Top Chef - S6E2 Postmortem

Okay, when's the last time you saw Tom this happy during a tasting? Dude was practically giddy. This is going to be a good season.

And Michael I. was even under control!

Seriously, some crazy good looking stuff. And I couldn't feel better about my preseason top four at the moment.

Number five on the other hand? Eeeugh. Let's just forget about that. Do her number five ranking the preseason and her number sixteen last week cancel each other out? I have some thoughts on her ceviche that I'll save for the rankings.

I'm always a little leery of catering challenges, but this was a really nice one. Next week, on the other hand...

Best part? It's set up as the battle of the sexes and the chefs don't bite. These folks are here to cook. Awesome.

Oh, and P.S., is Mattin contractually obligated to wear that neckerchief?

Rankings Monday. For reals.

Discuss!

Comments

[KinderJ]

Pretty Sweet episode, must say. I also like that Bravo did not shy away from the gay marriage issue, though I can see how some people might view it as distracting or trying to inject controversy.

The food looked fantastic. I am kind of hoping the 'Pickle Brothers' (yes, now I will forever think of them that way...) and the actual brothers go the distance. They all have been putting out innovative, well executed dishes. Looks fun.

And yes, Chef Tom did look like all his dreams came true. Always good to see him smiling.

[jse91]

I was glad that Eve was the one to go, though I can see how a case could have been made for Jesse. I was shocked in the quickfire when she didn't get the right pan for her scallops. Wow! It seems like execution is going to be a problem for her. I suspect it has to do with the pressure of the situation or nerves. But there are only so many times that basic cooking skills should be over looked.

But Eve was getting on my nerves. She was so slow and didn't seem invested. Kinda liked she had smoked pot.

Lots of good looking food tonight though. But I am having trouble telling the brothers apart. Is it just me?

[canasian]

These guys are awesome. Is it too early to say that this is the strongest field ever?

Number 5 preseason ranking or not, it's amazing that you called the first two eliminations in the previous week's rankings.

[po]

It seems like earlier in the season, your defense at judges table affects your fate more. Although I declared Eve's elimination before she even jittered to Tom, her rambling nervous defense didn't explain anything or her focus as a chef. At least on TV, of course.

[Cousin Sam]

I thought it was interesting that Eve said she cooks her style of food and hopes for the best, and that pretty close to what Tom said in his criticism of her dish. Too bad her diploma in wine and spirits failed her!

[Lon]

In her post-show video, Eve said she would have resigned if she had not been eliminated. Every year there's one or two that attempt the show and find out quickly they're not suited for the competitive environment. Obviously Eve is one of those.

Did we have the same thing last year, a lot of women got eliminated in the early going? Unless something changes soon, that is certainly going to happen this year. I would like to see the women overall perform more strongly. But both Jesse and Preeti seem to have fatal flaws.

Enough. Back to this week's show. Strong, strong show. Even on TV I can tell that the differences among the top chefs are not that great and that the overall level of taste and skill are very high already, at a level where it often doesn't get until near the end of the season.

[Greg]

Last season, the group of chefs were probably the least talented group since Season 2. This season, we have 4-5 chefs that could be the top chef on any other season except season 4.

Season 4 and Season 6 have alot of similarities in my opinion. Solid middle group, but a core group of 4-5 chefs that are just very very strong and will likely be standing at the end (with hopefully no Lisa on S6)

The Voltaggio brothers, Jennifer, Kevin are going to go a long way. A finale with these 4 would make S6 the strongest season yet.

[Independent George]

That macaroon looked astonishing - and I don't even like macaroons.

This season really does look deep; there is one down side to this, though. In previous years, the top contenders would be able to escape early on even if they made a bad mistake. This season, I think we've just gotten past the point where we can expect somebody on the bottom to screw up worse.

Hector looked strong today; I think the deep fried ribeye was just a momentary hiccup.

[jse91]

Independent George - I agree. One of the strong contenders could go early with one misstep. There won't be much room for error with this group, I suspect. We have seem very good chefs who seemed a lock to go deep foul up unexpected. I am thinking of Trey here. We could see more of that sort of thing than ever before. This could get very interesting fast.

[jse91]

unexpectedly.

[Greg]

I can't get over the differences in the fields. Last season not to sound like a prick but instead of talent they seemed to focus on putting the most hodge podge diverse cast possible with lousy results. There were two very good (and I wouldn't even say top 5 of all seasons combined) chefs .. Jamie and Stefan. Hosea/Leah/Hootie fell into the "pretty good". These 3 would be at the bottom of the rankings this season.

Last season Tom seemed visibly annoyed at the lousy food being churned out. He looks delighted with the food this season. Glad to see it.

[timothy]

Yeah. Good episode. I also was glad Bravo didn't shy away from Ashley's problems with catering a pre-wedding party. I agree usually that the show is best when it focuses on food, but chefs are people and they have attitudes about where and for whom they cook, and I was glad to hear her thoughts on the issue.

[Bart]

Another stellar episode. My thoughts:

- Glad, but not surprised, to see how well Hector fared. I think I summed it up in yesterday's post thusly: "You know how you're going up a flight of stairs, and you think there's an extra step at the top but there isn't one? And you sort of stumble in thin air? I think that's sort of what happened here, with Hector."

- Jesse, Jesse, Jesse. I can't help but wonder if she'll be this year's Arianne Duarte...stumbling quite a bit in the early shows, but then coming back strongly and dazzling the chefs with impeccable and flawless dishes, and then getting the boot when she stumbles again.

- Like the others, I was happy to see Bravo allowing Ashley to speak her mind about the marriage issue. I thought it was also nice that they showed Preeti say, "I know I should care, but I can't." Truly, the debate isn't one sided. Bravo showed that they knew their target audience by allowing this issue to come up at all.

- I'm losing interest in Mattin. Get a new neckerchief or something, man.

- Dom - a point of personal interest - Todd English's Olives in Charlestown (where the Bunker Hill Memorial is, right across the river from Boston's waterfront) was excellent. I had dinner there, but the most memorable dish was the lava cake for dessert.

[anon man]

Wow.

A few random comments:
-Does Nitrogen count as against the number of ingredients? Just wondering.

-I'm with you Bart. Jesse has some clear talent but need to get her sea legs before she gets sent home. Unlike last season, there isn't much "fat" to go through.

-Did Robin even appear in this episode?

-Unless someone burns their dish into a cracker, Preti is toast (which can also be burned). I just don't think she's remotely close to them.

-I looks as though, had the men not won, Ron would have been toast.

-Michael I didn't look like his dish was that good. His ego may eventually be his downfall.

-Remember last year the "Its not top scallop" comment. This year I would like to say "Its not Ceviche!" (or carpaccio, or crudo). I like all those things, but how many not cooked (you know, with heat) items do we have to watch this year. I know they were outside, but enough with the ceviche.

-And, lastly, Ashley needs to get a handle on her emotions. Yes, it sucks that she can't get married. It isn't fair. But, has she never hosted a rehearsal dinner in a restaurant? And does she think a homophobe has never eaten there? My point is we laud this group of chefs for their talent and professionalism (unlike previous seasons), and she gets all bent out of shape (to what end, I don't know) because she doesn't like the theme of the challenge? Next week someone could complain they they hate war and don't want to serve the AF people. Cook the food, move on to the next challenge; you know, like the pro you are.

