Top Chef - S8E11 Postmortem

Ugh. Ugh ugh ugh.

Let me get back to this.

"Anyway, you have to say this for [Richard]: he always seems to be making somebody's dish great, even if it isn't always his."

Even when it isn't on purpose!

Seems like the Dale gut punch was about the only thing that could take the focus off Mike. You guys know I tend to shy away from piling on unlikeable characters, but... what the hell, let him have it. Low and shameless. Brutal combination. Guess we have our villain for the finals. We'll talk about it more next week. Though I disagree with the suggestion that because this incident was featured, that means they're setting Mike up as the villain and he'll be in the finale. There's no way that little controversy wasn't getting full exposure no matter what happens in the final three episodes.

Dale. Man. It hurts on two levels. First, because I've always liked Dale, even when he wasn't especially likable. But he really seemed to be making a genuine effort to be a better person, he had the fire to win, and he was really killing it. The guy had won more than a third of the challenges all season leading into this episode (contrast with Angelo who, while perhaps equally talented, had won two). That's gut punch number one. Then I get to thinking about how two weeks back, I thought to myself that a finale featuring any three-way combination of Dale, Richard, Angelo, Carla and Antonia would make me happy. And it was looking like we'd probably get that. And now the only way that happens is if Tiffany and Isabella go 1-2 the next two episodes. Fingers crossed.

More next week. Gonna go sulk now. Danielle's link about sums it up for me.

Discuss!

P.S. -- So for the stats, who the hell do I give the quickfire win to? Isabella? Blais? Antonia? I feel like I should make a poll out of this.

Comments

[Dan V.]

I think we need to have a complete list of what constitutes CHEF LAW.

[Danielle]

http://www.art4kids.com/images/all/Storybook/07031-Aaugh!.jpg

[Maxx Antonucci]

That was the most frustrating elimination ever. I'll be sulking and moaning in the corner for several days over this one.

GGAAHHHHH!!!

[TxGriff]

Two painful eliminations in a row. Again, can't argue with the decision, but that was rough.

Richard seems to be picking up steam though. Antonia too. Carla...seems to be losing some. Come on Hootie!

[Krazikarl]

Dale, unfortunately, often got in trouble when he had to go outside his comfort zone. He nailed challenges in his zone, but he just seemed to have too much self doubt when he didnt like the challenge as much.

Its too bad because it would have been very interesting to see what he would have done in the finals.

[Tim]

Wow, what a shame. That's the game though, and I'm sorry but I don't buy Dale's complaint that the kitchen was too crowded, he's cooked his way through that many people before. It's just too bad, this whole season was turning out to be a Dale redemption. When they mentioned how strong the crouton flavor was, I cringed, I knew things weren't boding well. And Carla mentioned how bad the pressure was on her specifically, that's not that kind of attitude that's gonna help you win.

[matthew]

I'm exhausted. The very thing I feared happened, for both Carla and Tiffany. I'm sad to see Dale go. I really liked his style and appreciated his growth since Season 4.

[topchefrules!]

well, that was a tough one. looking ahead to final, with two of the best chefs, in my opinion gone, you have to wonder who it will be. Antonia and Richard seem to be locks, at least at this point. But who else?? To me it seems like Mike will be the third, and that just doesn't sound right. He definitely is not #3 this season, but I guess that's how it goes.

[Cheryl]

Hated to see Dale go but...Isabella needs to go...Didn't like him in his season...don't like him now..don't think he's that great as a chef...I'm sure he's better than most but this is the guy who did braised leeks for a vegetarian challenge thinking they looked like scallops so he was ok. Vegetarians have limited choices...leeks that look like scallops but don't good just don't fill the bill. I think he's limited and without inspirational chefs around him, he'll be limited.

[Alex]

I know this is how Top Chef works, I remember Lisa, and I remember Hosea winning, but how the hell is Tiffany still there?! She has now been on the bottom of 6 QFs and 6 ECs. That's pathetic! If she wins how can they possibly call her Top Chef with a straight face?

[Anon man]

matthew, please take one of those week-long vacations with Carla starting tomorrow and come back refreshed. Or, just make a few cocktails.

I never was enamored with Dale as much as some, but the guy is clearly talented. I really thought it was Tiffany.

I'm a white guy who loves collard greens and loved Carla's needle at Tre. Good stuff.

I know the comment explosion will happen soon, so I'll drop this nugget: I think I picked up a pattern in the interviews that I think I know who wins. And, we'll leave it at that. You'll have to believe me if I say I'm right in a few weeks. I'll certainly admit if I'm wrong.

[Nicole]

Anyone else think Tiffani F. deserves the credit for Mike Isabella's top 3 placement?

[HF]

@Nicole, a lot of it, yes. And his sound bites were super grating this episode.

[pottymouth princess]

That was the second week in a row that Tom prefaced his toss to Padma with "One bad dish will send you home." When he said that, I knew Dale was toast.

