Top Chef - S6E12 Postmortem

The four horsemen ride!

I will give the Magical Elves editors this much... though the ensuing discussion narrowed the field a bit, they definitely sent us to JT with the impression that anybody could go home. I wonder how close this actually was. Looking forward to the blogs (when the Bravo site is back up, that is).

Jen definitely got exactly what she needed to break out of her slump. Kevin did his thing and knocked it out of the park (I know, I know, me of little faith). Unusual to see Bryan stumble on an EC like that. The fact that the judges found Mike's flat elements out of character for him says a lot, I think. And Eli...

Most importantly, perhaps, how awesome to see Thomas Keller? With the finale in Napa, here's hoping we get to see some more of him.

I'm still annoyed by episodes 9-11 Jen, but I'm feeling a little better with her getting her groove back a bit. It'll be interesting to see who shows up at the finals. Could it come down to whether or not she can stay in her comfort zone?

In any case, I feel pretty comfortable saying that this looks like the strongest set of contestants for the finals we've seen, and no matter who gets the axe next episode, the remaining three will make one helluva finale.

Thanks for the birthday wishes, folks... and thanks to Kevin for not screwing it up :-)

Discuss!

Comments

[Bart]

What a great birthday present for you, Dom! (and heck, for Kevin, whenever his is)

I'm just anticipating a deluge of "STUPID EDITORS!!!!" comments to follow on the Top Chef blogs. Hey, their job is to create drama and suspense, and they excelled tonight. I really had a brief moment of panic, thinking Kevin might go home - due to some criticism his dish received followed by a post-show interview where he looked really, really sad.

Also, Brian's stock went up about a million-fold after he told Kevin how to cook the sous vide. Bryan is just one gigantic class act.

My rankings:

1. Kevin
2. Bryan
3. Mike
4. Jennifer

[Bart]

Ugh, I typed Brian instead of Bryan in my instance. Dom, if you like, feel free to edit my comment and then delete this one. Otherwise, I hang my head in grammar-shame.

[bfish]

Yay for Kevin and Jen and happy birthday, Dom! (In honor of Kevin I made carnitas tonight.) While the Bocuse d'Or competition requires a style that is antithetical to Kevin's approach, I believe he can -- with his smarts and obvious cooking talent -- adapt to the requirements and put forth a credible performance in the try-outs (given some practice time of course). He is a rising star. Remember, he's significantly younger then the others going on to Napa so where will he be when he has equal to their years of experience? This was a really great ending to the regular part of the season. Yes, it is SO refreshing to have four great chefs competing, i.e. no dubious contenders.

[babyarm]

Seriously, stealing a food network challenge bit for their finals episode 1? Really?

A tight quarters (quickfire?) followed by a cocktail reception catering challenge. Horrible.

I assume this was designed after Lee Ann left the show. If this is what is in store for S7 then I'm not sure how long this show will last.

[Yvanka]

A very happy birthday to you, Dom- and I, personally, am thrilled by your gift. Now we can roll on happily.

I, for one, am really looking forward to the final episodes of this season-- mostly because I think these are the cheftestants with the greatest ability to cook excellent food in a competitive environment while maintaining their professional attitudes. We might have a scandal-free finale! (Everybody knock on wood.)

[mncharm]

--Is this the first time in Top Chef history someone goes with a technique they are not familiar with and actually wins?!

--It was the bottom of the ninth, two outs, fourth and inches, and Jen was facing a full court press -- and she stepped up. Good on her for taking a deep breath, pulling it together, and putting forth a good effort.

--Mike can be an a-hole, but it's great from a spectator point of view to get his unvarnished opinion.

--Bryan: class act. I think I'm going to pull for him in the finals. Sounds like he damn near pulled off the win tonight as well (except for a stray comment by Tom that made me nervous towards the end).

--Classy exit for Eli.

Great episode overall. Once again, execution takes the day over more ambitious dishes.

[MikeyV]

The Bravo site is back up.

[anon man]

I wonder how "unfamiliar" Kevin was with sous vide really. He has used some other more modern techniques in the past (like last week's compressed veggies), so I wonder how much of that "Kevin isn't sure what he's doing" thing was contrived and how much was just Kevin asking Bryan (who clearly does more sous vide) for different options the way chef's talk about food.

As much as I like the result and as much as I love TFL (11 times and counting), I must admit that competitions like Bocuse D'Or kind of bore me. Overly complicated and precious food bites while people cheer. Lame, sorry.

The one magic Elves thing I want to give them real credit for is the deception on the preview. When Jen said she was making a turducken, she was speaking metaphorically, and thus her dish had no tur or duc or en. Nice move elves, especially since we were all expecting a Thanksgiving theme.

[babyarm]

Also to Kevin's win: It does appear that he got the Arianne Memorial Execution Award for this win. Everyone else just mistimed their protein or made one execution error and he gets 30 grand as a result.

Either that or they were trying extra hard to build suspense for the noose they set out in the previews. The Elves to my knowledge have never pulled a mis-direction like that passing off one chef's dish as another.

And am I crazy or were they asked to make some sort of elaborate garnish? Nobody did anything like that, right? Hung would have clowned that aspect of things. It just seemed they took garnish to = vegetable side dish.

[MiniMonkey]

Everything about this episode gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling:

1. Padma saying, "Welcome back, Jen," during the quickfire.
2. Bryan helping out Kevin with sous vide.
3. Jen helping out Bryan when he was running short on time.
4. No one really tanking.
5. And finally, Eli's bitter sweet yet gracious exit.

And DUDE! Can you believe ALL FOUR of the top 4 actually made it to the finals?! How awesome is that?! At this point, anyone could win and I wouldn't feel at all bitter.

[jkelley]

Dom's another year older,
Jen is back.
Kevin remains true to his vision and wins.
All is right with the world!

[Esther]

Happy birthday!

And what an awesome present. Honestly? I didn't think Kevin had any chance of going home. The first half of the show was giving him SUCH a negative edit that it would've been too obvious, and when the only negative thing judges can say about your dish is "too simple," it's never going to lose to dishes that have serious technical flaws. I'm ridiculously happy for Kevin.

Bryan and Michael are differentiating themselves more and more. Bryan comments that Kevin's food is "simple, but that can be good," and helps him selflessly with the sous vide. Michael not only dismisses Kevin's food but actually claims that his Quickfire was better than a Bocuse d'Or entree, which is pure bull.

I'm happy that Jen got her groove back. You could see the difference in the interviews; I wonder how much of it was winning the quickfire, and how much was just slow recovery from physically being sick the previous week. What worried me was the kind of errors she had tonight. As a whole, she seemed to have the second-best dish -- the only flaw was the uneven salmon -- but it concerns me that a seafood specialist can't make even pieces of salmon.

Finally, as I commented over and over while watching the show, tonight's crew were simply a delight to watch. Five extremely talented chefs, no major personality battles, and a challenge worthy of their skills. I would pay money to watch a regular TV show in which the five of them tackle cooking challenges every week.

(For whatever reason, tonight my instincts were dead on. I saw Kevin's lamb and said "wow, that looks perfect." Bryan's lamb: "hm, that's awfully rare." Eli's: "dear God, he's butchering the carving . . . in the worst sense of the word." The minute I saw how he was cutting that lamb apart in an obviously uneven way, I knew he was going home. Really, I didn't have any problems with the editing elves this week.)

[Lon]

This show confirms my belief that taste will beat out technique if there is a conflict between the two.

It does Kevin proud that he was able to use a technique he had never used before to prepare a basic dish, simple in presentation, but obviously well enough prepared and taste-filled to win.

And yes, kudos to Bryan for his assistance to Kevin. I'm not sure other chefs, even in other series, would have done that. In a way, I'm sorry he lost because I think he could do an excellent job in the Becouse d'Or. It would fit his personality and style.

Eli's lack of experience showed in tonight's show. Give him a few years to bring his experience into line with his ideas and he might be an excellent chef as well.

In the preview, Jen looks healthier and more confident. So here's hoping she does better.

Finally, I know the chefs were critical of the contestants. However, we're talking the best cooks and palates in the nation. They should find things wrong with dishes prepared under a timeline without advance preparation.

I consider Tom's final comments the most telling as to the contestants actual achievements. That's the strongest endorsement he's levied in six seasons.

[Independent George]

I'll be rooting for Kevin in the finals (mostly because he's awesome, but now, also partly to annoy Michael), but Bryan went up about six levels in my estimation. No, I have no idea what scale I'm using, but I have a tremendous amount of respect for him for playing honorably and showing respect to his competitors.

Actually, as others have mentioned, how great was it to see all the kids playing nicely together tonight, even if they all struggled on some level with their food? Tonight, we got to see:

1. Jennifer volunteer to help a harried Bryan with his plating.
2. Bryan helps out Kevin with the sous vide.
3. Kevin positively gushes over Thomas Keller.
4. Cocky young Eli offers a genuine, heartfelt tribute to Richard Blais.
5. Cocky young Eli offers genuine, heartfelt praise of his fellow competitors headed to the finals.
6. The four horsemen reciprocate in kind to support Eli, and seem to genuinely wish he were still with them.
7. Tom acknowledging how close-knit this final group seemed to be.

[Independent George]

Bravo website is back online. Classy as ever, Richard Blais writes a very moving tribute to his young protege:

And when I got my first executive lesson in corporate downsizing, it was Eli, the youngest and most capable of absorbing the loss of his job (he was in high school) who I had to let go. I told him the decision was strictly business and about labor cost. That it had nothing to do with him, or certainly his passion or skill.