[Bart]

For those of you wondering about Lee Ann's blog - I saw this in the Top Chef blog over at Bravo:

"A lot of you asked about Lee Anne's Blog, and guess what? It's on its way! She has actually been in Japan for the last two weeks. So hold tight, and check back for her commentary on the first two episodes."

http://www.bravotv.com/top-chef/blogs/team-top-chef/im-so-hungry

Hooray!

[Naomi]

Great episode.

I too loved Tom's joy at judge's table.

And how about Todd English calling Michael V.'s dish "ridiciulous" while tasting it? We don't usually hear that kind of exclamation from major judges at this stage. Made me smile.

So glad Eve is gone. She just looked befuddled all the time.

Like others have said, if Jesse doesn't get it under control, she's gone soon but I suspect she's capable of a lot more than we're seeing. Based on the judge's comments though, I think Preeti is out of her league.

Why doesn't Jennifer say the last syllable in ceviche? Is there a language where that last vowel would be silent? (honest question here)

I find Ashley very intriguing. Sure, she stumbled on the dessert but the watermelon dish was one of Todd English's favorites! Compelling (and Gail loved her ravioli last week). I think she's one to watch.

I think, on the other hand, that Ron might go sooner than we think. I thought so last week as well. He seems like a great guy and has an interesting story but I'm not sure he's up to the level of some of the others.

[babyarm]

Random thoughts

-@ LN2 being an ingredient. No, probably not it's just a way to cool something quickly. It ends up in the atmosphere and not on the plate.

-The gay marriage subplot was tiresome, but happily they did not make tooooo much a big deal about the boy/girl thing.

-If Vegas had put odds up however the boys were at least a 5-1 if not 10-1 favs to carry it. It is unfortunate that the females seem so weak this year. They will not be able to continue to throw Nikki/Arianne type lifelines for long. There seem to be just two females capable of RW at this point (Jen and Ashley).

-This season is RIPE for a Tre-esque dismissal. That's for sure.

-Don't look past the fact that this was a 3 hour amuse challenge. They had to make one bite on a huge budget with tons of time. This may cloud the results for people that do better with large plate dishes.

-I wish they'd at least publish video of what the QF dishes that were not even mentioned were. How hard is it to put 20 minutes of bonus footage up? Put !!ERICA!! on there every 5 if you have to pay for bandwidth. Lots of reality shows do similar things.

-EC next week looks actually pretty fun. They've had 4 nearly wide open challenges so far. Time to make one sort of hard.

[Perry]

Naomi,

A quote from Richard Blais Blog: "She’s pronouncing it as it would be in French. I know it was nails on a chalkboard to many, including my wife, but, c’est la vie, non?"

http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/omnivore/2009/08/24/top-chef-second-helpings-a-kiss-is-just-a-kiss/

I hope the link works.

[Brent]

Just a very small defense of Eve. Not even a defense really (she definitely deserved to go, and I have no idea what kind of food she makes in real life), more like a caveat.

Just because she failed at Top Chef doesn't mean she's a bad chef. It might, but it may just mean she's a bad reality tv cooking show cheftestant. And that she definitely was!

[Naomi]

Thanks, Perry!

[Independent George]

Perry - how did you post that link? I can't get my html tags to work, which makes quoting/replying to other comments difficult.

Italics
Bold
Blockquote

[Perry]

Naomi,
I just copied the link from my browsers address bar, paste the link here. I did press ENTER after pasting the link.

[Skillet Doux]

“These guys are awesome. Is it too early to say that this is the strongest field ever?”

No :-)

“Did we have the same thing last year, a lot of women got eliminated in the early going?”

Last year, no. In fact, five or six episodes in, the women were actually up. Then a rash of eliminations put them at -3 in the late going (Carla, obviously, being the lone holdout). Seasons 1 and 4 maintained remarkable gender equality through the course of the season and season 5 wasn’t too bad. In both seasons 2 and 3, there was a rash of early female eliminations that put them -4, which is the largest disparity achieved over the run of the show.

“The Voltaggio brothers, Jennifer, Kevin are going to go a long way. A finale with these 4 would make S6 the strongest season yet.”

How incredible would that be? Too bad it won’t happen. Read on...

“This season really does look deep; there is one down side to this, though. In previous years, the top contenders would be able to escape early on even if they made a bad mistake. This season, I think we've just gotten past the point where we can expect somebody on the bottom to screw up worse.”

Exactly. It’d be a long shot for those four to make it in any season, but the fact that the rest of the field is so strong makes it almost impossible. There’s so little chaff that if any of them trip for even a second, they could be gone. Heck, there’s so little chaff, there’s a good chance one of them won’t make it through episode five. But the good news is that it’s still early... a few of these other folks might be on that same level but just haven’t been able to show quite as much yet. I could see that leading pack that looks like four or maybe five right now expanding to six or even seven in the next few weeks. We’ll see.

“Jesse, Jesse, Jesse. I can't help but wonder if she'll be this year's Arianne Duarte...stumbling quite a bit in the early shows, but then coming back strongly and dazzling the chefs with impeccable and flawless dishes, and then getting the boot when she stumbles again.”

Could very well be. I think she’s a lot better than she’s showing so far. And I just heard more good stuff from some more Baltimore friends last night about Abacrombie. If she can get her head in the game, so to speak, she could do well.

“...the most memorable dish was the lava cake for dessert.”

This is not selling me :-)

“Unless someone burns their dish into a cracker, Preti is toast (which can also be burned). I just don't think she's remotely close to them.”

To me, she’s the ONLY one left who looks (on what is, admittedly, a very small sample) like pure chaff without potential. There are a few others who haven’t done anything exciting, but she’s the only one other than Jesse (discussed above) who seems primed for the chopping block. And that’s astounding.

“I wish they'd at least publish video of what the QF dishes that were not even mentioned were. How hard is it to put 20 minutes of bonus footage up? Put !!ERICA!! on there every 5 if you have to pay for bandwidth. Lots of reality shows do similar things.”

I’m of two minds on this. I’d LOVE to see more footage. But I fear my 8-10 hours of weekly Power Rankings work would become 12-15 hours :-)

“Just because she failed at Top Chef doesn't mean she's a bad chef. It might, but it may just mean she's a bad reality tv cooking show cheftestant. And that she definitely was!”

Very true. Some chefs, I think, just need time and their own kitchens to turn out great food. She sure didn’t inspire confidence though, huh?

"Perry - how did you post that link? I can't get my html tags to work, which makes quoting/replying to other comments difficult."

“I just copied the link from my browsers address bar, paste the link here. I did press ENTER after pasting the link.”

I think TypePad comments automatically turn URLs into live links. If you try one and it doesn’t work, drop me a line (below the photo, top right) and I’ll try to fix it. As for other HTML tags, yeah, I hate that they don't work too. I'm not sure if I can fix that, but I'll look into it. You know... in all of my spare time :-)

[Skillet Doux]

Actually, that was easier than I thought. I think I just enabled limited HTML tags for comments. What, precisely, is meant by "limited", I have no idea.