Isabella was made the new villain tonight, so I imagine he sticks around for the finals and Tiffany gets knifed next week. Blais had every right to be pissed about what Isabella did. Not cool; it sounded like it was straight up Richard's recipe. I'm glad the tables were turned in the EC.

I weep for Antonia. A win that was disqualified and coming up empty yet again in the top 3. Now that Dale's gone, I'll put my money on the Hammer. I think the near misses are lighting a fire under her butt; I don't remember her dishes being so sophisticated during her season. I'd eat pretty much everything she's made and I can rarely say that.

One more challenge, Carla. Don't totally fall apart on us now!

[Joanna]

What Danielle said.

If Richard goes home next week, I just might lose it. Dale clearly messed up, just like Angelo did last week, but the two of them seemed to have the potential for higher highs than most of the remaining chefs, and I'm really sad that we won't get to see what they're capable of in the finale. Siiigghhhhhh.

And Mike had been growing on me this time around - I really did not like him in his own season - but you don't violate Chef Law. I don't know how much of it was editing, but just as the quickfire started, he said: "I think people will fry chicken, or people will fry oysters, but people aren't gonna fry the chicken oyster."

Which, after the challenge, was followed by...

"Richard thinks I stole his dish from him, but I've seen it done before."

Soooo it was a brilliant idea when he was trying to claim it as his own, but once he was giving Richard a little bit of credit, it was nothing special. I'm not impressed.

[ri]

I will miss Dale, but I feel like as often as he busted out amazing Asian dishes (and they were quite amazing) the rest of his food always seemed meh. While I would probably make his grilled cheese and cookie at home, I wouldn't really care to eat it elsewhere.

[jw]

bummer, bummer, bummer...for the second week in a row, one of the best chefs gets eliminated for being over-tired and overwhelmed....seems like the pressure is really getting to some of them.

In happier news, looks like the cheftestants get visits from friends and family next week - does that mean we get to see you, Matthew?

Even happier news - Dom, glad to hear everyone's at home, safe and (hopefully, getting there) sound!

[Scott]

I like Dale a lot. But I often feel as if we've graded him highly throughout the season. I don't think he's as talented as Angelo/Richard but he's smarter. I'm sad to see him go but I think I'm fairly immune to strong chefs leaving all-stars. With a few tears and a bit of regret, I must say i am not looking forward to the finals.

I'm sure cooking for 300 people is extremely difficult, so I feel really really selfish because I was hoping for great food for a relatively open-ended elimination.

The elves running a Richard might be eliminated subplot really makes me sad too.

[LB]

I know I should agree with Angelo's philosophy that if someone outlasts someone, they deserve to do so. And if someone wins this season, they deserve to win by outlasting everyone else. But of the people remaining, I'm just not enthusiastic about anyone winning. Not even Richard who hasn't impressed me once this season.

And I'm sorry to say this, crazy and illogical as it is, but a win at the end hardly feels earned without Angelo and Dale being there to compete. Mentally I get that it's not the winner's fault they didn't make the finale; it's Angelo and Dale's fault. But my gut says it doesn't feel right. I'm not even making sense...this season has me so disoriented.

[Jon Olsen]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAA
AAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Kyle]

Isabella made himself the new villain several weeks ago. I know other people thought it, but this is the second week in a row that he's said "really? you?" when the person eliminated comes back into the stew room.

I really just want Tiffany to have one good week before she goes home. She did really well last season, and I'd hate for her long, mediocre run this season to overshadow that. You can call last season a weak season, but she still overshadowed a strong chef, Angelo, for several weeks.

[Steve F.]

Devastating...I don't know what my interest level will be for the final now. Two of the five major players now, gone. That means either Tiffany or Mike goes to the Bahamas. Carla's losing steam, too. Boo.

[HF]

Richard and Antonia heading into it with 3 wild cards right behind them? I'm not worried about my interest level dropping just yet.

[Beatrice]

"I'm keeping my white shrimp" is definitely a candidate for best Top Chef quote ever.

[Nikki L]

Yea, I get the whole "one bad night at a restaurant would keep me from going back" reasoning for not having cumulative competition be taken into account - but if everything I went to a restaurant it was mediocre, I probably wouldn't go back there either.

[dc]

I was shocked by Dale, even more that he went out on a fish soup. I didn't think Dale elimination had anything to do with his being an Asian specialist stepping out of his box. The Asian soups Dale has done highlight the proteins, not mask them with spices. So I'm like, WTH happened?

How much was because of Angelo. Angelo was picked last by Dale. Did the remaining contestants know something about Angelo's state of mind and tastebuds, to not pick Angelo? Did Angelo provide the spice mix? Angelo got eliminated on over seasoned potato soup last week (1 or 2 days ago in real time). Dale gets eliminated on overwhelm spiced under-cooked potato soup. Coincidence, or Angelo's fingerprint?

[Nsam]

A very interesting show, and I have to say that for this episode the drama and the quips, not the food, were front and center for me. "Check his NAACP card." Oh my god, I was dying laughing, Carla is a gift that keeps on giving.