His response?

I’ll see you tomorrow, Chef. Unpaid. Tomorrow, turned into years. Paid of course.

[jkelley]

Yes, please someone explain the concept of garnishes in this context. It looked to me as though the non-protein components were not what I would traditionally consider a garnish, rather a side. Do I need to adjust my definition?

[Anne]

I'm sure someone who knows something can say more, but in the vegetarian challenge I got the impression that garnish can equal vegetable side dish to accompany meat.

[Independent George]

There's one thing I was hoping Dom or someone else more knowledgeable than myself can clarify - from what I've read, Paul Bocuse himself is generally more highly regarded for his media savvy than for his actual cooking. In fact, I've read some distinctly unflattering things about his actual cooking. Is this a fair assessment, or is this more a case of professional envy?

[jkelley]

Thanks to Independent George for the heads up on Blais' blog. I'm not sure what impresses me more; Eli's passion or Blais' ability to write. We have some damn good writers posting on this blog (with Dom at the head of the list) but Blais is my favorite writer related to Top Chef.

[Skillet Doux]

Re: Garnishes, that's correct, in a classical context you're talking about a fully-developed accompaniment, not the spring of parsley or token ingredient that it means in a contemporary context.

[Dionysus]

That was just... an incredible challenge. And as someone new to being a foodie, it introduced me to Bocuse d'Or (which Im SURE, reading Tom's blog, was a large reason for having such a challenge). Given the strength of this season, it seemed appropriate to roll it out. Would I have liked everyone to perform a little better? Of course, but I am ecstatic that the Top Four live for the Finals. I've watched every season of Top Chef (started when season 3 aired and watched 1 and 2 online to catch up), and never have looked forward to the Finals this much.

The closest was Season 4, but still not on this level.

By the way, I was wondering if anyone could suggest some really nice restaurants in Philadelphia? I'm new to the area and my girlfriends birthday is in January. We both love nice food and I wanted to take her somewhere nice. I have Le Bec Fin and Mushulu on my shortlist right know, but I could use suggestions.

[Danny]

It was the right decision, but like last week, it is hard to believe that past performance wasn't taken into account.

Where were these chef's during the vegetarian challenge? All the garnishes they made were more substantial and better than the main courses they made previously (and yes I know that some protein was in some of the garnishes).

[KinderJ]

Happy Birthday Dom!

Blais' Blog this week was very moving, and I wish I had known about it at the start of the season. It really moves Eli from 'cocky kid with talent' to 'seriously hard working and dedicated.' He, and his mentor, should both feel very proud. It was a hell of an achievement, and he left as a class act. It also throws his scrapping with Robin in a slightly different light too, I think. Still thinking that out, sort of a 'Does she take this as seriously as the rest of us/home is not a place to be serious' vibe. Just me speculating.

For those looking for more on Bocuse, Chef Tom's blog is up on Bravo, and it's a long post this time. Gives a good history and background, explains the reasoning and analysis well. Strongly recommend you take a look. Sadly no discussion on what qualifies as a garnish. I personally always thought of a garnish as a flavorful decoration or compliment to the dish, not as something divorced from it. That being said, tournaments tend to generate tournament specific language and specialized meaning. For example, at the World University Debating Championships, a 'squirrel' has nothing to do with a four legged mammal. 'Garnish' may be context specific, in this instance, and tightly defined.

Very cool to see Keller. Interesting how his body language contrasted with his eyes. Very calm, comfortable and relaxed body language, but I got the impression that nothing escaped his eyes. Not on the plate, not in the chef. The eyes of someone who has refined his craft, not just chef but a man who runs restaurants and kitchens, to the very finest point. I can really understand why the contestants seem to view him with almost religious awe.

But the neatest thing about seeing Keller? As someone who sat down and read the French Laundry cookbook from cover to cover? It was finding out afterwords on Chef Tom's blog that he refused to sit at judges table and negatively critique the contestants. That his kitchens are so collaborative and supportive of individual members and ideas. That this steely eyed man, a living legend of American cuisine, cared enough about five strangers to spare them the impact of his criticism. He clearly made his views heard at the dinner table, but its quite a different thing than having the man sit in judgment over you.

Superb episode. Superb people.

[Lon]

Tom mentioned in his blog how Thomas Keller did not want to appear at the judge's table and why, also explaining how Keller had a kitchen where everyone worked together as equals.

I sort of got the same impressions of our five finalists. They could work at that level.

[òste e còc]

IG, where have you read that Bocuse’s promotion of nouvelle French cuisine during his 1960-80 tenure as modern France's culinary ambassador trumps his culinary legacy? Perhaps you are confusing Bobby Flay?

As for the episode, it is ballotine, not ballantine. The former is a scotch whiskey or ale depending on the punctuation. It was quite clear that the quickfire thing was to make a version of Mr. Kaysen’s dish, a ballotine. Michael should have listened more simply.

Was lamb on sale at Whole Foods that week? This was a challenge that demanded the whimsical classicism of French cookery and particularly “technique”: not a method but rather a honed manual discipline, ie: manipulating the proteins with their hands and controlling the elements, much in the spirit of the competition’s namesake, instead of letting an aquarium heater do the job. Perhaps they are content to entrust a machine instead of their intuitive skills to cook meat. (sous-vide has its merits, but not in this case)

There are plenty of progressive challenges but few that court retrospective cookery. Those platters should have been gilded with aspic, chaud-froid, tediously disciplined knife cuts, inlays, geometric patters and…showmanship! All I saw was 12hrs worth of higher end banquet cookery for 10 guests with little delineation of the protein or continuity of the garnishes (I’ve seen all of one of the chef’s platters before, not sure if the others were falling back on their proven repertoires). Poultry would have had a narrower margins of cooking temperature error and provided more garnishes by virtue of the giblets, leg/breast meat, skin and carcass properties.

[KinderJ]

Just had a funny-

Can you imagine if Jennifer made a Salmon Tartare ice cream cone as a garnish?

[Will Allen]

Like Esther, I saw Kevin's lamb, and said "that's pefectly cooked". When Keller's harshest criticism of Kevin's dish was that it was a bit simple for the time allowed, and given the skills of the chef, I knew that, at a minimum, Kevin wasn't going home. When the others' dishes were criticized for technical flaws, I was pretty sure that Kevin was going to win. The nature of the criticism that Eli's dish garnered made me think he was gone. Who knows? Maybe I made some lucky guesses.

I was quite happy with Kevin's win, because, of course, first of all, Kevin seems wonderful, but also because his victory strikes a blow for flavor, above all other culinary values. I can't tell you how often I've dined at restaurants with big reputations, in big culinary towns, and as I have signed the too-large check, I've thought to myself that the flavor and taste simply was not outstanding. I want to eat Kevin's food because I am convinced, damnit, that it will very, very, very, likely taste great.

I am so impressed with Eli, Bryan, and Jen. Eli, like a lot of young and talented people, was very cocky at the start of the season. Unlike a lot of young and talented people, however, when he was confronted with people of equal and better talent, he reacted by pushing himself, hard, to get better, and he did. Well done.

Bryan is a talented and honorable man, who has figured out that one is in turn honored by the quality of one's competitors.

Jen fought back from illness and setbacks, while being exceedingly decent to those around her. It ain't easy being a generous human being when one feels like hell.

Finally, perhaps I am ungenerous, but I find Michael to be extremely tiresome, even allowing for the editing process. Has he ever displayed even a glimmer of humor? Would the editors ruthlessly exise ANY evidence of that quality? Yes, he is talented as hell, but extremely talented people who are possessed by pettiness and envy are really quite boring.

[Will Allen]

I will agree that poultry, recent buffalo wings notwithstanding, is too often neglected in this show. Has it's reputation been so downgraded that chefs are afraid to go there, or are they truly unaware of what wonderful things can be done?

[KinderJ]

Will Allen- I agree that pettiness and envy are tiresome, but I cannot say that a person possessed of those qualities is necessarily boring. Picking a rather extreme example, Issac Newton could be the poster child for at least pettiness. His campaigns against those who challenged or disagreed with him were quite ferocious and vindictive. Not boring, exceedingly nasty perhaps, but not boring.

As for envy... Iago? Perhaps the Bard's most complete villain. No, bringing it back to top chef, even if you feel that Mike V. is petty and envious (which I don't) his food is exciting, and thus so is he. Not because you would want to hang out with him, but because you want to see what he does. If you had to have a blind tasting prepared by, say, Priti or Mike V., whose food do you think will be more interesting? As a chef, which of them do you find more interesting?

I personally take the view that profound self confidence, while off putting, is not a bad thing in a craftsman or an artist. Provided that they are constantly willing to learn, it is a valuable trait. I cannot really fault Mike V for that.

[garik16]

Was i the only one who thought of Jay Raynor when Eli made a scotch egg?

Couldn't believe that it was liked.

[KinderJ]

Mmmm... perhaps it's because the Bocuse does not use much poultry? Anyone have a link to previous ingredients? It would be interesting to see what they could do with pheasant or pigeon. Now that you mention it, salmon and lamb do seem a bit pedestrian. Could you imagine having to work with rabbit? All those tiny bones, and that presentation method? Eeeek. Double plus Eeeek.

[KinderJ]

Wikipedia you have failed me!