[aaalex]

dominic: not to contradict you too much, but i did think it was interesting that jen was the most pissed off about the "battle of sexes" angle. she looked annoyed when she said the sex of the chef doesn't matter. BUT last week, she was the one who took pride in how many "boys" she's made cry in the kitchen. puts an interesting angle on her being pissed at the challenge. also, the episode did make it kind of clear that the women, this year, are aware of how strong the men are. robin said she was glad to cook with women, because she had been in kitchens where there weren't a lot of women. but ashley mentioned some of the women were feeling over-matched and that a win by the women would be a confidence booster.

also, i pretty much agree with bart. you shouldn't take your early high ranking of eve as indicative of anything at all. her restaurant's had great reviews, probably because she's a great cook. one of the most interesting things about top chef masters, this year, was getting to understand that these contests don't necessarily bring out the best in the chefs. anita lo, who looked like a thrilling chef, put out dishes, during tc masters, that - in her own words - she would not have put out in her own restaurant. so, top chef is really about cooking well in situations where there are artificial constraints. given less stress and more time, eve probably could do something great with shrimp. top chef just isn't the place where she can best show what she's got.

also, dominic, you got your ranking of the voltaggio brothers pretty much right, it seems. they both seem like great chefs who respond well to this kind of pressure. the hardest part of the rankings, before you know the chefs, has got to be trying to get a sense of their personalities. i mean, that would be the hardest part for me. do you find it not so difficult?

naomi: english pronounces words that end in "che" mostly according to what language they come from. we pronounce "brioche" and "cache" and "niche" without a final "ay" sound, because they don't have the "ay" sound in French. "ceviche" and "cliche" get the "ay" sound at the end because they do in their original languages (spanish and french). (so, i guess, technically, jen's wrong in her pronunciation.) not too many anglo saxon words end in "che". "ache" comes from old english, but it was originally written "acan"

anon man: i know what you mean about ashley's comments on marriage. but she made a fair observation and, just before the ec got underway, she did express her happiness that these two people had found each other. so, ashley behaved like a true professional, whatever her feelings.

a really interesting episode, more for the food that came out than the drama. even a mid-table cook like robin made a duck mole that looked as good (and interesting) as anything jamie made last year. (i think stefan is the only one from last year's group that could handle the pressure as well as these people do.) should be a fascinating year. (i say jen, kevin and michael v. in the final ... watch me be dead wrong...)

[aaalex]

i meant i pretty much agree with BRENT, not bart. but by the time i posted you'd addressed this issue. so ... never mind ...

[Bart]

Dom - I know, the dessert being the most memorable part of the dish won't sell most foodies...but you have to understand, I'm a severe chocoholic and I have an intense affinity for desserts. (Which would explain why I've repeatedly said you should visit Mike's Pasty, lol)

That said, now that I'm thinking about the meal - I remember having a wood grilled pork chop which was succulent. I can't remember what the others had, but the only thing I remember not enjoying were the roasted fingerling potatoes. They seemed a bit undercooked.

Oh, and they had olive flavored spreads for the breads. Kinda corny, but hey. The restaurant is called Olives, after all.

The atmosphere was nice, and you had either a great view of the kitchen, or of the Bunker Hill memorial. One of the Top Five meals I've had while in Boston.

[Independent George]

Actually, that was easier than I thought. I think I just enabled limited HTML tags for comments. What, precisely, is meant by "limited", I have no idea.

Boldface doesn't seem very visible (I bolded 'easier'), but italics, embedded links, and blockquote seems to work. Huzzah!

[Independent George]

I’m of two minds on this. I’d LOVE to see more footage. But I fear my 8-10 hours of weekly Power Rankings work would become 12-15 hours :-)

What, we're not paying you enough to blog for us?

[Mann of Sandd]

Season is certainly starting off strong (and the Atlanta trio looks to be particularly strong), and from Tom's comments in his blog, he seems to indicate that the level stays high throughout the season.

[jw]

from aalex: (i think stefan is the only one from last year's group that could handle the pressure as well as these people do.)

Wouldn't it have been great to see Stefan in with this group where he'd really have been pushed to put out his best instead of what was "safe"?

[Bill]

For the record, I'm just happy that I don't have to hear ceviche pronounced incorrectly anymore.

[1000yregg]

Thank goodness the wuss, Eve is gone.
Rooting for the Voltaggios! My cousin likes how the older one, Bryan is clean cut whereas the younger, Micheal is all tatted out. They're great for the show.
I attribute liquid nitrogen to fire on a grill- a way to cook- not an ingredient.
I'm impressed with your rankings, Dom: 2 for 2. Keep it up.

[Dave_P]

Awesome ep, though not as good as ep 1. Some random thoughts:

I think Jen was pissed off about the battle of the sexes, because she knew how uneven the field was, and she'd likely be carrying her team.

Ashleys's pro-gay marriage schtick got old, fast. I'm sure it's a passionate topic for her and many others, but frankly, I wanna see cooking. More to the point, I want to see a chef that happens to be gay (black, a woman, bipolar, be-fauxhawked, whatever), not a Gay Chef. This is why I liked seeing Dale L cook, but was happy to see the team Rainbow (or whatever they called themselves) mostly sent home early last season. No doubt the edits made it seem worse than it was.

Of what seems to be the top 4 (Jen, Kev, V-bros), I think Jen & Kevin seem to be the least mistake-prone, at least w/this small sample size. Both the brothers seem to be more risk takers (of which I wholeheartedly approve, btw!) and I can see one of them getting Tre'ed, esp in a field this deep.

Of the 4, I think Kevin has the best shot at lasting, and even winning it all. The guy can not only cook, but he's smart (MIT schollie and all) and I think he knows how to play to the judges. Also, he keeps a very cool head--I think we can look forward to a Jen C blowup at least once this season. I just get a really good feeling about this guy.

Preti & Jess are clear chaff at this time, but I really like that Jess at least seems to be receptive of criticisms, maybe a bit too much, but she knows what she's doing wrong. That she can't correct them bodes ill, but it's early. Preti, otoh, seems more typically belligerent about the judging which rarely goes well (unless you're a certain sullen finalist in S4). I won't miss her if she gets cut soon.

My local chef gets sent home early, and deservedly. I'd still like to try out Eve, but I'm in no particular hurry now. This brings to mind the risk of entering a televised contest--I know there's no such thing as bad publicity and all (cuz, prior to this, I hadn't even heard of the place), but she really didn't do her reputation any favors (fairly or not).

--
Dave

[Kathy]

Mattin wears the scarf as a symbol of Basque pride. :)

[paula]

Dave, I think it's your duty to this board to go to Eve soon, so you can report back to us on what you ate.

