 hours apart. That's a lot more time to consider, plan and coordinate the meal for the team going second. While the men were cooking, the women were still able to chart out their game plan. After they'd eaten the mens' meal, they had an entire night to reflect on what the men might have done wrong, and what they were going to do (differently) on the next night. In the end, it seems obvious that the team that went second would have won. Even in the effed up world that is Top Chef, this seems like too big an advantage to give one team.

Oh well, at least Ty-Lor can take solace that now having departed from the show, his nudie pics have managed to surface online. Great career move there.

This season's a dud.

=R=

I've really wanted to enjoy this season, given all the Chicago chefs, but its getting difficult. Too much drama. Regarding Ty-Lor's Thai dish, I couldn't believe that they they didn't make a "Boring Thai" pun. Unbelievable.

ronnie_suburban wrote:Oh well, at least Ty-Lor can take solace that now having departed from the show, his nudie pics have managed to surface online. Great career move there.

Gross.

I've been watching this show all season and, like many of the posts above, am finding the editing and the judging to be frustrating this year more than years past.

This week's challenge: go head to head with another cheftestant and make a healthier version of common block party main and side dishes. As it was unfolding, my wife and I thought aloud whether they will be truly judged on the healthy aspect of the dish or the overall taste. Do you just make what tastes good and apologize later or do you try to follow the challenge and win it with a low-fat/low-cal dish? This episode is brought to you by HealthyChoice.

Obviously, just make good food and apologize later. With 6 contestants, three were deemed winners based on the "people's vote," (i.e. - better tasting). They were safe. The other three, each "winner's" counterpart were in the bottom, in front of the judges. What were they judged on? Taste. Two of the people there had deliberately made healthier swaps than their counterparts, to whom they lost. One of those people didn't even try to go healthy, still messed up his meal but wasn't let go. Chris' dish must have really been bad.....Or....

Or.....Another thing that's been bugging me is how the judges have sort of mocked Chris all season about his "tricks and gimmicks." It seems clear, from sneering glances and backhanded comments, that Tom and Emeril just don't like this type of preparation. That's fine with me, I don't have a dog in this fight but the mocking is a bit uncalled for. The other thing they seem to focus on is Sarah's inept Italian cooking skills. Bad pasta, undercooked risotto, etc. It seems strange to me that the executive chef at one of the better Italian restaurants can't make pasta or risotto properly. Does Cat Cora have better pasta at her Disneyworld restaurant? How about the restaurant at the SF airport? Or Macy's in Costa Mesa?

These are some talented chefs that are just not doing well in the Top Chef challenges. Are the challenges a true representation of chef skills? Are they outdated skills? Is the NYC restaurant chef criteria different than everywhere else?

I really don't care who wins this thing but I'll still probably watch it, frustrated, for the next few weeks...

tyrus wrote:Does Cat Cora have better pasta at her Disneyworld restaurant? How about the restaurant at the SF airport? Or Macy's in Costa Mesa?

Don't knock Disney food until you've tried it. I had a pretty darn good meal at the "Mediterranean" restaurant, Catal, at Disneyland. Expensive but would stand up well in any major city (not just Downtown Disney).

tyrus wrote:I've been watching this show all season and, like many of the posts above, am finding the editing and the judging to be frustrating this year more than years past.

This week's challenge: go head to head with another cheftestant and make a healthier version of common block party main and side dishes. As it was unfolding, my wife and I thought aloud whether they will be truly judged on the healthy aspect of the dish or the overall taste. Do you just make what tastes good and apologize later or do you try to follow the challenge and win it with a low-fat/low-cal dish? This episode is brought to you by HealthyChoice.

Obviously, just make good food and apologize later. With 6 contestants, three were deemed winners based on the "people's vote," (i.e. - better tasting). They were safe. The other three, each "winner's" counterpart were in the bottom, in front of the judges. What were they judged on? Taste. Two of the people there had deliberately made healthier swaps than their counterparts, to whom they lost. One of those people didn't even try to go healthy, still messed up his meal but wasn't let go. Chris' dish must have really been bad.....Or....