[Will Allen]

Kinder J, I often find people who are possessed of those qualities (and to be sure, everyone has displayed them at some time) to be boring because, in the end, their behavior toward others tends to be utterly predictable. I've reached the point that I could write Michael's interview remarks before I hear them. In the end, this is not just a cooking competition, but a television show about human beings. If your opinion of him is different, I of course respect your opinion.

I haven't spent much time around great chefs, other than to sit in their dining rooms occasionally, while they pursued their passion in the kitchen. I have, however, due to the random nature of the world, been, with some frequency, in the company of world-class athletes. The more interesting ones, and admittedly, this is merely my personal preference, have been those who were mostly lacking in those qualities.

This is not to say that lacking pettiness or envy meant that they were not capable of being quite nasty. Far from it. To illustrate, as a child, I had the occasion to spend a day in the presence of the great Ted Williams. To put it bluntly, he was a nasty sonovabitch, at least at times, even to, or perhaps especially because of, my young eyes. He didn't hold back for being around a young person, at least not on that day, and I heard verbs, adjectives, and nouns of a unique nature, employed in a unique way.

What he also was, however, was exceedingly generous in his opinions of other people who were dedicated, and generous with his time with those who were less talented, but who shared his passion and willingness to work. An immensely talented, difficult, complex, stubborn, generous, harshly judgemental, and impossible to encapsulate man. Never boring.

[jh]

I found Bryan's remarks about Kevin's cooking quite interesting. Both he and his brother have remarked about Kevin's "simple" cooking, but I think due to Bryan's maturity, he was able to make his soundbite very PC. It reminded me of Kevin's response to the Robin situation in the house. Perhaps Mike's take on the situation is the "translated a-hole" version, while Bryan and Kevin are the PC versions.

For a while, I almost thought Bryan was going to win because of the "coachable" comment at the dinner table, but am very happy with Kevin's win.

I almost feel that this episode should have been the finale with the people present and the prizes. I hope that finale doesn't disappoint. I love Thomas Keller's cookbook. I also enjoyed his collaboration with Ratatouille. It was ridiculous how well Pixar was able to recreate the dish (they have a whole special features section with Keller).

Happy B-day!! Is there a newborn addition to the foodie community??

[Shelly]

That one had me on the edge of my seat! I had no idea who was going home, except that I was pretty sure it wasn't Kevin. I was convinced it was one of the brothers, and I really didn't want to see Bryan go after he'd helped Kevin out. I thought it would be Mike because of the bone.

So they're trying to drum up publicity for the American Bocuse d'Or challenge? Is it televised? Because if it is, I'd love watching it to see what Kevin will do.

[paula]

Great episode all around. So much class (Michael V. notwithstanding) and talent. "Welcome back, Jen" indeed--she was watchable again, and not in the train wreck sense! I can't wait for the finale.

[gilmore]

How about Kevin winking at Jen after Padma said "welcome back" during the quickfire.

Eli grew in stature this episode. Classy exit and it was obvious that the remaining four have great respect for him.

I thought Eli was a goner because his protein was the least edible. Not sure how much of each piece of lamb was consumed. It sure looked interesting (cutting skills aside).

Last season, Blais stated that in Keller's kitchen, everyone is referred to as "chef".

With such a great foursome left, I only look forward to the competition, and whoever packs their knives, packs their knives (although I hope Kevin wins).

What great prizes Kevin racked up this episode!!!!!

I would think that Michael V. would help if and when needed, but the editing process may do him in.

[SorchaRei]

Dom got what he wanted for his birthday! Yay!

So the connections between Top Chef and Bocuse d'Or continue to grow. Hung was a finalist for this year's team and won a prize for his seafood entry, even though he wasn't the chef chosen to compete. So no, I don't agree that Hung would have "clowned" the garnish.

Bocuse d'Or requires such a specific style of cooking and presentation that I am not surprised that the time allotted was not enough to produce more typical platters. I'll be very interested to see what Kevin can do with a proper amount of planning time.

Whenever Michael sneers at Kevin's cooking, I recall the pairing challenge and his comment about how he'd been to the vineyard and they had hazelnut trees, so he worked hazelnuts into his dish. He's such a thoughtful chef, it's hard for me to imagine that given time to think about his approach to the Bocuse d'Or USA contest, he won't do something to be proud of.

I have been wondering if Hung will compete in Bocuse d'Or USA again next spring. That would be an interesting comparison, in a very well-defined setting. Anyway, I'll make a point of checking out the announcement of the teams on Dec. 7.

And once again, happy birthday, Dom! Thanks for another year of this blog, and for creating this awesome space for us to hang out and discuss both this show and food in general.

[Naomi]

Is there a newborn addition to the foodie community??

Not produced by me ;-)

Although I'm anxious to meet this baby (and in a geeky way thought it would be fun if it shared Dom's birthday), I'm glad I got to relax, watch a great episode and get some good sleep!

I don't have anything new to add to the discussion. I agree with much of what's been said and am absolutely thrilled that the top four will be in the finals.

[Dawn]

Happy Birthday Dom, glad your wish came true. And Naomi, good luck. Funny, my sister just gave birth a few days ago to a very tiny and adorable baby girl. So I'm definitely in baby-mode right now :)

As for the episode, while I adore Kevin & have an outmost respect for his cooking, I do feel like Bryan was robbed in the end. His dish I thought was more representative of the kind of food that they look for at Bocuse d'Or. But at the end of the day, I suppose it was more important to produce a great dish than actually fulfilling the requirements of the challenge (much like last week's casino inspiration dishes).

And Jen, 'Welcome (half) back' indeed. I hate being a flip-flopper, and eventhough I have my moments of doubt, I'm definitely team Jen all the way (and has been since the beginning, though I was in denial when she suddenly sucked). She might be the dark horse going into the finale, and while I think Kevin is more likely to win, I'm still pulling for her. I'm somewhat ashamed that my preference is skewed by the person I like/admire the most rather than their performance on the show, but what the hell. It is a reality show after all :)

[dc]

I can't see any of these final chefs actually competing in actual Bocuse d'Or, because it would require them to take months off for training (like olympic athletes do at olympic training center.) Only Eli I could have seen jumping at an invitation. Also, they have already garnered far more American media exposure and legitimacy from their TC than they could from BO outside of actually winning the BO.

I was PO'd and confused by the editing. The criticism at JT seemed to have little connection with what we heard at tasting, which seemed to have little to do at the ppykag. It was like one editing fakeout after another. And I wanted to hear more about the side dishes/garnishes, as all bottom 4 had flawed proteins, I wondered if Eli had good enough garnishes to make it close/controversial to eliminate him. Michael got the worst of the criticism for his garnishes -- but his protein was cooked correct (perfectly in this context), minus a bone.

How much did Jennifer's salmon miss by? I hoped she would still win going into JT, given the mixed criticism of her salmon at the dining table. I wondered if these judges palate are so discerning as to pick at cooking issues mortals would never notice, or their personal taste of how well done an ideal salmon must be.

Perhaps Michael was hurt by his previous competitive cooking experience. He cooked competition 10 years ago, which made him confident and comfortable going in. But in 10 years trends, styles, techniques change. If you pull out your 10 year old wardrobe, dance moves, car, phone, politics today you will seem very dated and out of place. Is that what happened to Michael?

@òste e còc : They had to pick between lamb and salmon as main protein.

[Independent George]

If you pull out your 10 year old wardrobe, dance moves, car, phone, politics today you will seem very dated and out of place

Yes, but if you waited and pulled out your twenty year-old wardrobe, dance moves, and car, you'd be lauded for your retro chic. Maybe culinary trends just cycle faster?

[Jon Olsen]

Mark your calendars—I agree with øste e çöc. I am, as the kids say, down with o.e.c. I wanted to see some crazy ass knifework and shiny crap smeared on everything. Give us aspic! Give us flash! Make a cathedral of the meat (that's a meatthedral for those of you scoring at home) and an outer medieval courtyard of glossy vegetable towers! A bouquet of parsnip and blood orange orchids. Recreate the nativity out of seven kinds of potatoes. A Roman stadium woven of cucumbers and purple carrots. Something. Please!

I noticed that when Bryan was being all sportsmanlike and classy, he'd said cook the lamb at 52. I'm pretty sure Kevin's circulator was set at 54. Hm. Conspiracy. Clearly they loved his work on the chard. Man I love chard.

How do you keep the food hot on those mirrored platters? Cold lumps of salmon and "garnishes" of heaped veggies in ramekins. Mmm. Nummers.

[Independent George]

How do you keep the food hot on those mirrored platters? Cold lumps of salmon and "garnishes" of heaped veggies in ramekins. Mmm. Nummers.

Actually, I think it would be easier to keep food hot on those platters. Glass is a pretty lousy conductor of heat - certainly as compared to aluminum or silver.

[TxGriff]

John Olsen- your comments bring to mind something that Natalie Portman said on the show. Something along the lines of who is your dealer and how can I buy some of whatever you are taking.

I think Tom did a good job of explaining how they judged this challenge. It was in the style of the Bocuse d'Or, but they understood the time restraints and that the food produced couldn't be judged at competition level, so they evaluated the overall execution of the meal and who they thought could be trained to compete for the American team. At least, that's how the TC judges looked at it.

Great show, no complaints. This is the first finals ever where I would honestly be happy with any outcome because they are all so deserving, even if Kevin has become my favorite constestant. On to the finals!