I was laughing hard all the way through, until the elimination, of course. Yeah, Angelo and Dale are two disastrous eliminations in a row. Really takes the shine off of the finals.

[Independent George]

Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. Worse than being elimination is the feeling of not really understanding how it happened.

Is it my imagination, or did it seem like Mike also get a top mention in the EC by letting Tiffani do all the work? I've defended him in the past, but not anymore. Worse than the plagiarism is the fact that he wouldn't even own up to it.

[Independent George]

Ok, I really enjoyed Bourdain's mini-blog, which echoes much of our comments.

"Anthony Bourdain is semi-conscious in Connecticut, but sad to see Angry Dale go. Managed to mutter that he enjoyed the congestive heart disease theme of the Quickfire Challenge before slumping to the floor, babbling Not Dale! Not Dale! Nooooooo!"

[Sweet Sue]

Team Antonia all the way.

[gilmore]

Sad to see Dale go. I don't think he is a one trick pony (Asian). He won a lot or was in the top with many non-asian dishes.

Dale saved Stephanie in the finals with his chicharrones after her pork was ruined. Maybe he will be a finals-savior for someone else.

If spouses/family are on the next episode, than Matthew has been hiding the results as much as Carla - he knew she was not eliminated on the last two episodes - unless they have a family reunion for all who were on the show, including those who were eliminated and do a great editing job.

If it looks like an asshole, sounds like an asshole, smells like an asshole and tastes like an asshole, it is an asshole. Marcel is an asshole. It is not the editing.

[Bart]

Hoo boy. When Tom said, "There's one dish that stands out [as the worst]" (or something to that effect), I knew that whoever was getting eliminated had no chance.

Isabella, wtf.

Speaking of Marcel, he apparently has his own show on another channel now. Discovery, I think. All about MG, of course.

Carla was freaking hilarious in this episode. I actually wasn't too worried about her at JT - I thought it would come down to either Tiffany or Dale.

What a bummer to see Dale go. Angelo could have won the thing and he got eliminated. Dale could have won the thing and he got eliminated. Richard could win this thing...will our worst nightmare come true next week? Will we be Angelo-less, Dale-less and Richard-less in the finale?

[Elf Bait]

If Richard ends up losing in the finale, he'll be stuck for life with the choke tag he gave himself.

[Wangus]

Not going to comment on the EC. I knew it the moment they mentioned the potatoes. Too heartbreaking.

Re: the quickfire win. You still gotta give it to Mike, Dom, as much as people might not like it/him. His dish certainly was a bit of intellectual dishonesty, but Richard didn't execute Mike's dish. We can't guarantee that if Richard tried to make that concept, that he wouldn't have screwed it up in some way.

Ignoring Antonia is harder. BUT, Antonia didn't complete the rules in the allotted time. In the end, it's akin to Richard in the first challenge. Although it certainly seemed like a mind fart, we can't say for certain that things wouldn't have been different if she had focused and remembered the second plate. There are too many variables (especially considering we only see what the elves show us) to be certain otherwise.

[Anon Man]

On the Chef Law theft thing. I'm not sure if you're kidding, Dom, but I don't see how you don't give the win to Mike. He cooked it, he won. There's tons of examples of semi-theft/aping/homage to previous dishes or famous chef dishes, or a chef helping someone with an idea and then that person wins, etc. Yeah, Atonia gets the nod for the shouldof-couldof, but Richard almost got the same thing when he went over time. So to use two sports analogies: 1) If you get DQ'd it doesn't matter if you win the race; and 2) If the ref doesn't call the penalty, it isn't a penalty.

Of course, Mike may have to atone for his actions elsewhere like in Chef Court.

[paula]

First off, glad you're writing from home again, Dom. Hope the wee one is feeling much better.

I didn't see that elimination coming at all. Wow. That hurt. I'm not Dale's biggest fan or anything, but I still expected (and wanted) to see him in the finals. And both this week and last, seeing Angelo and Dale cry and choke up--so rough! It feels almost personal.

I'll play devil's advocate and suggest you give Antonia the QF win. Her error was simply in plating. I'm sure she made enough that she could have plated them both (don't they all make several dishes' worth, so they can choose the prettiest ones to serve? I would). And Paula emphatically stated that Antonia won the challenge. It's not like other similar incidents, when it wasn't clear if the contestant would have won if they'd followed the rules/not run out of time/whatever. She simply forgot to plate two.

I thought this was a solid episode overall, though, despite the devastating JT. Isabella: What more can really be said? As he was describing that dish to Paula, could it have been any clearer that the concept had "RICHARD BLAIS" written all over it? Wow. Mike knows he effed up, though. His interviews were so lame, guilty, and grasping at straws to save face, but he knows he acted like a worm. Screw him for not admitting it outrigh. Pathetic.