[aaalex]

dave p: the ashley question is kind of interesting to me. i mean, she was edited in such a way as to give full attention to her problems with being asked to cook at a stag party. her attitude made sense. her anguish made sense. and her position was contrasted with preeti's, so there was no implication that bravo entirely supported her position. what people tend to leave out (colicchio did on his blog as well) is that ashley, in a clip just before the ec, mentioned that she was, despite her feelings, happy that these two people had found each other. then, rather than drag her heels and do the bare minimum, she shot herself in the foot by trying to make a second dish, a basil panna cotta. though you can question her decision to do two dishes, as jen rightly did, ashley approached the challenge passionately and with total commitment. she was a complete professional. so, i don't really think it's fair to call her a "gay chef". she is a chef who is gay placed in a situation (maybe one of the few) where her gayness was an issue. if top chef asked ron to cook for a celebration in memory of papa doc duvalier, he might, rightly, have similar objections, papa doc being a horrible, haitian dictator.

i think i understand when you say you prefer a "chef who is gay" to a "gay chef", but these are very difficult things for me to keep separate. i'm not sure what a "gay chef" might be? are there specifically "gay" procedures in the kitchen? is there "gay" food? i don't mean any disrespect at all, but what it seems to come down to, in the end, is that you don't want to know about chef x's sexual leanings, that "a chef who is gay" is one whose sexuality is invisible. i get it, but top chef would seem to be the worst place to find such a creature. the show is about the kind of pressure that forces people to reveal things about themselves as well as about their cooking. i'm not sure what you thought about jamie, but i wonder if, faced with the same dilemma as ashley, she might not have spoken up as well? jamie was kind of lucky she got to be "a chef who is gay". ashley, kind of unlucky. there's another aspect: ashley is clearly passionate and devoted to cooking. her passion comes from who she is, and it came out in her having to deal with her feelings about marriage. preeti: not so passionate and, in the pressure cooker that is top chef, much less likely to go far.

[Lou]

The brothers V have the advantage of having competed against each other for a long time. I think that makes for some very interesting techniques and risk taking.

The marriage issue - Tom's blog addressed it very well. I like him better for expressing it. Chefs are people with feelings and passions which will show up in the food - not vending machines and automated food processors.

Odd (to me) Ash gets very little air time but his finished dishes seem to get praised but not enough to move him from the middle of the pack.

Ron seemed to be low on the men's team with Mike I. maybe just a step above - "mushy" and "lack of salt" are just about the 2 worst sins to Tom and Gail's palette.

I'm loving this season and also like Fabio's video on making the macaroon ... now I wish I could find the recipe for Mike V's cookie.

[Lou]

I found the cookie recipe!

[Brent]

Couple Q&As from an interview with Eve last week in the Detroit paper:

Why did you decide to try out for "Top Chef"?

Actually, the show's producers contacted me to see if I wanted to participate. To be honest, I hadn't really been following the show, but things were going smoothly at the restaurant, so it was a convenient time for me to be away. I have a great staff to run things, and I thought it would be fun working with other chefs.

What is the most overrated ingredient?

Truffle oil. I love truffles, but truffle oil is too cloying. During the show, they were using a lot of powders and concentrated ingredients. I wasn't used to that. I like flavors and textures. I don't even make a roux for thickener. I like to stand over a saucepan of cream and watch it thicken.

Most underrated ingredient?

Honey and jams. I like to mix sweet with savory and spicy and those ingredients really lend themselves well to that. I also love avocados and mangos.

[KimberH]

Awesome start to TC...

Eve needed to go. She just didn't look like she wanted to be there. When the spirit isn't willing...

As an aside, I am watching Iron Chef right now and remember Mark (the Aussie) from Season 3? He is one of Brad Farmerie's sous chefs. Very interesting.

[aaalex]

someone, last week, expressed doubt that there was such a thing as a "villain edit". not only is there a "villain edit" but, as per richard blais, there's a "hero edit" as well. here's a Washington Post squib on Michael Isabella:

It's been a week since "Top Chef" debuted, but tempers are still simmering around these parts about one of our local cheftestants. With regard to a clam-shucking competition, Zaytinya's Mike Isabella said, "There's no way -- no offense -- but a girl shouldn't be at the same level that I am." Chatters in Tom Sietsema's discussion today were none too pleased, so Tom called the chef to get his side of the story. Sietsema reports:

"I'm a very sarcastic person," Michael Isabella told me this morning. The news that some viewers are upset with his comment (to fellow contestant Jennifer Carroll of Philadelphia) is "disheartening," he says. "I've been friends with Jen since before the show."

He thinks "Top Chef" producers wanted to "hype it up" in advance of tonight's segment, which pits the male and female chefs against one another.

Did he mean what he said, though? Isabella says he doesn't. "Half my staff is female," he says.

His boss's advice: Focus on the challenge and "don't read the blogs," counseled Jose Andres.

[Skoolie]

Great show, and thanks again Dom.

just a few thoughts here.

aaalex, you mentioned Jen being upset with being on a team with women. I don't think she is having a sexist issue, I think she generally gets along better with males. She has a tomboy streak in her, and I think when she says "I've made boys cry" its more about her being the tough tomboy chic than about really wanting to stick it to men. It seems to me that most of her peers are men and she identifies with them, and yet does not identify very much with the women. Also someone said that she has sized up her competitors and I'm sure she has, so she knew she wouldn't get a chance to shine in the EC this time.

Does anyone else think that this the judges are going to have a seriously hard time picking who should go after a few more episodes? We could see more ties for the worst, in which then they say they discuss their all around performance and that could save a person who has been a front runner the whole time.

Hector - I meant to say this the last time, but living in central florida, and yes their are areas here where puerto ricans are the majority, the fried steak thing makes since to me. I think he didn't take into account the judges thought or perhaps made a mistep in cooking or frying the meat for too long. I'm glad to see him in the top four this week

Eve - I agree with all that said she wasn't cut out for this competition even though she may be a very great chef, sometimes that fast past reality tv show aspect of it wears people out. And yes Dave you need to eat there asap

The V Brothers - I find myself routing for micheal more but that is because I identify with him being a second same sexed sibling. My older sister is a year and 8 days older than me and there was plenty of competiveness and we werent even competing for anything. It's either that or I find micheal someone hot with his tats.

Okay so ceviche is the new scallops and is doing two dishes when you only have to do one the death trap. Its just like salad, if you are going to do a salad you must have something special, if you are going to do two dishes they must be equally excellent.

When in doubt leave it out. You will always get the "We would have rather seen one excellent dish focused on that two dishes that where just good".

The whole gay marriage thing was the character, human side of the show and the struggles and issues the chefs deal with during the show, I think it is valid to the show, you can't tell a story without tribulations, triumphs and raw human emotion. Most of the time it comes from someone forgetting an ingredient, burning something, but sometimes it's more about humans especially if everyone does pretty well.

I really can't wait for the postings, In my head I can see where some are going to lie, others I'm interesting and seeing what Dom has to say.

* Note - I agree the b tag for bold does not work, I tried the strong tag as well and it doesn't do anything either.

[SorchaRei]

HTML note. The b tag is fine. What's making it tough is that this website uses a typeface where the weights are not that different, so it's hard to see. Compare: sample sample

The show was great. Lots of intriguing food, some intriguing characters.

I said last week that Mike I. is either an unrepentant bigot or he's decided to play one on TV. Given the interview reported above, I've decided there is a third option: he's an idiot. Reality TV is about editing, and "sarcasm" doesn't take much to be edited into something it may or may not have been intended to be. Frankly, I think he thought it was a funny comment at the time, and doesn't like the press he's getting, so he's back-pedaling. But humor doesn't always translate well, and it's just stupid to give editors stuff like that to work with. No one can show you trashing women if you don't give them the clip to use.

[Elise]

Watching Jen talk about battle of the sexes was like a flashback for me. Sure, she knows that she's as good if not better than any of the boys there, but she's also pissed to be on a team that, even if she has the best night of her life, won't win. I used to feel the same way when I had to compete on the girl's team in any sort of boy dominated area. One on one I could take any of them, but I couldn't beat a whole team by myself, and usually the rest of the girls would be dead wood. Math camp to floor hockey and a lot of stuff in between that was true.