[Dave_P]

Great episode, one of the best of the season. I'm very happy to see the top four getting into the finals, though I felt bad for Eli at the end. Classy exit, indeed.

Earlier in the season, Lee Ann mentioned that there would be some eye popping guests and challenges still to come, and this was right after Robuchon guested, so I figured T. Keller would be making an appearance, but when TC went to Napa, not in Vegas.

Lots of good blogs on Bravo too, esp Tom's and Richard's (thanks to IG for that--the Bravo page didn't make it clear he had a new blog). Tom makes it clear why Kevin won, and why Eli was let go.

For the first time, I'm going to compliment the editing by the elves--I had no idea who was going to win and who was going to lose. Normally, a terribly executed protein is a death sentence, and Eli's lamb was the worst offender by far, but I just couldn't tell this time. Also, I was so focused on who was going to be eliminated that I almost forgot someone also had to win! Gratz to Kevin and his prizes. He's smart enough to figure out what aspects of his game to work on for the Bocuse, which, as Tom implies, is more than just about the food. I wish him luck.

One nitpik: why didn't they bring Hung back for this episode? I guess he doesn't quite rate that table (yet?) since he didn't actually compete in the Bocuse, but he is a TC alumnus who made it to the finals of the '09 US qualifier (to see who'd compete), and iirc won the best fish dish.

Can't wait for the finals.

--
Dave

[dc]

In my conspiratorial mind Jennifer and Bryan had strikes against them because of their age. They may been considered too old for Bocuse. I think the American Bocuse selection and winners are generally in their late 20s. Kevin is the ideal age, as well as his exceptional demeanor and talent and learning ability to represent the USA proud. Paul Bocuse and the American Bocuse folks might seriously hope Kevin will take up their offer of a US finalist spot, regardless of his rustic cooking style.

I certainly would love to see Kevin represent stars-and-stripes in international culinary warfare. Especially it means Bravo gets to make a "Top Chef Kevin" series out of it. More Kevin! :)

[Steve]

After reading Colicchio's blog, I understand and support the decision to choose Kevin as last night's winner. He was the only one to cook a dish free of real bad mistakes and one that was also well received for flavor. The clincher was that from his past preparations and performance, it was believed that Kevin could learn to cook the Bocuse D'or way.

I felt for Bryan who came close to nailing his dish. Was happy that Jen redeemed herself for a deserved spot in the semi-final. Was disappointed in Michael who usually is spot on in terms of flavor and the one who I would really like to see open his own restaurant (as Kevin and Bryan already have their own). Glad that Eli was the one to go home - he stayed out of the bottom until the end and even won a couple of competitions, but the four that are going to the semis essentially swept this season and deserve the shot to win.

I'm thinking that Jen may be the weakest going in. But as always, we'll see. Kevin is generally still on top of his game. But the Voltaggios have lost some of their discipline and focus. Let's see how the interval before Napa invigorates our contestants. Even if Jen is at her best, she has won fewer challenges and doesn't bring as much creativity as the others.

But I agree, they are going to bring it!

[Bill G]

@Dionysus

I wouldn't go with the Moshulu for anything but their wine list. The menu is dated and mediocre. Le Bec Fin is still worth a go.

A list of places to try:
Amada (Tapas)
Xochitl (Mexican, traditional not steak and beans)
Modo Mio (Italian)
Vetri (Italian...best restaurant in the city. Do the degustiazone if you have the dough)
James (N. Italian I guess, mostly just fine dining)
Zahav (Mid Eastern)
And there's always Jen Norris' 10 Arts (Eric Ripert's too...)

@Top Chef

So excited for the final four...this is what we wanted the whole time and we got it. Kevin seems to understand the judging of the show better than any of the others; it's never been about completing the challenge exactly, it's the quality of the food (source: Blais, Richard).

I'm interested in Michael's semi-villain edit. He'd be more hateable if Kevin didn't just keep chugging along so easily. Bryan, on the other hand, becomes more likable every week.

Great to see Jen fighting hard too. This will be a great final two episodes.

[Independent George]

More crazy NFL analogies - the Postgame Press Conference Edition

Michael V: "Kevin was who I thought he was. He was who I thought he was! And I let him off the hook! If you want to crown his ass, then crown it! He was who I thought he was!"

Jennifer: "Finals? Finals?!! You're talking about - finals?! I'm just trying to survive a challenge here!"

I tried to come up with a Bryan as a closed-mouth Belichcick quote, but, true to form, couldn't think of anything memorable.

[mncharm]

Morning after, I'm still amazed Kevin pulled off the lamb. As someone else noted, he undoubtedly isn't a total novice to the method, but still -- given his questions to Bryan the night before and Top Chef history, I was nervous.

The finals should be epic. 1991 World Series potential here (am I pushing the sports analogies too far yet)? :)

By the way: happy belated, Dom!

[karenology]

Happy birthday Dom and thank you for all you do for us, namely, fueling our food-nerdery :)

[Danielle]

Will Allen: I'm reading that compilation of Pierre Franey's 60-min. NYTimes recipes that my mom, my aunt, and my grandmother all owned in the '80s, and it's shocking to see him praise boneless, skinless chicken breasts as the ideal choice for a tasty, quick, French-style dinner.

danny: Re. taking past performance into account, I wonder whether the producers finally agreed with all us fans who were sick of seeing subpar chefs win after the top dog made one big slip-up.

[Esther]

Jon: I noticed that when Bryan was being all sportsmanlike and classy, he'd said cook the lamb at 52. I'm pretty sure Kevin's circulator was set at 54. Hm. Conspiracy.

IIRC, Kevin said that he planned to sear the meat after, so Bryan said 52. In the recipe on Bravo's site, though, there's no mention of final searing; he may have increased the temperature slightly to compensate. (I was a little surprised at serving a red meat without searing the outside . . . but hey, this is Kevin, so I'm hardly going to question his meat-fu.)

I love this blog, because it's full of people who get excited at fabulous cooking and genuine culinary masters; it's so strange for me to see other sites describing episodes like this week's as boring or sub-par.

[mncharm]

George, love the NFL quotes. Here's another:

Question to Tom: "What did you think of Eli's execution?"

A: "I'm in favor of it."

[rab01]

"Jon: I noticed that when Bryan was being all sportsmanlike and classy, he'd said cook the lamb at 52. I'm pretty sure Kevin's circulator was set at 54. Hm. Conspiracy.

IIRC, Kevin said that he planned to sear the meat after, so Bryan said 52. In the recipe on Bravo's site, though, there's no mention of final searing; he may have increased the temperature slightly to compensate."

I'm also not sure that we saw the final temperature. We saw Kevin rolling the numbers backward and then the camera cut away ...

I'm still trying to figure out who had the second best dish. I couldn't tell from the show; I couldn't tell from the blogs. Was it Jen? Was it Michael? ANyone have a good guess?

[Dan V.]

Kevin is the Tito Francona of Top Chef if we go the baseball manager route. He always has a great explanation, never throws anyone to the wolves, and backs up his ideas with sound thinking and technique.

We'll just see if he stomps on the throat come "playoff time" like Tito does.

[Independent George]

it's so strange for me to see other sites describing episodes like this week's as boring or sub-par.

I didn't find it boring, but I did think it was sub-par because everybody but Kevin had serious issues with their dishes, and nobody produced a truly dazzling success (though Bryan's concept was pretty exciting, and I LOVE his self-awareness at his errors).

[jh]

I found the "Burning Questions" Bravo blog this week to a treat. It includes anecdotes of Kevin as well as Jerome Bocuse's perspective of the entire situation.

http://www.bravotv.com/top-chef/blogs/burning-questions/solving-the-bocuse-d-or-puzzle?page=0%2C0

I find it endearing how Kevin was able to eat and talk at a table with Joel Robuchon, Hubert Keller, etc., but completely freezes up in the presence of Thomas Keller.

[Kim-in-Chicago]

Blais is a talented writer and a class act, no doubt about it. I just read his blog about Eli. Truly touching.

[Will Allen]

I must admit that I am beginning to enjoy the look on Michael's face, with each victory by Kevin, in the same manner that I enjoy the look on Jerry Jones' face, in the closing moments of yet another elimination loss by the Dallas Cowboys.

[Jon Olsen]

Will Allen, anyone from Minnesota who remembers the Hershel Walker trade will join you in that delight, and I think you have the analogy spot on.

Bryan dresses too nicely to be Bill Belichick. Also, he laughs.

[Nicole]

@Dionysus

The two biggest names in the city right now are probably Jose Garces and Marc Vetri. Vetri has two big restaurants, Vetri and Osteria, both of which have rave reviews but neither of which I've been to.

Garces has Amada (his original, Spanish tapas); Tinto (Basque style tapas), Distrito (Mexican street food), Chifa (Peruvian-Mandarin) and his newest, Whiskey Village. I've been to all but Distrito and they're all amazing. Tinto might have been my favorite, but Chifa has the most recent buzz. Amada is the classic.

I also went to 10 Arts recently and thought it was excellent, although perhaps not as exciting as some of the others.

Zahav is also stunning, and Michael Solomonov is probably the third most buzzed about name in town right now.

There are also the many Stephen Starr restaurants, but my sense is that they're a little past their prime, although I'd love to go to Parc.

[Lon]

RE: comments about using the entire season for judging at this point in the show.

Based on Tom's comments, Kevin's ability to adapt throughout the season was a strong factor in his choice as winner and, thus eligible for the Becouse D'Or.