And as long as Richard and Antonia end up in the finals, I'll be satisfied. It really feels to me like this competition is his to lose, though Antonia is going to put up a hell of a fight, and I'm psyched about that. I'd be thrilled if either of them won. Carla, honey, as she said: Redemption is slipping away. I hope she can spring back next week. I kind of suspect she will. Poor Tiffany. She's a better cook than she's shown this season. She needs to go home and enjoy her newlywed status properly, and relax for several months.

[nomnomnom]

Dale has had just as many wobbles as anybody. And I got sucked into him thinking that once he could cook his own food he'd have just as good a chance as Blais or better. With Angelo gone I thought he was at least safe to give Blais a run. Oh well.

I guess what sunk Dale was the portion count, and serving the judges last? (I always wonder if they do the edit in the order of serving). Cooked potatoes and less mustard and we would have probably been done with Tiffany.

EXTREMELY MINOR SPOILER ALERT

Those that caught the run-up to this season know that there is something *ahem*missing* about the next episode. I didn't notice the former champs in the previews at all. If for whatever reason they don't appear in the show then this is not the last episode in NYNY.

[mncharm]

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

[paula]

Fantastic blog from Dale on ew.com. Though I disagree with his take on Isabella:

http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/02/24/top-chef-all-stars-episode-11-blog/

[Independent George]

Thanks, for the link, Paula. I particularly liked this section:

I’m thinking about running that Elimination dish here [at Buddakan] on Thursday as an amuse bouche and flipping it completely. I would’ve done an sashimi of amberjack, taken that andouille sausage and turned it into an oil, crisped up the sausage like a crouton, turned that oil into a powder , [used] a little bit of that powder as an accent, and then the holy trinity as a garnish — diced onions, diced celery, diced peppers, pickled that and then a little blackening spice on the fish. I would’ve then seared the fish à la minute to seal that spice on. I wouldn’t necessarily go back and change my old, poorly judged dishes. Those dishes are like your drunk uncle who shows up at Christmas. He gets into a huge fight and causes drama.

[Skillet Doux]

"I'm not sure if you're kidding, Dom, but I don't see how you don't give the win to Mike."

Mostly.

[El Paso Mark]

Well that sux (Dale elimination). Regarding Mike and the Oysters, I'll have to watch the start of the QF again to verify but weren't Mike and Richard sitting around going through Richards notebooks, and in the QF Mike says says something to the effect of "I saw this (Drawing?) in Richard's notebook (Or discussed this with Richard). I could be wrong but it seems like he (Mike) gained prior knowledge of the oyster dish either by Richard discussing it with him, or out of Richard's notebook.

Cheers,

Mark

[Sweet Sue]

Dale saved Stephanie in the finals with his chicharrones after her pork was ruined. Maybe he will be a finals-savior for someone else
Stephanie didn't need saving and it was Dale who ruined the pork by not putting it in the fridge as he was told to do.

[BK]

I'm very curious to hear actual chefs weigh in on the Blais/Isabella "chef code" thing. Dale points out in his EW blog that Blais didn't invent that dish, and he pooh-poohs the "chef code" notion (and Dale and Richard and good friends). On Twitter, Michael Voltaggio appears to come down on Isabella's side, too (I say "appears" because it's possible I'm not reading his 140-characters correctly), and suggests that Richard should have been happy to "inspire" another chef.

But as we've seen over and over, in both his seasons, Blais is probably the most generous chef in the show's history, in terms of sharing ideas and helping out (and in S4, even giving one his prizes - cash? - to Stephanie). No doubt Richard would have shared the idea with Mike had Mike asked, and likely wouldn't have objected had Mike asked. It was more the manner in which Mike took the idea, it seems to me, than the fact that he did take it.

[Mogleymama]

Long time reader, first time poster. Mike I(ICK)are you kidding me? At least give credit where credit is due. Your "original" idea was to make a leek look like a scallop (poorly I might add). You seem to be at a loss unless you have someone else to lean on. Tiff with the grit covered scallop's, Angelo before he left, the Volt brothers etc. Your an okay cook but not a top chef! Admit it! There is nothing wrong in admitting that you need others inspiration to carry off anything new. Some people are not creative. Get over yourself and be the copy cat that you are!

[paula]

Making suggestions for how to cook an ingredient you're unfamiliar with is one thing; having someone steal a **concept** like this one--which Mike had just been shown that same morning--is a completely other story. I don't think we can say for sure that what Mike did was actually "Blais's dish"; maye it was just the idea of making the chicken oyster look like a real oyster and plating it on a shell. But that concept and presentation were so instrumental to the success of Mike's dish. And it doesn't matter if it's been done before, as Dale suggests. What matters is that Mike wasn't inspired by what he'd seen on a menu somewhere else, he was "inspired" by the personal notebook of one of his competitors. Bad, bad, bad form. There's no way around that.