I think the most annoying thing about Ashley and her gay marriage comments (even in light of her pro-love bit)was that she sounded more like she was annoyed straight people can get married rather than being mad that gays don't get to.

That might be a fine distinction, but I think that's where most of the problem was. Not that she's rightfully mad about being unable to marry, but that most of her comments sounded like sour grapes for those who can.

[dan_boston]

I've read several comments on here complaining about Ashley's complaints, and I've got to say I find them not only disappointing, but even outright offensive.

It would be one thing if she was using her reasonably mixed feelings as a crutch to excuse poor performance - but as a matter of fact, she even tried (stupidly) to go above and beyond, but at base delivered a great dish. And at judge's table, she spoke only about her food and copped to her poor judgment.

So Elise, Dave_P, (and anyone else) I'm sorry that Ashley 'annoyed' you. I sympathize with the horrible, horrible cross you both have to bear. How dare uppity gays say gay things or bring up their gaity on this reality T.V. show. I could go on here, but I think even the two of you must know how patently ridiculous and offensive your attitudes are, regardless of whether or not you'll cop to it.

Anyhoo, what is it about that neckerchief that just makes me want to give that chef one chef a smack? I realize that I just have a bias against accessorizing on men period, but that one really rubs me the wrong way. Is he a big Scooby Doo fan or something? Because I spent 4 weeks in Basque country, and didn't see a single one.

[Azdahf]

aaalex, I was the one who said I didn't believe in the villain edit, and I still don't. I should have qualified my remarks by pointing out that I don't think Michael I. is a rabid misogynist -- it was clear to me that he was trying to be humorous -- I just think that he's obnoxious. And I think he's obnoxious because they show him being obnoxious. A lot. Admittedly, sometimes it does end up being legitimately humorous (see: "pickle brothers") but even he realizes it can grate on people (see: "they'll get tired of me").

Could they have edited TCM so that Bayless looked like an a**hole and Chiarello looked like the nicest guy in the world, instead of the other way round? Maybe, but it would have been very difficult, and isn't the whole point of reality TV that you don't have to spend the money and time it takes to make believable fiction?

[Pants McCracky]

Boy, I hate to contribute to this thread getting off track, but I have to add my "amen" to dan_boston's comment. For people to treat the issue of civil rights for gays as some kind of annoyance is, shall we say, a rather 1950s attitude. Those whiny gays, always going on about wanting rights. Whatev!

For straight people, legal marriage is such an ingrained privilege that I don't think we even view it as such (for the record, I am a married straight), and I don't think most straight people can even envision what it would be like to be denied that most basic and universal of human liberties. I can only imagine the chaos in the streets that would ensue if the tables somehow turned and straight marriage was deemed illegal.

So perhaps we can spare a teensy weensy iota of forbearance for a gay person feeling somewhat bitter about having to serve at an event celebrating an occasion that every human on the planet is permitted free access to, provided of course you're part of the approved class of people.

In my opinion Ashley showed estimable class in setting aside her (justifiable) feelings and giving her all to the competition. Anyone who finds her attitude annoying really needs to put themselves in her shoes and honestly think about how they'd feel in that situation.

[Dionysus]

"So Elise, Dave_P, (and anyone else) I'm sorry that Ashley 'annoyed' you. I sympathize with the horrible, horrible cross you both have to bear. How dare uppity gays say gay things or bring up their gaity on this reality T.V. show. I could go on here, but I think even the two of you must know how patently ridiculous and offensive your attitudes are, regardless of whether or not you'll cop to it."

I don't think its about that. I AGREE with Ashley's basic position. I'm a huge supporter of gay marriage. What I don't agree with is the notion that because the issue still, unfortunately, exists, that TC shouldn't have marriage themed challenges when there are gay contestants. That's absurd and unrealistic. Does she plan on never attending any friends' weddings? Refusing to allow rehearsal dinners to be held at her future restaurant? Tom Colicchio's blog covers all this better than I can and I pretty much agree with exactly what he wrote.

[aaalex]

azdahf: not sure why you don't believe in the "villain edit". (i wish there were a more elegant name for it.) it's pretty simple. reality tv, if it were truly "real" would be in actual time and it would bore most people senseless. the editors choose the material they present but, just as important, they choose the sequence, the order in which things are heard. this order doesn't necessarily conform to the sequence in which things are done or said. (the sequence in season two when cliff tried to cut marcel's hair is famously wonky and there are any number of "reaction shots" that were NOT in reaction to what we (the audience) had just seen ... every top chef fan will have his or her favourite (or most annoying) moment when the editors have put things out of sequence to create a "dramatic" impression.)

the most recent, blatant (and to me slightly annoying) example of a "villain edit" is from top chef masters when dale talde's reaction to michael chiarello was played from different angles to highlight/heighten both the confrontation and dale's pugnaciousness. when you remember that rick bayless mentioned he did not see or hear the confrontation between chiarello and talde, you get the message that the confrontation was tweaked to make dale look irrational and, because they then cut to chiarello saying he ate three dales for breakfast when he started out, to make chiarello seem macho and insensitive.

i think it's important to remember that "reality" is not what the editors are after here. they're after the dramatic and the dramatic, by definition, requires conflict. in any dramatic conflict, it's more vivid if you have someone who will offend the sensibility of the audience. marcel was MADE to look like he did, however annoying the man might be in real life. his negative chracteristics were exaggerated for the sake of ratings. the woman who broke a bottle on his face in a bar didn't have a clue that what she had seen was not real, that the marcel she hated was the product of deliberate editing for dramatic purposes.

in a recent blog entry, richard blais mentioned that people have this idea of him as generous and giving and not dark. he acknowledged that PART of his personality is like that but that he can be as dark as the next person. in other words, blais had been edited by the top chef editors to look "heroic". and it made for good TV.

you ask "isn't the whole point of reality TV that you don't have to spend the money and time it takes to make believable fiction?" and i think the answer is no, not not at all. you pay editors and producers (instead of writers) to create vivid hour-long drama. you take hours and hours of footage and boil it down to its most compelling form. and, because of all that boiling down and selecting and editing what you have is as close to fiction as it is to reality.

on michael isabella: they don't show him being obnoxious. they show him saying things. when he was in the race with jen c., he didn't say anything about beating her because she's a woman. he said that AFTERWARDS, in the interview room where, according to richard blais, everyone does some "smack talking". the context was different. same point when he spoke about robin being an "old lady". we heard him say those words when, in the context of the show, they would have the most dramatic effect. the editors deliberately chose to have you hear those things when you did. sorcharei mentined that she thought michael isabella was, maybe, an idiot for allowing the editors to have material that they could use to make him look bad. but there's another possibility: michael isabella may just be naive, entirely media un-savvy. in that, he's no different from many of us: i mean, we take what we see for unedited "reality". that's to misunderstand the manipulation (the enjoyable manipulation) that goes on in the creation of a television show like top chef.

(this doesn't mean that the things michaell i. said weren't offensive. it's just that we don't get to know the real him while watching this show, so we really don't get to know how offensive michael i. really is.)