<snip>

I don't think that's true. OK, no one seem to get the fact that tofu has as much (if not more) calories and fat as mayo, but that's neither here nor there. They specifically mocked Ed's decisions to make it more "healthy" such as the snipping of the fat and the substituting of bread for rice.

My favorite part of the night occurred not on the show, but when I saw a tweet from Colicchio saying "Here comes the product placement"--so, apparently, the participants may be as irritated as the regular viewing audience with the crassness that they've sunk to this go round.

I'm enjoying the show well enough, except for the unrelenting use of a sledgehammer with these "ads"--I can watch pretty much anything (I compulsively watch old 90210 reruns on the Soap network when no one else is around ) but I'm about at the end of my rope with TC.

tofu has as much (if not more) calories and fat as mayo

I'm surprised at this. Per Wikipedia:

Homemade mayonnaise can approach 85% fat before the emulsion breaks down; commercial mayonnaise is more typically 70-80% fat

Nutritional value of 100g raw tofu: 4.8g fat per 100g (same source)

rickster wrote:

tofu has as much (if not more) calories and fat as mayo

I'm surprised at this. Per Wikipedia:

Homemade mayonnaise can approach 85% fat before the emulsion breaks down; commercial mayonnaise is more typically 70-80% fat

Nutritional value of 100g raw tofu: 4.8g fat per 100g (same source)

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at, but my google sez mayo is 49 calories/serving w/4.9 grams of fat (http://www.thecaloriecounter.com/foods/ ... /food.aspx) and tofu is 88 calories per serving w/5.3 grams of fat (http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-tofu-firm-i16126).

We all have out peeves, and one of my big ones is the small mistakes we make in our food choices. Like we are spooked of mayo, and yet it turns out that mayo is not really that fattening (unless you consume in JiminLoganSquare quantities ). Same thing with putting some cream in your coffee. I just believe we take away the small pleasures that can make eating good, while ignoring the things that are really bad.

rickster wrote:

tofu has as much (if not more) calories and fat as mayo

I'm surprised at this. Per Wikipedia:

Homemade mayonnaise can approach 85% fat before the emulsion breaks down; commercial mayonnaise is more typically 70-80% fat

Nutritional value of 100g raw tofu: 4.8g fat per 100g (same source)

Mayo is about 75-80% fat by weight, tofu is about 4%; calorie-wise tofu runs about 1/10 the calories of mayo.

Vital Information wrote:

rickster wrote:

tofu has as much (if not more) calories and fat as mayo

I'm surprised at this. Per Wikipedia:

Homemade mayonnaise can approach 85% fat before the emulsion breaks down; commercial mayonnaise is more typically 70-80% fat

Nutritional value of 100g raw tofu: 4.8g fat per 100g (same source)

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at, but my google sez mayo is 49 calories/serving w/4.9 grams of fat (http://www.thecaloriecounter.com/foods/ ... /food.aspx) and tofu is 88 calories per serving w/5.3 grams of fat (http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-tofu-firm-i16126).

We all have out peeves, and one of my big ones is the small mistakes we make in our food choices. Like we are spooked of mayo, and yet it turns out that mayo is not really that fattening (unless you consume in JiminLoganSquare quantities ). Same thing with putting some cream in your coffee. I just believe we take away the small pleasures that can make eating good, while ignoring the things that are really bad.

You're comparing 1tbsp mayo to 1/2 cup tofu. "Servings" aren't equal.

You're comparing 1tbsp mayo to 1/2 cup tofu. "Servings" aren't equal.

Exactly. Mayo is 4.9g fat in a 14.6g serving. Tofu is 5.3g fat in a 126g serving, per that link. Pretty clear by a mile which is fattier.

rickster wrote:
You're comparing 1tbsp mayo to 1/2 cup tofu. "Servings" aren't equal.

EXACTLY!!

spinynorman99 wrote:

tyrus wrote:Does Cat Cora have better pasta at her Disneyworld restaurant? How about the restaurant at the SF airport? Or Macy's in Costa Mesa?

Don't knock Disney food until you've tried it. I had a pretty darn good meal at the "Mediterranean" restaurant, Catal, at Disneyland. Expensive but would stand up well in any major city (not just Downtown Disney).