[Jordan]

In my opinion I believe this is only the 2nd time in 6 seasons where the best 4 chefs made the finale. I hate to say it but the other season was season 2.

[Will Allen]

Danielle, it just is a bit puzzling to me that poultry is so seldom featured, or at least that is my impression. As a previous poster noted, because of the animal's diverse parts, it really lends itself to having a chef's creativity and talents highlighted. Kevin's rustic approach could certainly be a strength, and Michael, I'm sure, could do something more interesting than his winning buffalo wings.

[anon man]

@Jordan, Do you think Cliff was not one of the best 4 in season 2, or are not counting him because he was kicked out for non-food related transgressions?

[Jordan]

@Dionysus+Nicole

Nicole your definately rigth about Vetri and Garces taking over the Philadelphia restaurant scene. Vetri just filmed an ep of iron chef america for next season and Garces is about to win the next iron chef this sunday.

I've been to Vetri and Osteria, and Amada, Tinto and Distrito. Only one I didnt love was Distrito, the other 4 are guarenteed a top meal of your life. Vetri is italian and for what its worth Mario Batali is on record calling it the best italian restaurant on the east coast.

My favs though are Amada and Tinto, they are in fact probably my favorite restaurants anywhere ive been to. Amada is a little fancier/pricier but the quality is top notch at both.

[jordan]

@anon man

I was including Cliff, I just didnt think he was better than any of the top 4, but not far off, definately closer then eli was to this top 4.

[David]

I wonder if knowing that the Bocuse D'Or challenge was up next played any part in the judges' decision to eliminate Robin in last week's episode? In her blog, Gail says the following, referring to this week's starry array of guests:

"By inviting them to help us judge a Bocuse d’Or–style challenge on our show, we were declaring our belief that these final five contestants were up for such a prohibitive task. What if they failed? And in front of this intimidating group, no less? It would have been our own reputations, as much as the contestants’, at stake."

Whatever her merits, Robin clearly was not up for this kind of challenge, and as it happened Eli predictably did nothing to sully his own reputation or that of TC or its judges--and he certainly did a better job than Robin would have. Is it possible the judges had this consideration in mind (at least subconsciously) when they opted to PPYKAG Robin?

[Independent George]

Ranking TC Finales:

1. S6 - Kevin, Bryan, Michael, Jennifer
2. S4 - Steph, Richard, Lisa, Antonia
3. S3 - Hung, Dale L, Casey, Mularkey!
4. S1 - Harold, Tiffani, Dave, LeAnn
5. S5 - Hosea, Stefan, Carla, Fabio
6. S2 - Who cares?

[Bart]

David, that's a very interesting point. Now that you say it, I can't help but wonder if, indeed, that was a factor.

[kit]

Bocuse d'Or sounds Insane, in good and bad ways, one of the bad ways being missing two portions of your garnish because a dishwasher ate them (poor Gavin Kaysen!).

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/0507/250.html

[rab01]

"Bocuse d'Or sounds Insane"
The worst way being (according to Tom's blog) announcing the winner before Kaysen had even finished presenting.

[Joanna]

Oh gosh I loved this episode. The quickfire was much less cheesy than I feared, and Eli proved to me that a scotch egg doesn't have to be that awful monstrosity Art Smith put out in TCM, so kudos to him for that. And while it would have been great to see one of the top 4 knock the elimination challenge out of the park, I think that the ways in which each of them failed were incredibly revealing.

Kevin - kept things a little too simple

Mike V - opposite problem; he overreached and focused too much on being flashy, at the expense of taste

Bryan - had a great idea, but got caught up in timing issues and couldn't quite execute

Jen - got a little flustered and had minor execution problems

It seems to me like the mistakes that each of them are likely to make in the finale fall perfectly in line with the mistakes they made this time around. Like... each of them messed up perfectly in character, if that makes sense. It should make the finale really interesting.

Also, Dom, I went back to look at your preseason rankings:
http://www.skilletdoux.com/2009/08/top-chef-power-rankings-s6-preview.html

and I'm still in awe that you nailed the final 4 before the show even started. (Let's just gloss over #5 for now...)

On the Philly discussion: the tasting menu at Vetri was possibly the best meal I've ever had in my life. If it falls within the realm of possibility, I would HIGHLY recommend it.

[Bart]

The worst way being (according to Tom's blog) announcing the winner before Kaysen had even finished presenting.

I noticed that. That annoyed me, probably because that's just SO BLATANT. At least wait until everyone finishes so you can at least PRETEND to have a MODICUM of impartiality.

[Katie]

I noticed that. That annoyed me, probably because that's just SO BLATANT. At least wait until everyone finishes so you can at least PRETEND to have a MODICUM of impartiality.

Though, to be fair, the article above made it sound like his fish course was served first and was disastrous. It's possible that he couldn't have won even with the meat scores. (Not necessarily likely but possible.)

[Will Allen]

Yeah, a little professionalism when fixing a match is appreciated....

[dc]

re above comments of the rarity of poultry on TC, and lack of protein variety in general.

I am half surprised there was no offal challenge. I think the closest was the escargot, followed by the cactus.

I've had tail, kidney, liver, tripe, lung, gizzard, poultry feet/comb -- and they do impart a rich and enjoyable change of flavor and texture from mainstream muscle meat.

Is TC worried it could turn off part of the viewing audience? Or considered outsider food, too far beyond fine dining norms?

[karenology]

^^ There was an offal challenge in Top Chef Masters!

[Maia]

So this is a bit off topic (still haven't seen the last two eps, woe), but I had a question for all of you. A friend is writing a story in which someone manages to get someone else kinked out of cooking school and we were trying to find a scenario where that would happen. Can anyone help?

[paula]

David: That's the first thing that came to my mind when I read Gail's blog. Gail says how nervous they all were about looking bad in the eyes of the guest judges last night--that if the cheftestants did a poor job, it would make them all look bad. I can certainly imagine that, given the mental image of Robin babbling away in front of the diners, Tom, Gail and Padma were like: No way. That ain't happening, even if Eli's clown soup did make half the judges want to vomit.

[Independent George]

Yeah, a little professionalism when fixing a match is appreciated....

I agree. As a Chicagoan, there's really nothing more annoying than a bunch of amateurs screwing things up for the professional crooks.

[Shelly]

Heh. *Kinked* out of cooking school? How about serving a Bocuse d'Or competition platter Nyotaimori style? ;)

--
David, I was thinking that last week when we heard about this week's challenge. Robin would have been an embarrassment in this challenge, and I didn't blame them for getting rid of her at that point. In fact, I wouldn't be the least surprised if it was the deciding factor (and the reason Tom stuck up for Eli's hideous dish - did you see the recipe? Ack.). I'd have done the same thing.

[Danny]

Danielle, I think that you are right. I think that it must bother the regular judges to kick off someone great because of one bad dish and let someone mediocre slide by. I would imagine that the Lisa experience might have pushed the regular judges over the edge. They may say that they don't take past performances into account but I think that for two episodes in a row past performance was taken into account.

Last week, Eli clearly had the worst dish. No one said that Robin's dish was inedible but 2 out of 3 judges said that Eli's was or close to it. My husband is a casual viewer of TC at best but last night he said that he'd feel terrible for Robin if she was in this episode. There has been too much hyperbole in dissing Robin's food - she does have a successful restaurant - but clearly the Bocuse is just not in the same universe that she is in.

And Tom is essentially admitting that it wasn't just about the food that was served that night. How could the judges guess that Kevin was best suited to the Bocuse unless they took past performances into account? And in doing that, the winner was picked not just not for what was on the plate in front of them but also for previous plates. I'm glad that Kevin won but it wasn't just based on one episode.

[dc]

After reading Tom's I don't understand why Jennifer didn't win.

Tom praised her garnishes, criticized her on technical mistakes with her salmon, but no criticism on flavoring. We heard mixed opinions of salmon doneness the table, some saying the salmon was perfect, others saying slightly undercooked, so we know her technical problems where slight. Tom also writes Kevin's lamb was slightly overcooked. So in my mind Jennifer's slightly undercooked salmon and Kevin's slightly overcooked lamb are a wash. But unlike Kevin, Jennifer got no criticism on being too simple. Which I thought would have flunked him on one of the core criteria of the challenge -- haute cuisine type complexity and sophistication.

Taken together, I think she should have gotten the $30k, win, and BO invite. I can wonder out loud if Kevin's being telegenic, his age, Jen's poor recent performance, gave him favorite points with judge. Even Kevin himself was very surprised he had won.

[Anne]

Can we never, ever discuss the Hershel Walker trade again? What's next, Bruno for Tommy Herr?

[jh]

I think Kevin's previous dishes help affirm the judges decision as the winner of the Bocuse d'Or challenge, but I feel that Kevin won because of the single plate he served. His dish was the best executed of the field, and tasted the best. The major ding was the simplicity. In the Bocuse d'Or, flavor accounts for 2/3, whereas presentation is just 1/3. If Kevin's flavors were tops and slightly faltered with the presentation and everyone else have better presentations but worse flavor, then given a weighted scenario, Kevin would still win.

The judges are also risking their reputation by allowing the winner of the EC a fast forward in the American Bocuse d'Or. I think Kevin's approach to the challenges and his ability to thoughtfully address the crazy situations yet turn out great dishes time after time helped put the judges minds at ease. If Eli had turned out the meal of his life and was able to top the other 4 in this particular challenge, I think the judges would be a bit more apprehensive. I think Eli has great potential, but he still needs a little more time to grow and hone his skills.