[jse91]

For the record: Tom C's exposition on marriage as it relates to civil and religious ceremonies is the best I have seen. And I have seen a lot!

That being said, I thought Ashley's diatribe a bit much: Dude - You are on a reality show, what were you expecting! I mean, you don't go on a show like this expecting to win the Nobel Prize for Peace or even expecting to be treated with dignity. You are here for the exposure. And maybe for some coin. But you are not here because your life is committed to social justice and revolution. Not even Ron get to claim that! [Have I mentioned how much I love Haiti and how sad I am that my November trip is a no go!] Here is the story: There is a lot of injustice in the world. Gay right in the US of A don't make the Top 10. Even so, I wish it were set right. But at this point: cook!

That is my screed.

[dan_boston]

"What I don't agree with is the notion that because the issue still, unfortunately, exists, that TC shouldn't have marriage themed challenges when there are gay contestants. That's absurd and unrealistic. Does she plan on never attending any friends' weddings? Refusing to allow rehearsal dinners to be held at her future restaurant?"

I totally agree Dionysus, but kicking puppies is totally wrong, and you need to understand that. What's that you say? You never made that argument and I'm just throwing in a Red Herring? Sorry!

[Dave_P]

This is far too good a blog for me to get involved over a silly internet argument. Dan (and others) are entitles to their opinions, as am I, "patently ridiculous" as they may seem to some. My only advice to them is the same as to the chefs: let's keep it about the food. If they insist on carrying on, it'll be without my participation.

I'll try to make it over to Eve, but my last friend in A2 just moved out of town (I'm about 25 miles away), so I don't go over there very often. If I do, I'll be sure to make a report.

Forgot to mention in my first post--I really wished they'd move the 15K prize over to the EC so as to incentivize the QF winner to risk his/her immunity again (of course, that'd make the QF winner be ineligible for the prize as well if they held onto immunity). That'd make for some real drama, not the manufactured/edited kind.

--
Dave

[Marya]

On the topic of Eve... in a weird way reading the interview with her made me think her issue is that she's less of a chef and more of a cook. She doesn't see to get how technique and flavor are tied together.

(Not that I am a chef but it strikes me that is one of the things that separates cooks from chefs.)

I still have hopes for Jesse once she gets her nerves under control. I was sorry to see her crying, it was clear she was trying so hard to control it and couldn't.

[mc]

Eve's early departure relative to the strong reviews her restaurant receives didn't surprise my wife and me. When we ate there, the butter was a standout, as was desert, but the other courses were consistently overwhelmed by a single strong flavor, much like Tom's critique that her asparagus salad tasted mostly of blue cheese. We'd considered going back once we saw that Eve was on Top Chef, but her performance on the show was completely in line with what disappointed us about the restaurant, so our meal probably wasn't a fluke.

The strong reviews for Eve are part of a pattern we've noticed in Ann Arbor: restaurants receiving high marks despite so-so food, lapses in quality, poor value for money (especially Zingerman's!), and occasional service problems.

[aaalex]

dave p: i agree with you. there are enough places on the net where you can go to insult and get insulted, if that's your thing. i hope you didn't think i was trying to call you out in any way. when i asked your opinion about ashley's behaviour, it was because i'm kind of fascinated by the way top chef deals with reality (it's a show with at least eleven editors, so you know it's massive manipulation) and i also thought, in episode 2, the editors did a particularly good job of giving you ashley's point of view while also showing that she transcended it. she behaved exactly as a professional chef would/should. so, i don't at all think of her as a "gay chef", whatever that might be exactly.

re the 15k prize: this year, for the first time, it feels like the qf is more exciting than the ec. i loved the qfs in previous years, but i always thought the ecs were the main event. now ... not so sure. maybe at least one of the ecs needs to be for big money. (sad to say it but: money does make things more interesting.)

[Nsam]

Yes, this "silly internet argument", (which anyone with an iota of moral intelligence would more likely call an important civil rights point) will have to go on without Dave_P's participation. Because, having greatly contributed to the abrasive tone of the discussion by throwing in his two cents worth of vitriol, he's now decided he'll take the high road by declaring himself too good for the discussion.

Ashley's anguish is dismissed as mere "schtick." Commentators who call him out on his derisive, abusive tone are "carrying on." Oh, but I guess I should stop -- Dave_P isn't going to respond, he's taken his ball and gone home. Sneering at others' insistence on the importance of this matter and then, when faced with commentators who disagree with more intelligence and acuity than he, scurrying away with his tail between his legs as he declares himself above the fray, is the extent of Dave_P's contribution.

[Nsam]

Dom, I felt compelled to write that to Dave_P, but my apologies to you. I actually agree with Dave_P in preferring to focus on the food, and that this blog is too great to spoil with such nastiness.

[Skillet Doux]

*TWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET*

Hokay, folks. This is an important issue and emotions run high, but I think things are getting a little out of hand. We've managed to keep things very civil here and mostly avoid the usual internet pitfalls over the last two seasons, and I'd really like to keep it that way. No hard feelings, no need to make a big deal out of it, but if we could let this one go for the time being and get back to the show and the food, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Thanks!

[Bart]

Back to the food - I have a legit question...

What's so special about a carpaccio, anyway? Particularly a watermelon carpaccio? She just sliced a watermelon really thinly and plopped it on a plate, no?

I looked at the recipe and...well, honestly, there doesn't seem to be very much in the way of technical achievement in shaving a watermelon in thin strips.

I don't get it.

[Mann of Sandd]

aaalex,

Your post at the end of the first comments page re: the editing was extremely well presented. Thanks for posting.

[anon man]

Bart,

That's what I said. Its not top crudo, carpacchio, ceviche.

And I Loovvvvvvve carpacchio and ceviche. One of the best things I've ever eaten was a wonderful venison one in San Francisco a decade ago. And I had a wonderful coconut milk/pineapple ceviche in Maui. (And true, most carpacchio is at least lightly seared before serving, so it is at least nominally cooked.) But, it seems like a giant cop-out to serve these things time and time again.

Maybe part of the reliance on these dishes is the heat this season. Ok. But, maybe part of it is the "thematic nature" of the challenges. It might make total sense to have a ceviche bite at a pool-side bachelor party, but the challenge in essence, was pair a dish with this cocktail, a la the Sapphire challenge a couple seasns ago. (And given the kerfuffle above, I think we all wish they would have just made it a "pair with this shot" challenge.) If it was just "pair with this", people might think more outside the box, like Casey's french toast in that challenge, instead of turning to tired crowd pleasers, which several of the dishes clearly were.

From the previews, next week it looks like its cook for X hundred airman in a less than ideal kitchen. We get that every season. That its airman or the foo fighters or whomever, shouldn't really matter to the contestants, should it? But I think it does, even if it is unintentional. Watch them cook "homey" food rather than anything super interesting. If we see a bunch of casseroles next week, I'm going to throw a shoe at my tv.

[paula]

I watched Fabio's video making the macaroons, too, and was (in spite of myself) completely charmed. I totally want to be annoyed by him and his Mario Bros. persona, but damn it, I can't! I just can't help but like that guy.