[Polybus]

Dom, I think you have to give the QF win to Mike, even though his manner of taking the recipe was appalling. As BK said, if he'd just asked Richard, I'm sure that he would have received permission. Just taking it from Richard's notebook and running with it is the act of a weasel, but he did execute it and Antonia, like Richard in the first episode, did not meet requirements.

Going into this episode, I had Dale ranked third because of his inconsistency (which also plagued him during S4) so I wasn't so much surprised by his performance as I was by Tiffany managing to skate by yet again. The way it was edited, I was also almost certain that Antonia would get the win - I was very surprised when it went to Richard.

I agree that it is very disappointing to have two of the best competitors gone before the finals. I'm just truly hoping that Richard, Antonia and Carla survive next week. And much as I now dislike Mikey, I would much rather have his skill in the finals than an uninspired Tiffany. She was so much better last season.

Also, Richard did mention before they started choosing sous chefs that he didn't think that he would want to work with Angelo because he had just been eliminated and was probably shaky psychologically. And I do give props to Mikey for passing second choice to Richard.

[matthew]

What's the old aphorism? "Good artists copy, great artists steal." I think BK may have hit the nail on the head with the idea that Richard's rub was that Mike ran with an idea from his book, as opposed to talking to him about it first. Someone pointed out on Mike's Facebook page that the chicken oyster dish was done by Chef Morimoto on Iron Chef; so....

I think the principal objection (Chef Law chatter) is because it came about in the context of a competition. The inference is that Mike would not have created that dish without culling it from Richard's notebook. Therein lies the rub. Was it, as Mike said, simply being inspired by something Richard said or noted in his book, or did Mike boost the idea entirely from Richard? Dale's blog piece doesn't make it any easier to discern. Dale said that Mike, flat out, indicated that he got the idea from Richard's book, yet stating that the fried chicken oyster idea is hardly novel. I think the troubling subtext to this discussion is the suggestion that Richard is the only one (remaining on All Stars) that could have conceived something "clever" like the fried chicken oyster in an oyster shell. Honestly, that doesn't necessarily scream Richard to me, but perhaps more so when thinking of the other competitors. I suspect had Dale pulled out that dish, no one would have thought he wasn't capable of thinking up such a dish. Who knows?

I do agree that this dust up does add a villainous or, maybe more appropriately, a showdown vibe between Blais and Isabella. Looking at the history of Top Chef seasons, this type of tension is hardly uncommon in the run up to the finale.

[Janet]

Creative editing or factual reporting? The proof is in the pudding: Isabella goads Antonia about the $5000 QF prize that should have been hers and Blais is taking Fabio to Barbados to share the EC prize. Seems to me the elvish editing might be spot on. Isabella is a tool. If he makes it into the finals, I might just sit in a corner and cry.

Godspeed, Dale Talde. Was not a fan of Angry Dale, but Centered Dale is one cool cat. Very sad to see him go.

[HF]

Dang, "chef law" is kind of blowing up Google today. Is "There's man law and then there's chef's law" today's meme?

[HF]

I really shouldn't misquote Carla...

"There is man law and there is chef law."

*fixed

[Natalie]

Carla wanting to check Tre's NAACP card cracked me up, as did his stoic "I'm a city boy" face. Especially since I'm a country white girl who grew up on greens and chow-chow. Yum. I'm very sad the pressure got to her and I hope she can pull herself out of the death spiral.

Mike I, whatever. Done with that guy. Even if Richard's pouty-face kinda made me laugh, it was a jerk move.

I'm not a chef-type person, so I don't always catch the pacing issues, but why would you try to make stew in batches when you (1) have potatoes, which take quite a while to cook through and (2) have 300 freakin' people to serve? I don't get it.

[Andrew]

"Is it my imagination, or did it seem like Mike also get a top mention in the EC by letting Tiffani do all the work? I've defended him in the past, but not anymore. "

While I understand why people may be mad at Mike for the QF, I can't get behind this rationale for the elimination challenge. The idea that he wasn't doing the work came from another competitor (Antonia, I believe), and was shown with some quick edits. I'm not saying Tiffani didn't do the work, but there's not really enough evidence to suggest either way.

And I'm really bummed that Dale's gone.

[Skoolie]

Shocked! You know Dale is a winner in my eyes even though he missed the finale. He won more than a third of the challenges racked up some nice prices and he also did something I never thought he could ever do. Learn from mistakes. I went into the season not liking him putting him near the bottom because of his temper.

But the dude has matured into a wonderful person and chef. I'm glad he was able to get redemption and he will be missed in the finale.

[Independent George]

Andrew - it's also the four-second clip of him planning with Tiffani, and who seemed to be basically telling him exactly what they should do. You're right, though - it's wildly out-of-context, and completely out-of-character for Mike to just let someone take over. I'm willing to chalk this up to the editing monkeys, but that was the overall impression I was left with (probably by design).

[Skoolie]

You could go back and forth on the Mike situation. I don't think it was all that cool of Mike to do but I wouldn't call it stealing. He took the idea of the dish and executed it. So I do agree with Dale and Mike V on it.