[paula]

DC: there's a huge difference between slightly overcooked lamb and undercooked salmon.

[timothy]

I really enjoyed this episode. There are some people who exude greatness, both as people and as practitioners of whatever craft they choose to master. Thomas Keller just came across as one of those people. I expected him to be an amazing chef -- my sister gave me a play by play description of her dinner at French Laundry -- but there was some intangible quality that he managed to display even on a short reality TV appearance. Or maybe I am just projecting upon him the qualities I wanted to see. Whichever, I felt like I was watching a truly good person share his ideas and skills with his peers, and indirectly, with us. Good TV. And now may I ask a food related, but not Top Chef related question? It is about Thanksgiving turkey preparation. For the past few years I have used Alton Brown's Roast Turkey recipe, brining included, and it has been great. This year for the first time, I have ordered a fresh turkey. Does one need to brine a fresh turkey? Can I treat it just like a thawed, pre-frozen turkey? Should I brine it for less time? I realize this isn't a turkey prep forum, but many of you all are great cooks and I would appreciate your advice. Thanks.

[rab01]

About past performance, I don't think that Tom says it never comes into play during the regular season. In fact, we have plenty of clips of them mentioning how a particular chef exceeded or failed to meet prior expectations.

The only place he has said that past performance never matters is in the finals where he uses a sports analogy -- a great regular season gets you into the playoffs but doesn't give you extra points during your playoff games.

Past performance doesnt save you if you have a lousy dish but if there are two equally mediocre dishes, it's clearly a different story.

[TxGriff]

DC- Tom was the only one who said that the lamb was slightly overcooked, and he didn't say that Kevin didn't cook it properly, only that it was slightly overdone for his personal preference. Gail said that the lamb was perfect, and the other judges at the table agreed. Some of Jen's salmon was cooked well, but other people said theirs was practically raw. That is not "slightly undercooked". The main difference here is that Kevin didn't have any technical issues with his cooking, whereas Jen did. Jerome Bocuse had an interesting quote on the TC site:

"But if you don’t have a solid foundation you can’t go any farther. It’s like a house; if the foundation is weak, everything will collapse after two weeks. In cooking it’s the same thing. Before you add the seasoning, push the envelope, go to molecular cuisine, or whatever, you have to be sure your base, your foundation, is strong, that the meat is going to be cooked to the proper temperature and so on."

Reading that, I think it's pretty clear why Kevin won. The judges couldn't even truly evaluate Jen's garnishes because the foundation of her dish, the protein, was not solid.

[jh]

Don't think it will happen, but I would love to see Thomas Keller on TCM.

[rab01]

"other people said theirs was practically raw"

Actually, the quote at the table was "mine's almost undercooked." And then Boulud said that his was perfect. Her slicing wasn't even and she (according to Tom) cooked it too quickly but it wasn't a total disaster. Kevin's execution, however, was by all accounts perfect.

[TxGriff]

rab- That's true, I've only seen the episode once, so I don't remember the exact exchange. I thought I remember someone saying that theirs was almost raw throughout. Regardless, my main point was about the execution. But thank you for clarifying the conversation.

[rab01]

I'm not disagreeing about Kevin's execution - he nailed it. I only spoke up because we don't have to exaggerate the others' "errors" to justify his victory.

[Shelly]

Actually, since Keller is trying to both raise money and get exposure for the American Bocuse d'Or competition, perhaps they could tempt him into going on TCM. ^__^

[Independent George]

Re: Jennifer - Traci Des Jardins said the salmon was "almost undercooked", and Daniel Bouloud said his was cooked perfectly. Later on, Thomas Keller said that his favorite component was the flan, but Daniel Bouloud answered that his was undercooked.

As a whole, the judges were split, but generally positive. Des Jardin liked the individual flavors, but the whole plate wasn't well thought out; Colicchio and Kacen agreed (he went so far as to say "the vision of the dish is at a dead end."). Another judge (I didn't catch her name), on the other hand, called it "one of the more interesting and impressive platters", and Padma called it "the most intriguing visually."

I think Bryan was the second-place finisher ahead of Jennifer, though. Even though he got slammed for undercooking the lamb (which he realized even as he was serving it), everyone understood and loved the concept of his dish. The consensus was that if he'd had more time to prepare, and executed cleanly, he probably would have won - so even though he had a more serious technical error, the conception of his dish was far better.

[Danny]

rab01, I hate to disagree, but over the past seasons Tom and all of the judges have very pointedly said that they don't take past performances into account and that they only look at the plate in front of them. That has even been said on the show itself. On one episode Tom alluded to a dish from a previous episode and Toby quickly said that they were not supposed to take that into account....they were only supposed to discuss and judge the plate in front of them. And in previous seasons I think that this has been true. It's the only way to explain Lisa being in the top 3.

This season, that concept has been less evident. It is the only explanation for the previous episode, ie, a too-firm Panna Cotta versus an inedible dish with the inedible dish winning and Kevin getting the Bocuse spot when Tom states in his blog that Kevin would be eliminated for his dishes but that they felt he had the best chance of going forward. Obviously this was based on past performances.

I have no problems with this but I think that the regular TC judges should state that their criteria has changed. Clearly they are now taking both past and potential future performances into account. If they were only judging on the plates before them, Eli would've gone home and Robin would've embarassed TC by being at the Bocuse challenge. They didn't want that and in spite of the stated rules of TC they made decisions that were based on past and future challenges. I have no problem with this but they should at least be honest and say that they are changing the judging criteria.

[Anne]

I think you're misreading Tom's blog. I got the impression that he was saying WHILE it wouldn't have lasted long in the actual competition, it was the best of the night. Some--Gail maybe?--said while everyone else at the table were evaluating things as if it were a Bocuse, they were looking at it differently. Kevin's food tasted the best.

Also, in the last challenge they were choosing a total failure of execution of something simple verses something with ambition that tasted gross. Tom actually liked the dish, and total failure of execution of something simple usually goes home.

[Kaytee]

@ timothy "Can I treat it just like a thawed, pre-frozen turkey? Should I brine it for less time? I realize this isn't a turkey prep forum, but many of you all are great cooks and I would appreciate your advice. Thanks"
I have been brining a fresh turkey for years, using Alice Waters' brining recipe, which, if you were interested you could find at the San Francisco Chronicle's web site under "best way to cook turkey" I'm not familiar with Alton Brown's method, but the time for this method is up to 18 hours, comes out wonderfully every year.

[timothy]

Kaytee, Thanks a million. That's really helpful.

[gilmore]

Here is an interesting interview (at least the first 25 minutes) with Laurine about TC.

http://wherefoodiesgo.com/guest/17/

[Bart]

Oh gosh! From Brian Malarkey's blog:

If we were to put a sound to our chefs this season what would if be? Michael would have to be modern with a cocky undertone and a backbone of righteousness – Kanye West! Ouch! Jen would be ultra talented with a self-depreciating anthem – Alanis Morissette. Eli would be the comically twisted with a jolly rhythm – Jack Johnson? And Bryan would be overly serious with a dark realization peering through the clouds into sunny tomorrow – Morphine. Let's just give Kevin – Blues Traveler for fun!

This is fun!

Let me add my own:

Kevin: The Beach Boys: Simple, upbeat, classic, appeals to all - but can astonish on a technical level (see: Pet Sounds)

Mike: Led Zeppelin: Darker, more complex, sometimes inaccessible.

Bryan: Pink Floyd: More restrained than Led Zeppelin (sometimes) but no less impressive

Jen: Rolling Stones: Started out great, but faltered dramatically after peaking

-------

I reserve the Beatles for Colicchio.

[paula]

Bart: Yours are WAY better than Malarkey's. Nice.

[paula]

...although I have to say, I like the idea of Mike as Kanye. "Imma let you finish, Padma, and Kevin, you cool, man, but I made the best terrine OF THE YEAR!"

[dc]

@gilmore: nice interview.

In it, Laurine says Michael V. told her he taught Keller how to sous vide! Having such a prior relation is a solid reason for Keller to recuse himself from judging, beyond just being too much of a nice guy to criticize the chefs.

She dishes interesting dirt about Michael V, who she says is in person even more prickly and arrogant and the snob 'artiste' than he appears on the show. He quit his job to go on TC when his boss wouldn't give him leave. OTOH, Michael V has to be on this season for the Voltaggio brothers to be a duo act. And I think MV is the type who does a bunch of job hopping to pick up his vast variety of skills and experiences. Makes me conclude the personal friction and contrast between the brothers is the real deal and not in the editing -- fascinating.

She badmouths Padme fierce. :P

She is really genuine and sweet and professional on interview.

[TokenOmnivore]

When Jennifer Norris nails a turducken, it's hit so hard the components revert back into fish.

[Independent George]

I'm way too slow; Paula beat me to the joke.

[George]

David, my inital thought on hearing the challenge was "Oh, so THAT'S why Robin was axed last week." I think they did it out of kindness, mostly...she simply would have been unable to perform.

[David]

Re: the connection between Robin's elimination and the upcoming Bocuse d'Or challenge, here's another telling line from Gail's blog:

"Eli did an extraordinary job and I am confident that none of the contestants eliminated before him could have done as well."