Fair enough. Does it compare favorably to Spiaggia? I'll be heading down there in the next few years (young kids trip), It's good to know that Disneyworld restaurants are worth seeking out and I have to admit my surprise that they stand up to some of the best restaurants in other cities. Have you ever had her food at either airport location? I often find myself struggling to find great restaurants in airport terminals. Thanks for the tip.

knitgirl wrote:

rickster wrote:
You're comparing 1tbsp mayo to 1/2 cup tofu. "Servings" aren't equal.

EXACTLY!!

Except when you make chicken salad, you use. 1 tbsp per serving, & when you go Chris Jones, you go w/1/2 cup of tofu per serving.

Vital Information wrote:

tyrus wrote:I've been watching this show all season and, like many of the posts above, am finding the editing and the judging to be frustrating this year more than years past.

This week's challenge: go head to head with another cheftestant and make a healthier version of common block party main and side dishes. As it was unfolding, my wife and I thought aloud whether they will be truly judged on the healthy aspect of the dish or the overall taste. Do you just make what tastes good and apologize later or do you try to follow the challenge and win it with a low-fat/low-cal dish? This episode is brought to you by HealthyChoice.

Obviously, just make good food and apologize later. With 6 contestants, three were deemed winners based on the "people's vote," (i.e. - better tasting). They were safe. The other three, each "winner's" counterpart were in the bottom, in front of the judges. What were they judged on? Taste. Two of the people there had deliberately made healthier swaps than their counterparts, to whom they lost. One of those people didn't even try to go healthy, still messed up his meal but wasn't let go. Chris' dish must have really been bad.....Or....

<snip>

I don't think that's true. OK, no one seem to get the fact that tofu has as much (if not more) calories and fat as mayo, but that's neither here nor there. They specifically mocked Ed's decisions to make it more "healthy" such as the snipping of the fat and the substituting of bread for rice.

Yes, they did mock Ed as well but he was the one that deliberately did not choose to even try to go healthy - which I thought was the essence of the challenge (as cross promoted by HealthyChoice). At least Chris tried to go healthy -if it was any healthier or not is debatable but the effort was there. I was sure that even though Chris' dish may have sucked, Ed was going to get the boot for just ignoring the challenge. When I said they were judged on taste, I was comparing Chris and Ed's dishes. The former may have tasted bad but at least he tried to go "healthy." The latter was mocked for not even trying to go healthy (except the thinly veiled attempt to remove some fat and swap bread for rice), which seemed to me an easy disqualification. Maybe I missed something overall but I was left a bit confused at the end.

I'm sure Dom will correct me, but to my memory, no one has gone home for shirking 'healthy' rules if they make great food. if the food's equal (or in the ballpark) THEN the constraints of the challenge come into play.

Kudos to Paul for making something that apparently tasted good and actually looked healthy. He embraced the challenge and still bested red meat meatballs.

Ed's decisions were pretty much laughable. They rightfully looked past his 'healthy' choices at Judges' Table, and he didn't sound convincing when he explained them to the camera. Grilling short-rib kalbi. What did you change exactly? Looked like he tried make it healthy by trimming fat and shrinking the portion size, which is debatable but ultimately irrelevant because apparently the food wasn't any *good.*

My favorite part of the night occurred not on the show, but when I saw a tweet from Colicchio saying "Here comes the product placement"--so, apparently, the participants may be as irritated as the regular viewing audience with the crassness that they've sunk to this go round.

Deal with it.This has been a given from almost day-one of TC. Sometimes the product is not as prevalent as other instances, but it can be pretty extreme, like the time, if I recall correctly, Barilla took over the entire show, including the elimination challenge: create a pre-cooked pasta dish that Barilla can add to its product mix.

Speaking of Italian cuisine and Colicchio, has anyone else noticed Tom's apparent antipathy toward "al dente" risotto? It certainly seems to be a sure-fire way to draw his negative attention. Risotto, salads, and choosing to be front-of-house in restaurant wars all seem to veer in the direction of the exit door.

Using an advertiser as the base of a challenge is understandable. Flashing to pics of the GE Profile and Toyota whatever logos, ok. It's the ridiculously artificial "lines" they're giving everyone to say this season that seems different from the past.