Chef's borrow ideas from other chefs all the time and it isn't like Mike ripped the page out of the book.

Richard is just as guilty in oversharing a concept, which Mike executed. As Dale pointed out its not an original Blais concept either Blais got the inspiration from somewhere else as well. It's hard to tell how much of the Blais spin Mike may have put on it.

Blais had a right to be a little upset, I just think he took it a little too far. Had Mike been in the bottom of the QF and not won I don't think Richard would have been as sour. Richard is extremely tough on himself. He strives to be the top and gets down when he isn't

[Independent George]

Lost in the Mike debate is the fact that Richard is apparently OCD; it does make me wonder why he keeps leaving scales on his fish, though...

[Mogleymama]

If Richard really was OCD, I think he would of moved further away from the fart blowing, beer belching, bugger picker Mike in the stew room! Antonia - move away and save yourself!

[matthew]

Apparently?! LOL! I can laugh because that's me, too. Carla sometimes calls me Percy -- short for persnickety.

@Natalie - I also cracked up when I heard the NAACP quip. Over the years, I've had a few friends jokingly query the authenticity of my card, because of an occasional disconnect with certain iconic cultural references, so I could relate with Tre and laugh at myself.

[bryanD]

Okay, I'LL say it. These people can't "cook". There.

"Chef Law"? a complete non issue, 1) because The House and the stew room are 24/7 reciprocal "ideating" (a Blaisism!) zones, and 2) Blais cannot prove he invented "his" own dish. All Blais can credibly say is that he showed Mike a notebook and Mike was so gauche as to pay attention, which might be chalked up to the hazards of Blais and his well-established professorial tendencies.

[Alamos Road]

"Gonna go sulk now." Now you know how I felt last week. I think I felt worse about it than Angelo did.

But time heals all wounds. The Mike I fans will have to wait to see if time wounds all heels.

Give the quickfire win to Antonia. Mike I gets to keep the cash; I'm sure that means more to him than his Skillet Doux weekly ranking (no offense meant).

[cb]

"So for the stats, who the hell do I give the quickfire win to?"

Nobody. Just skip it in the count

[ally]

I agree Mike did a Chef Law don't.

A Man Law equivalent would be - ok, just because your friend shows you his little black book, doesn't mean you call his (ex)girlfriends. Unless you're a jerk.

Dale's claim that the chicken oysters on the half shell - I don't see it anywhere on the net. Or in Ideas in Food specifically. Or Google images (except a picture of Isabella's dish). Maybe it's one of those ideas that is so simple it seems obvious and that someone did it already. But I don't see any evidence for that.

[ally]

I meant to say "Dale's claim that the chicken oysters on the half shell have been done before"

[wallfish]

Someone mentioned on a previous post about the "sad eyes". Dale totally had sad eyes during his interviews.

*sigh*

Poor Dale, but I do think his showing this season is going to be what people remember in every positive sense. And may be a reason why future employers will ask for a urine test.

As for Mike I, that was poor form not giving Blais a nod for the inspiration. But, he did execute it well. I don't think what he did is going to win him any congeniality awards and $5k is a poor exchange for the respect of your peers. But he should probably get the point for his execution.

[Genevieve]

Respect of his peers and of his potential diners, wallfish. I was planning on trying out his new restaurant, and have been giving him every benefit of the doubt because I loved his cooking at Zaytinya, but I now have zero desire to give him any of my money. I'm not going to his restaurant, I won't be recommending his restaurant, and I know other local foodies who feel the same way. So he may have shot himself in the foot for his 5 Gs.

[bryanD]

Just re-watched the episode on Tivo. I will amend my remarks to say that only HALF of the remaining contestants can't cook.
1)I can't find "chef('s) law(s)" on Google. (OK, I only checked one page. Time is mon..er, Time.) Under "chef etiquette" the meaning of "when in doubt, imitate your superior" could be stretched to fit Mike's purpose. Hey! It's an unwritten law versus a winning dish. Advantage:dish.
2)Mike DOES acknowledge Richard's idea. 15 minutes of the episode is overlaid with Mike's situational apologetics. Mike also PERSONALLY acknowledges it Mano e mano by secret chef sign language code during prep. Blais directly ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT of this message by way of secret chef sign language code himself during prep:
Mike: [wink.nod.wink-wink]
Blais: [wink.head-wag.nod] (check the video!)

PS I wonder what the ratings were for this episode. Certain persons who deliberately "don't keep up with" Top Chef are coming over later to bask in Paula Deene wisdom and sayings. Go figure.

[ally]

@bryanD: acknowledging you stole someone's idea doesn't make it OK !!!

I'd like to give Isabella some extra secret sign language with one of my fingers.

:)

[Genevieve]

What ally said. Plus, the cherry on top was Mike's unseemly nasty gloating, to both Antonia (about her not plating two dishes, so he got the money) and the talking head to/about Blais ('it's my dish because I won the 5 G's'). He demonstrated a complete lack of integrity. And funny, the other chefs seemed to recognize that and be horrified, so it's not just Blais being mad.