[Will Allen]

Michael V. claiming to be Keller's teacher is more pathetic than Roy Williams procaliming himself to be the Cowboys #1 receiver. On the other hand, I think it's admirable for someone to go out on a limb, and quit their job, to do something difficult like Top Chef. I don't care for him much, but he deseves his due; he has guts, talent, and doesn't shy away from work. Maybe he'll end up doing an interview while sharpening his knives in his driveway (sorry for the obscure reference to non-football fans).

[rab01]

Danny -- First of all, Toby is a _______ . (I'll leave it to others to fill in the blank; hey, maybe it can be a new parlour game).

Second, the judges have sometimes said that they are judging only the dish in front of them but they have also said things like "this chef has just reached the end of the road" and when two chefs have made glaring missteps, they keep the chef who made a bigger mistake (e.g., Blais' scales) over the one who doesn't realize why their dish failed (thereby showing a lack of knowledge).

We can see from Tom's own blogs going back to Season 1 that the most important thing is the dish in front of them but that he does not pretend not to be influenced by prior performance:

a) S1 - final four:

"But before I get into it, I'd like to say this: I wasn't at all happy with the outcome of tonight's show. I'm not even going to try to lie about it. ... Thus after a season of mostly generic and uninspired cooking, Dave - the weakest remaining hitter on the team - stood up in the 9th inning and sent one home. It was his Aaron Boone moment. ... If I had had my way, based on overall performance to date, we would have sent Dave packing and Lee Anne would have joined Tiffani and Harold in Las Vegas"

b)S2 -- Restaurant Wars:

"The judges analyzed which chef seemed to add the least to his or her team in terms of imagination, skills and overall added value, and settled on Michael. ... this contest isn't designed to reward personality, it's designed to choose the best chef."

c) And to support your point, when Tom was defending himself for sending home Tre over CJ:
"If I were writing a blog I would've titled it "Sometimes the Best Chef Doesn't Win" or something. We judge based on the performance in that episode. We all thought Tre was someone who should've been in the finale."

I think they are serious about the winner of an episode being the best dish and the loser being the worst dish but I also think that when they are looking at the losing dishes they are also looking at what the failures say about that person as a chef. When they think about that, prior performance does seem to come into play.

As for explaining Lisa's presence in the Top 3, she had an honestly good dish in the finale. During her survival streak, she was up against losers like Spike (of the frozen scallops) and Andrew (of the no-grain "sushi" rolls for cops). As for surviving against Dale (who should've been in the finals), Bourdain thought that his butterscotch scallops were revolting. Even if Tom had been there to take his past performance into account, I doubt Dale would have survived.

[crack]

Will Allen ends up commenting at all the websites I read. It is becoming a bit disconcerting.

[SorchaRei]

Michael V. claiming to be Keller's teacher is more pathetic than Roy Williams procaliming himself to be the Cowboys #1 receiver.

I don't particularly believe Michael's story as it's reported third hand, but I don't think that, on the face of it, the idea that a TC contestant could teach something to a revered chef is impossible. In fact, one of the most endearing moments of the Season 4 finale was watching Eric Ripert geek out learning about the uses of liquid nitrogen from Blais.

[Will Allen]

Hey, I pretty much only comment at this one (thanks Dom!) and FO anymore. I still have those pesky clients' phone calls to answer (darn it!), and I finally figured out that food and football have much classier followers than most other pursuits.

[paula]

I don't think we can take all of Laurine's comments at face value, either. (And I like that reminder of Blais and Ripert. That was cool.) I listened to Laurine's interview, and she's definitely harsh on Padma, saying how Padma can afford to eat at nice restaurants a lot, and she may have a good palate, but she knows nothing about being a chef and therefore Laurine had no respect for her opinion.

The problem with this is that she also slams Mike V. for cooking only for himself, and not for his guests, whereas she feels a chef's job is first and foremost to cook great food that people want to eat. So: If Padma indeed has a good palate, and eats a lot of great food regularly, why should her opinion not be worthy of Laurine's respect simply because she's not a chef?

[Will Allen]

Oh, I agree, ,SorchaRei. I just find it predictable and believable that Michael would want to inform people that he taught Keller something, whereas most people would be more circumspect about such a thing, in the same way that, for instance, someone, even a very accomplished someone, would be circumspect about talking about how he gave Tiger Woods tips about his golf swing.

[Ivan D.]

I think the reason why Robin got axed last week had more to do with the fact that she failed to execute on the challenge. Because her sugar piece didn't come out the way she wanted, she ended up serving up just a panna cotta, and a bad one to boot. What does a plain panna cotta have to do with the Bellagio? Nothing. Failed on both counts.

Eli's dish may have tasted terrible, but he at least was able to incorporate some theme for his hotel. One fail.

Robin: bad execution, failed criteria.
Eli: bad execution.

[gilmore]

Will - got the TO reference. Would trust him with knives as much as I trust Plaxico Buriss with guns.

Paula - got the feeling Laurine was referring to Padma's knowledge of what it takes to create a great tasting dish - the time they have, not being able to trial a dish, equipment, etc. Chef or not, I feel that Padma has been judging Top Chef long enough to understand the constraints, however, even if she is not a technician. Plus, she wrote a cookbook.

[Independent George]

I just find it predictable and believable that Michael would want to inform people that he taught Keller something, whereas most people would be more circumspect about such a thing, in the same way that, for instance, someone, even a very accomplished someone, would be circumspect about talking about how he gave Tiger Woods tips about his golf swing.

I completely agree. It's comments like this which makes me glad for my decision to bring you over here from FO.

Now excuse me while I clear out the driveway so I can code some Java.

[Will Allen]

HA!

[Cousin Sam]

I had liked the things that Laurine wrote in her blog, but in listening to that interview I thought she sounded pretty smug about the whole thing. And why in the world would you try out for a show like TC if you'd only seen once and didn't know or appreciate what it was about? I call sour grapes, and even if all the things she says are true (MV's arrogance, artificiality of the challenges, dissing Padma, Kevin & Jen crumbling in RW, etc), I've still lost repect for her.

And much to my surprise, I'm finding what irks me the most is that she said (something to the effect of) most people watch TC for the entertainment value of the personalities and the drama, not the food. I'm nowhere near being a foodie, but (in large part encouraged by the conversations here) I want to see them cook good food and be decent to each other. And if you're not in it to win it, then by all means stick to your little catering business and let someone who actually appreciates the show and its audience compete instead.

Harumph.

Go Kevin!

[Duffy]

Paadma's roll is curious. In the very early seasons, wasn't she just the hostess -- introducing guests, explaining contests and announcing who must ppkag? When did her roll chage to include making critical comments at JT and, I assume, voting?

[Lou_NJ]

Padma's credentials include an early Food Network show - Melting Pot (which had various host chefs for different cuisine's (hers was obviously Indian)) and she has a cookbook or two to her credit. I don't know of any professional cooking credentials other than that. As a food writer/presenter is her experience much different from Gail's (not known as a chef) experience - both bring valid points of view to the show. I like that the show has a balanced panel of judges.

I wonder what Jerome Bocuse gave Kevin to read. The 2 best (of many best) books to read are Tom C's Think Like a Chef and Keller's The French Laundry - how he deals with food (think rabbit) truly elevates the art.

[Dawn]

Cousin Sam, I definitely agree about Laurine. She made it sound like she's above Top Chef or something. Don't compete then, woman!

Also, she keeps contradicting herself in order to paint a better picture of her time in the competition. For example, she said in the first 10 mins or so in that interview, that being a chef is more than just cooking; you have to know how to delegate, how to manage & organize the crew/kitchen staff etc. Then 5 mins later, commenting on her demise during Restaurant Wars, said that this is Top Chef, not Top Floor Manager or something. Seriously?

The funny thing is I kinda like her own the show, especially how classy she was when she was eliminated. But Laurine has become such a sour grape AFTER the show that it undermines any good thing she has done on Top Chef.

[dc]

I don't think she is being sour grapes. She is being refreshingly frank. Sour grapes to me is someone who revises history to improve their own image or psyche. Her accounts are consistent with other contestant interviews outside TC editing filter. I do remember a second flash of Kevin admitting responsibility for ruining her RW lamb at JT. Mike I. confirmed the core of Laurine's account of Jen's RW problems in a non-bravo interview.

Her distaste for TC competitive format also comes down to gender personality difference. Taking joy in ranking and elimination portions of competitions is more commonly a testosterone driven social trait. That's one reason TC needs to goes out of its way to recruit enough talented female contestants -- along with there are just fewer elite female professional chefs. I think Jen asked to participate by Ripert. Eve was invited by TC to try out.

[Naomi]

Hey, food nerds :-). Just wanted to let you know: it's a boy.

Now that that's out of the way, on to the finale!!

[jh]

Naomi,

Congratulations! At least he was polite enough to come in between TC episodes.

What if TC did a challenge sponsored by Gerber?

[SorchaRei]

Naomi: Congratulations!

Gail Simmons attended culinary school at the Institute of Culinary Education. She interned at Vong and Le Cirque. I believe she worked under Daniel Boulud when she was at Le Cirque. Her "chef" credentials are quite a bit more substantial than Padma's.

However, I don't agree with Laurine that this makes Padma a poor judge, and I think Laurine undermines her own case when she says that the point of being a chef is to please the customer (she says this as part of tearing down Michael V.). Padma has a good palate, is a knowledgeable cook and eater (even if she's not got experience on the line), and she has eaten at a lot of restaurants. She is similar to a lot of people who eat at high end restaurants. What's more, she has undoubtedly been to a lot more catered events than most of us will ever have to attend. She's right in the demographic that Laurine claims a chef should be aiming at, which makes Laurine's dismissal of her ridiculous.