[Duffy]

The way to recognize what is so special about a carpaccio (or ceviche, or tartare for that matter) is to get a bad one. Even though it is an apparently simple technique, if not precisely prepared, the thing can be disgusting. The proof is in the result, not the difficulty or number of ingredients -- does it taste good? Does it "wow" the taster? I suspect the judges expect much more perfection from apparently simple dishes than the more complex -- but when a simple dish is done to perfection, and does "wow" the judges, it wins. And justly so. Witness Jen's ceviche in the quickfire.

[dan_boston]

It is always so tempting to judge the 'worthiness' of a dish based on the perceived complexity level of it's preparation. Ultimately however, I don't think complexity of technique really become an issue for the judges unless a dish has failed. The sense I get is that 'complexity' as a criteria for judging falls maybe third in priority, with the first two spots going to something along the lines of 'conception' and 'execution'.

[timothy]

This is a great blog. Top Chef is a great show. The fact that a food focused show and blog can some times get people thinking about issues involving identity, rights, marriage, and all the rest, just goes to show me that food is life. There is just a strong connection between the way people eat and the way people live. At the very least we can all agree with that.

[Dave_P]

mc:

Don't even get me started on Zingerman's. There's actually a deli closer to me that has comparable pastrami (Seigels in Walled Lake, btw), I can get in & out within 10 min (faster if I call ahead), and is *much* cheaper. Zingerman's has better bread though. Thanks to you, it looks like I can skip that trip to Eve. :)

Nsam:

I'm sure you've been on the internets long enough to see how quickly otherwise good forums can delolve into flame wars, which is why I refused to escalate matters. I still feel that way and certainly will respect Dom's wishes so this will be the last time I touch on this matter, regardlss of your opinions on my actions.

Has anyone seen the recipe for Hector's tofu ceviche? I truly hate surfing Bravo's site and haven't really looked for it. Of all the winning dishes, that's the one that I'd like to try to make--mostly cuz I haven't any hope of replicating the MG stuff and I have my own recipes for tuna tartare.

--
Dave

[RumRunner]

To the question of how much of Ashley is revealed and whether it is appropriate. I enjoy the food being showcased more because of the chef personality. I can't taste the food, but I can see it, and I can see and hear these chefs. Who is passionate, who is clueless etc. So I like that this show is about humans who happen to be in the business of cooking.

Otherwise, just watch Chopped or Next FoodNetwork Star. They don't really show humans who are cooking and otherwise plying their trade and giving us a show...they just show people cooking, which, I don't know about you, but in such a forum as TC it would get boring in a hurry.

[timothy]

Rumrunner- Yeah, I think I am agreeing with you. Even though the Leah-Hosea romance and the Marcel-Cliff-Ilan antagonism got old fast, I do think it is part of Top Chef. the show is not a documentary on life in the kitchen, but it makes clear that good chefs have real personalities, flaws, and opinions, and as long as the focus is on food, I don't mind learning something about who these people are.

[Allison]

Thanks Timothy. I agree 100%.

"This is a great blog. Top Chef is a great show. The fact that a food focused show and blog can some times get people thinking about issues involving identity, rights, marriage, and all the rest, just goes to show me that food is life. There is just a strong connection between the way people eat and the way people live. At the very least we can all agree with that.

Posted by: timothy | August 28, 2009 at 09:53 PM"

[KinderJ]

Somebody raised a good point above that I want to explore a bit- what exactly is a watermelon carpaccio beyond thinly sliced watermelon? How would you differentiate that from, say, watermelon sashimi? And if you are just putting very thin slices of watermelon on a plate, kudos for the knife skills but what exactly are you cooking?

I am not trying to be snarky here, but I seem to recall (with my deeply crap memory) that this is sort of a running thing on TC- slicing damn near anything thin and calling it carpaccio. I am wondering if the term has moved from being a dish to a presentation style. Any thoughts?

Changing topic entirely, someone mentioned that the neckerchief was a 'Basque Pride' thing? Is that guy actually a Basque? Because Basque cooking can be really fantastic and I would love to see some of that on TC. Puerto Rican food versus Basque, with to Voltaggio (sp?) brothers waiting in the wings... Yeah. I would be up for that. Oh yeah.

And yes, Fabio making the macaroons was hilarious and wonderful and reminded me of why I liked the guy so much. Making good food, having fun and not taking himself so seriously, all while talking in an accent my Nonno would have loved. Classic. Did anyone else catch the Michael V. demo for his quickfire winner? He looks and sounds like he has been extensively trained in doing demos. Either that or he has had lots of practice. It was really good.

[KinderJ]

aaaaaaand I just went back and re-read the pre season power rankings. Damn shame about Mattin, I have eaten some great Basque in the past and would like to have seen more. Oh well.

[Duffy]

Re carpaccio -- Isn't this by definition an antipasto consisting of very thin slices of cold, raw beef with a vinaigrette? The secret is in the preparation, as the meat has to be carefully selected and then precisely trimmed and sliced. Here, didn't the cheftestant do this, and then add thin watermelon slices to the dish??

[Duffy]

Kinder, on this matter of watermelon carpaccio: As I recall, the cheftestant here added thin watermelon slices to thin slices of beef, all in a vinaigrette.

According to my Larousse, carpaccio by definition is an antipasto of raw beef and vinaigrette. Japanese sashimi is similar, except that it is a dish of fish -- both are precisely trimmed and sliced, both served raw and very cold, The differences are in the finish -- carpaccio is finished with a creamy vinaigrette, the sashimi with a variety of garnishes and dipping sauces.

If carpaccio is served at a Sushi bar (!?!), could they call it "beef sashimi?" Or if a chef adds slices of cold watermelon to either (or both), does he have to make up a new name for the dish? Maybe here, he should have called it Italian Sashimi??

[duffy]

Oh, good grief -- sorry all, I thought I was editing the thing, and that only the final version was posting. Arrgh.

[alamoswoman]

First post = with several years of thanks to Dominic for another layer of flavor in my TC addiction.

Loving the mathematical discussion. Keep expecting all those with skills to point out that all the guys had unaccounced immunity in the first EC. Balanced gender numbers were needed for the second EC and the only way to achieve that with 8 men and 9 women would be to plan ahead to eliminate one woman. (Not that Jen did not earn her elimination - how relieved the producers must have been to have three women so obviously deserving of the Padma salute.) Then add to that that one of the 9 women had immunity .... the chances for elimination for all the women other than Robin were 1 in 8 rather than 1 in 17. Of course Robin presumably didn't know this when she chose to keep her immunity, but it does change the objective mathematics.

[Skillet Doux]

"Loving the mathematical discussion. Keep expecting all those with skills to point out that all the guys had unaccounced immunity in the first EC. Balanced gender numbers were needed for the second EC and the only way to achieve that with 8 men and 9 women would be to plan ahead to eliminate one woman."

This presumes they were unwilling to go with unbalanced teams, or didn't have some silly device on hand by which one of the men would be named an honorary girl for the day, or wouldn't have simply drawn knives and scrapped the gender theme altogether. In other words, this is a matter not of fact, but of speculation... speculation to which you're entirely entitled, but speculation nonetheless :-)

[Mann of Sandd]

Unless I'm mistaken, the teams were unbalanced. There were 9 males and only 7 females, unless I just counted horribly wrong.

[Skillet Doux]

"Unless I'm mistaken, the teams were unbalanced. There were 9 males and only 7 females, unless I just counted horribly wrong."