Someone in another forum said Mike has now made it clear that he's the kind of guy who would cheat on his taxes, or pick up a piece of fish that dropped on the floor and re-plate it for an unknowing diner. I don't care if there's no "Chef's Law" on google, I'm not interested in giving him my money for his food.

[bryanD]

@ally: That's funny. But really, Richard wants it both ways. He's an evangelist and then he's pretending to mind his own business. BUT! He LET'S MIKE HOLD AND READ HIS BOOK---go to video!----on a cooking show with a $250,000 prize. I call this fight a wash. They can BOTH go on their way or they can both get detention, suspension, swats, whatever. (Frankly, I think Blais was surprised his generosity bit him due to under-rating Mike. Add that to Blais' adoration for The Interview process and the further opportunity it gives him to SHAPE THE NARRATIVE---remember, according to Blais, All-Stars is "My Season", Part 2. Think: Gospel According to Luke + Acts of the Apostles. A continuation.

A good word for Blais: I think I'm beginning to understand his MG strategy: "STAY AS FAR AWAY IN JUDGES' MINDS FROM THE OTHERS AS POSSIBLE".

[LaLaura]

I hate it that Dale was eliminated, but as long as Carla made it through, I'm happy. And, Paula was not bad at all. Was she? lol Matthew, I hope you make an appearance on one of the upcoming episodes. My husband already thinks i'm coo coo because I say that I hang out with a celebrity chef's spouse. Of course, I don't mention that it is on-line and I mostly just lurk. lol My fingers are crossed that she makes it to the finals.

[ally]

@bryanD: I did indeed see the holding of the book. I think Richard is very pleased with himself, as IMO he should be. That he is so naive as to think that someone who is on NATIONAL TELEVISION would STEAL HIS IDEA may seem to you to be TOTALLY RIDICULOUS.

Me, I'm constantly surprised by people, because i still, at 40+ years old, expect others to adhere to my personal code of conduct. Like Richard, I may be TOTALLY STUPID, but there it is.

[ally]

I meant to say "wouldn't steal his idea".

I need to proofread :)

[Rahul]

The Blais/Isabella issue isn't about the recipe; it's a matter of trust. What Mike did was wrong, but only because he probably damaged his personal/working relationship with Richard. I'm sure that, if asked, Richard would point to other recipes that led to his chicken oyster dish. He lives to riff on and mutate established flavor profiles/ingredient combinations/recipes/whatever. Isabella simply cheated by presenting the answer (and getting away with it). The work Blais put in, just to create a rough idea for his notebook, wasn't there as a backbone for the dish. Not an issue when you're out in the real world, thieving recipes left and right for your own restaurant...I mean, who's going to know or care? There should be a greater stigma when you're dealing with people in a competitive setting, but again, there's nothing that Richard could do except let it go (begrudgingly). Life can be crappy sometimes...

[Chris Hennes]

Blais has commented in the past on issues of culinary plagiarism outside the narrow bounds of a cooking competition: http://egullet.org/p1153527

[Bart]

Funny that people keep mentioning the sad eyes. I don't even notice. I'm hearing impaired, so my focus is either on the closed captioning or their mouths.

So I can't tell by "sad eyes" but I have picked up other verbal cues. For example, when the judges all but said that Dale's dish was inedible, I knew that was it. And the way the judges talked about Carla's dish, I don't think she was ever in any real danger of going home.

[bryanD]

@ally: I HOPE YOU DON'T THINK I WAS YELLING AT YOU!

:-)

But really, I suspect a wee bit of show biz all around. The stars of Top Chef are akin to an improv troupe. People get loose and try to be newsy. They're selling themselves. That's Mike's punishment if what he did was too evil to be counted as clever. (This is much less personally egregious than what was pulled on Alex during the "pea puree" controversy which even Tom Colicchio was happy not to clear up even though the answer (Alex:Innocent) was clear to people with a DVR.)

[ally]

@brianD: I know your style by now and don't take it personally :)

I agree it is TeeVee and not to be taken seriously. However, what Isabella did was really beyond the pale IMO.

[Nsam]

"If Richard really was OCD, I think he would of moved further away from the fart blowing, beer belching, bugger picker Mike in the stew room! Antonia - move away and save yourself!" Oh God, Antonia's suffering expression as she endured the farting, belching Isabella was priceless. My 2nd favorite moment of the night, after Carla's NAACP card-check remark.

They were in rare form last night. A riotously entertaining episode. Plus, some of the food looked pretty good, too.

[Kenny]

Dale was definitely a fan favorite (and didn't Bourdain send him home way back in the day?) And Angelo was definitely a fan favorite. Big losses.

But as Richard put it (last week?), you only have to win the last one to win.

I would have loved to have tried Antonia's two dishes this week, especially the crab cake with macque choux.

Going to be an interesting several weeks coming up, Top-Chef wise.