I think that's what I dislike about this interview with Laurine. She wants to diss Michael, so she makes sweeping statements about how chefs should be judged. She wants to dismiss Padma, so she makes contradictory sweeping statements about who should be allowed to judge chefs.

And yes, I do think there is some sour grapes there. She's revising her rules about who and how to judge professional cooking to suit her dismissal of two different people. Either Michael V. is right not to care about the experience of the eater, or Padma is qualified to have opinions about chefs' work. She really can't have it both ways.

Finally, if Laurine doesn't like hierarchically-based "ranking and elimination portions of competitions", then she should not have competed in this one. It's sort of like someone revving up to compete in the Bocuse d'Or, not winning, and then complaining that the Bocuse d'Or is biased towards people who do a certain kind of cooking. Why, yes, it is. If you don't like that kind of cooking, don't enter it. If you enter it anyway, because you think that the possible benefits to you outweigh your distaste for that kind of cooking, you don't get a free pass from me later to complain about what kind of cooking is involved. Ditto with Top Chef.

[SorchaRei]

By the way, on that last point, I do give such a pass to Season 1 chefs. No one knew what TC was in those days. However, anyone who agrees to go on TC season 6 can't reasonably make the same claim of having had no way to know what she was getting into. The only way you could have been ignorant was to agree to do something without bothering to inform yourself about what it was, and that's on you, not on the show.

[paula]

Congratulations, Naomi!

[gilmore]

Congrats Naomi. So is his name Kevin, Tom, Bryan, Michael, Stefan, Richard, Fabio,,,,,,, or Dom??????

[TaNo Sirianni]

Love you for making the voice of Guybrush Dominic! please contact me by facebook if you want, i'm a big fan of you.

Greetings from Argentina!!

[Duffy]

You guys are missing the point of Laurene's comments in her interview. Her critical comments are TAME when measured against half the stuff thrown around on this blog. She didn't say one thing in her interview that hasn't been said before, numerous times, right here. More important, she was talking introspectively -- and retrospectrively -- in response to some very provocative questions from the interviewer.

It is clear that she did not like some aspects of the competitive atmosphere -- but I did not read this as sour grapes -- just that she had never cooked in competition before, and did not enjoy it all that much. On balance, I thought her comments went both ways. She did recognize some good times and valuable experiences, and indicated ambivalence on whether she would do it again.

I thought it interesting that she dived into the tryouts without investigating the show -- but then, it was what it was. Apparently, she was encouraged by others, it sounded interesting, and she was up for a new challenge. What's to criticize here??

Every chef up there has said in so many words that they did not think they deserved to be tossed off at the time it happened. Laurene is no different from any of the others. I thought it came across as irony rather than sour grapes that it was for FOH failures and not cooking.

I also thought it interesting that she was led to believe that the level of competition would be line cooks and sous chefs -- based upon what she had been told during the tryouts, and that she was taken aback at the level of competition that actually presented. But then, weren't we all?? While we all were happily surprised -- the steep curve must have been a considerable shock to many of the potential MOP'ers.

I though it also interesting that no one has to actually cook for anybody during the tryouts! Everyone gets in on their resumes and their personalities at the casting call.

On balance, I thought that Laurene presented a very fair and frank discussion about her personal impressions on the show -- that she met new people, some she liked, some she didn't; that she has many experiences to relate, some good, some disappointing; and that she came away with some valuable insights into herself and a renewed sense of purpose in her profession. What's to criticize here?

[gilmore]

Re the Laurine interview - the lag time from when the show is shot and her exit interview to the interview on her web site is considerable. During that time, she has seen the episodes leading up to her PYKAG moment. I would guess that seeing the comments from the other chef's that she was not aware of while on the show, the judges discussions, time to look back and reflect/simmer, etc. all lead to a different view of what went on vs. her view several months ago. I would think this is the same for all of the departed chefs.

[Will Allen]

I thought (although I may be misremembering it) Eli's exit interview was very impressive, in that he seemed to acknowledge that the remaining contestants deserved to be there, and that he had lost fair and square. That is not easy for someone like Eli, who is obviously talented, driven and competitive. It isn't the first time that losing revealed more character than winning likely would have. To use Robin's phrase against her, I think Eli's parents raised him pretty well.

My respect for Laurine plummeted when she essentially quit during Restaurant Wars. For her to not explain the dishes to the diners, because she wasn't happy with the way things were going, is no different than the chefs back in the kitchen not sending food out, because they were similarly unhappy. If you commit to a task, finish it, your feelings be damned.

[SorchaRei]

I thought it interesting that she dived into the tryouts without investigating the show -- but then, it was what it was. Apparently, she was encouraged by others, it sounded interesting, and she was up for a new challenge. What's to criticize here??

What I find to criticize here is that its unreasonable to dive into something you chose not to investigate and then use your ignorance of what you dove into as an excuse.

That's not "I decided to do something about which no information was available and it turned out I did not like it". It's not even "I have never done a cooking competition, but I watched old episodes and it looked kind of fun, so I tried it, only it turned out I didn't like it at all". It's more like "I chose not to find out for myself what TC has been in the past, and to rely on other people's advice without doing any research, and now I am not taking any responsibility for finding myself in a situation I did not like at all."

Yes this season's chefs are more advanced than previously, but that's not her only complaint, and all the other complaints are something she could have informed herself about had she taken responsibility for herself. I just don't see any awareness of that in her interview.

There are other parts of the interview where I do think she showed self-awareness, but the whole TC experience is not one of them. And as I mentioned before, I'm not a fan of her using one set of criteria to criticize Michael V. and a contradictory set of criteria to dismiss Padma.

I agree with Will Allen that Laurine did basically quit on the job during RW, and that she has only herself to blame for her elimination. No, it's not "Top FoH", but she told Tom she knew what her job was, and then she failed to do it. The job of the FoH person in this year's RW included expediting, which is something chefs are supposed to do, and she didn't do it at all. She didn't offer even the judges a description of the dishes. She let a broken sauce past her. The FoH person doesn't have to be perfect to get a pass in RW -- but this was not a few FoH issues. This was a total failure along with a major contribution to a failed dish as well. She blew it, and she let it happen. Yes, it's too bad for her, but again, I'm just not seeing any acknowledgment that she has any ownership here at all.

[Independent George]

The other thing is I don't actually believe for a moment that she really didn't understand what was involved in Top Chef.

For starters, even appearing on TC is a huge, huge, huge career booster; simply appearing on the show represents a HUGE boost to your marketability. I don't believe for a second she didn't realize what an opportunity it was for her, and that she didn't do everything possible to prepare for it.

Second, the shooting schedule is for a full month. There's no way anybody decides to go into seclusion for a full month, and signs what I imagine is a 50-page television contract, without figuring out what's involved.

[Cousin Sam]

I think there are ways that someone can express their point of view about the show and the people involved without sounding so dismissive, even if there are aspects about which the contestant didn't feel were wholly positive. I didn't get that impression from Laurine's interview. Which is fine - she has an opinion, she expressed it (to a pretty suck-upy host, I might add), and probably doesn't care too much about what other people think. I just think it's a shame she undid for herself the respect she gained from some people who were otherwise rooting for her. Like I said before, I liked her blog entries and found those to be a lot more insightful that that interview was. JMHO.

[karenology]

Goodness, that host was so obsequious I had to turn off the interview midway through. It did make me laugh when she insisted that Mike Voltaggio wouldn't last in her kitchens. I'm sure he's crying himself to sleep about it.

[paula]

I agree, Karenology. That host was uber-irritating. I just remembered something else from that interview that struck me as surprising: Laurine used Gail as an example of someone who is so nice and sweet in person, but then "not nice at all" behind their backs. I always thought Gail's comments to be the most constructive and least harsh of anyone's.

[TxGriff]

I don't know why there is such extensive discussion of Laurine's interview. She didn't interest me on the show, and she doesn't interest me now. She's full of contradictions- Mike V. is a jerk for not catering to his diners, but it's ridiculous that Padma should be allowed to judge her food. She didn't want to do ANY research about the show, but she's upset that it wasn't what she "expected" it to be. She says Gail is two-faced, but she spends a good part of her interview bringing other people down. She thinks part of being a chef should be staying organized and knowing how to lead a kitchen, but she's upset that she was sent home over her poor FOH performance. Hearing interviews like this makes me appreciate some of the other interesting, thoughtful and intelligent contestants that still remain.

[natmicstef]

I think there is such extensive discussion on Lauren's interview because there's really not much else to discuss. I found the host of that interview rather scary; she certainly seemed to have an axe to grind about Michael Voltaggio. The man has real talent for goodness sake and this is not Top Man and I admire him for his skills and talent, he doesn't have to be wonderman too.

[natmicstef]

sorry for spelling mistake; Laureen's interview

[Independent George]

I just remembered something else from that interview that struck me as surprising: Laurine used Gail as an example of someone who is so nice and sweet in person, but then "not nice at all" behind their backs. I always thought Gail's comments to be the most constructive and least harsh of anyone's.

That comment bugged me, too - it seems that what she was objecting to was the fact that Gail was acting like a critic. Which is, um, kind of her job.