Whoops... you're absolutely correct... the initial M/F breakdown was 9/8, and the first elimination left the women two down for the bachelor[ette] challenge.

I believe that's the quickest and easiest conspiracy debunking we've ever had here... thanks, MoS :-)

[alamoswoman]

Blushinbg all the way - this is why I don't do mathematics.

[KinderJ]

Interesting on the carpaccio- I did not notice that Ashley did use beef. I thought it was strictly watermelon. That being said, we seem to be circling around a couple of key points. If we say that carpaccio can be 'carefully selected, well trimmed, thinly sliced X with creamy vinaigrette' we can stretch the definition pretty far. Still, I would kind of like to know exactly went into her dish.

[kit]

Re: Ashley's carpaccio

According to the Top Chef website, Ashley's carpaccio has no meat. Its ingredients are: watermelon, mint, ricotta, strawberries, and balsamic.

[Azdahf]

Ashley's carpaccio has no meat. Its ingredients are: watermelon, mint, ricotta, strawberries, and balsamic.

That's totally a carpaccio. I don't know what you people are complaining about.

By the way, has anyone tried Kraft's individually-wrapped cheese carpaccios? DEE-LISH!

[KinderJ]

That... actually sounds pretty tasty. Why on earth would she call it a carpaccio? Call it 'Awesome Watermelon, Good Job!' and let the complements rain down.

As for the Kraft carpaccio, I prefer Sargentos, on account of being a persnickety person.

Huh. Spellcheck says persnickety is a real word. The things you learn from television...

[Luray]

To dave_p "Has anyone seen the recipe for Hector's tofu ceviche? I truly hate surfing Bravo's site and haven't really looked for it."

I found the recipe by searching for Tofu on their recipe search. Not surprising- there weren't very many recipes for tofu. It sounds very good.

[duffy]

Re warermelon carpaccio -- with no beef?? Ouch -- shoulda checked the recipe -- was relying on memory, which at my age is too risky.

Did ask google about this, and most definitions returned says the dish is "beef." One (of uncertain authority) says meaning originally referred to a beef dish, but now used for many ingredients to emphasize that dish is served raw.

But then, wouldn't one expect watermelon to be raw? No criticism intended here, imo the chef can certainly use poetic license at will -- but remember the flap Casey caused when she served what she called Coq au Vin to the persnickity Frenchman??

[doktarr]

I think it's a hopeless (albeit possibly fun) task to produce a strict ordering at this stage, so here's my take on the rankings:

Top 4: The Voltaggios, Jennifer, Kevin.

5-7: Eli, Michael, Hector.

8-10: Ash, Laurine, Robin.

11-12: Ashley, Ron.

13-14: Jesse, Mattin.

15: Preeti.

[doktarr]

Another unrelated thought:

Shouldn't the $15k be for elimination challege wins? The chefs already have all the incentive they need to win the quickfire (i.e. immunity), and they have no incentive to cook conservatively (i.e. the bottom chef does not go home). It's the elimination challenges where there is a strong incentive to avoid screwing up and just focus on executing relatively simple dishes.

[Bart]

Right, I get how a carpaccio is made. I'm just wondering what's so great about slicing a watermelon to really thin strips.

I mean, I love watermelons. I don't want no puny bite. I want a CHUNK of watermelon. I don't want a piece of watermelon to evaporate on my tongue - I want to bite into a big, juicy piece.

Gosh I'm hungry. Looks like I'm going to pick up some watermelon on the way home after work.

[Bart]

And watermelon was had :D I feel better now

[KinderJ]

Sort of my point there, Bart. I mean, yeah, if the weather is over ninety and your in the direct sun, a big chunk of cold watermelon is just about the most perfect thing I can think of. So if you can make a really, really good watermelon dish that's wafer thin and incorporates ricotta (which is not a sun friendly cheese in my experience), why would you confuse the issue by calling it a carpaccio? So far the consensus seems to be that the only things this dish had in common with actual carpaccio is a) its served cold/raw and b) it's thinly sliced. I don't even know how you could call it a 'play on' or 'homage to' carpaccio, given how far it's removed. I guess I am just a little irritated by the lingual drift. It's ok if your dish is not remotely like a classical dish- just be proud of making something new and good. I would be. It sounds like Ashley achieved something incredible, and undercut it with a misleading name and an unnecessary pannacotta.

[paula]

Maybe it was meant more to be a tongue-in-cheek play on the presentation of the dish? A thin slice of watermelon could very well resemble a thin slice of raw beef, yet on a hot day in Vegas, a watermelon "carpaccio" could come off as a clever riff. You know, like when people make a "dessert pizza." No one thinks the person serving it actually thinks it's an authentic "pizza." (Lame example, I know. Sorry. I grew up in the suburbs.) :D

[KinderJ]

Yeah, but I have the same issue there. I have a pretty broad definition of what qualifies as pizza, certainly a lot broader than the Italian Ministry of Agriculture's definition of 'authentic Italian pizza', but I feel like once you add cookies and frosting, you can't really call it a pizza. It's pedantic, and worse it's not a hard and fast rule, but some times that sort of thing gets to me. I just wish people had the confidence in themselves and their dish to say 'This is X and it is delicious. It is also something new. Enjoy.'

Let me give a positive, Top Chef example. I would say that Carla's Green Eggs were a play on normal fried eggs. They were still fried and still eggs, but very different from the way we would normally consider fried eggs. That to me would be a play. If you were into molecular gastronomy and created some concoction on an anti-griddle that looked like fried eggs but was actually, say, tequila and astronaut ice cream, that would not be a play on fried eggs. It could be a parody, or some sort of nightmarish prank, but not really a play on the dish. Simply seeming, or looking like, is not enough. Some of the, well, truthieness of the original dish should shine through the new production. That's my take anyway.

[doktarr]

KinderJ, while I have no real opinion either way on the carpaccio, I think that's an excessively narrow definition of what a "play" can be. For instance, the winning dish was, I think, a pretty successful play on chips and guac.

[timothy]

Since we're talking about the carpaccioness of the watermelon, I began to recall an episode in an earlier season when someone made watermelon "steak." Was it Marcel? I can't quite remember the details, but it seems like an equally dubious classification.

[Karen]

Not to be a pain in the ass here, but its TUESDAY and I'm craving my rankings! Love this blog even though I am the pickiest and least adventurous eater I know.

[Skillet Doux]

"Not to be a pain in the ass here, but its TUESDAY and I'm craving my rankings!"

Working on the finishing touches right now!

[Naomi]

>> Working on the finishing touches right now! <<

Yay! I've been obsessively hitting refresh with my fingers crossed.

[aaalex]

please forgive my wretched compulsion for symmetry, people, but i can't stand that the number of entries is so close to 100.

[aaalex]

so i've added two meaningless comments. (may my psychoanalyst - and god - forgive me)

[aaalex's god]

Sorry, aaalex, there are no straight lines in nature.

[aaalex]

dear god,
you have confirmed what i always suspected. i am in hell.

yrs
aaalex

[Independent George]

It's ok aaalex. With this comment, we are back in the prime numbers.

[KinderJ]

Oh My GOD! Dom is 3 for 3 on eliminations! He is the secret god king of the Top Chef world, striking down the unworthy....

Fear Dom, cheftestants, and tremblingly obey!