[Kenny]

Also, and I wonder if this had anything to do with it, Isabella did say that Tiffani had lived in New Orleans for two years. Being from NOLa, a lot of people try to make dishes that end up being parodies of local cuisines, rather than simply preparing good food.

[Independent George]

Chris - wow. How did you find that link? This was March 2006, even before, I believe, his Iron Chef appearance.

[Chris Hennes]

@Independent George: I'm the Director of Operations Technology for the organization that operates the eG Forums, so I'm pretty familiar with our content over the years :).

[Joanna]

@Chris Hennes, thanks for that link. I know it was written 5 years ago, but this seems so prescient:

"It's OK to do a cover song, just give credit. At Blais we would often say, " in the style of " and now if we feel that we get too close we will call the dish a "remix"

To straight out copy, without giving credit, and know that... That must be a real creepy feeling."

My guess is Mike did actually have that creepy feeling, and it showed in some of his comments (for example vacillating between the idea of doing something original vs doing something that had been done many times before). But his ego was too big to actually apologize to Richard, or to stop him from doing that dish in the first place.

It's especially interesting because Richard was talking about copying/stealing/etc in a general restaurant context. The competition aspect of it makes what Mike did that much creepier, in my opinion.

[nic]

good job by the magic elves editors to create a preview that seemed to point to some sort of redemption challenge

on to the episode it seems that tiffany had a bit of a better episode this week and just happened to have served a weak version of her dish to the judges. (ie. comments about sweetness, her saying that marcel didn't dilute the glaze)

and dale. good job. wish u could have stayed longer but it did seem that u were genuinely the worst this week.

[Liz]

I enjoyed the beginning of this season but started losing interest around the dim sum episode, I assumed because the challenges were getting silly instead of interesting. But I think now my problem is not with the challenges so much as it is with the format. A chef with 4 quickfire and 3 EC wins is gone and a chef with no wins and several finishes in the bottom is still there. It may make a good game, it may make good TV, but it's not so good at determining who in the group is the best chef.

[Bart]

By the way, gang - Tom C's blog is up. He's not making a big deal out of this Isabella thing. He ain't bovvered.

[tennischef]

Let's see:

I'm not your bitch, bitch
This is Top Chef, not Top Scallop
There is man law and there is chef law
Check his NAACP card

I need more coffee to remember anymore

Add this to chef law list:
Never touch another chef's knives

[ally]

Bart, Tom says that legally it wasn't stealing but it was poor form on Mike's part. From Tom, I think that is pretty unusual, because i'm trying to remember the last time Tom has criticized a contestant on his blog. I think he even defended Jaime.

[JJ]

"I enjoyed the beginning of this season but started losing interest around the dim sum episode, I assumed because the challenges were getting silly instead of interesting. But I think now my problem is not with the challenges so much as it is with the format. A chef with 4 quickfire and 3 EC wins is gone and a chef with no wins and several finishes in the bottom is still there. It may make a good game, it may make good TV, but it's not so good at determining who in the group is the best chef"

Liz: I agree. There is virtually no reason (except the financially-fueled one) to have a whole season of competitions if the idea is simply to ignore history and past performance and judge solely on what food is presented on a given day. Moreover, as you say, how does this actually and legitimately determine who is "Top Chef"? It's bad enough that the producers/judges insist on this rule during a regular season of the show, but particularly galling on a season of All-Stars. (I would also add that the absence of any real innovation to the All-Stars season – the only change is the return of former contestants and larger cash prizes – has simply made the new season feel, as it goes on, a bit tired and played out.) I would never have believed, at the start of the season, that Tiffany or Mike would be in the final 5 (rather than Angelo or Dale or Tiffini or Jen, etc.). And the sad thing is that Tiffany and Mike didn't prove me wrong and show they deserved to be top 5. Tiffany, in particular, has not done a single remarkable dish the ENTIRE season. Every week she says "it's time to bring it" and each week she ends up either MOP or, more likely, in the bottom three. I know people will point to Lisa as a precedent for this, but I find it particularly inexcusable that such a thing could happen during an All-Stars season. Sad.

[MH]

"2)Mike DOES acknowledge Richard's idea. 15 minutes of the episode is overlaid with Mike's situational apologetics. Mike also PERSONALLY acknowledges it Mano e mano by secret chef sign language code during prep. Blais directly ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT of this message by way of secret chef sign language code himself during prep:
Mike: [wink.nod.wink-wink]
Blais: [wink.head-wag.nod] (check the video!)"

@bryanD - Are you watching the same show as the rest of us? Blais says "I'm trying to get him to look at me - but he won't". Then he finally does and Richard gives him the stink eye wink! Then Mike goes on to bash Richard for being a baby and a loser because he knows he pulled a scum bag move. All Blais did is acknowledge that Mike is an a-hole!

In an earlier episode Mike bashes Blais for helping people, (people who acknowledge his help and don't call it inspiration) and then he in poor form steals his idea because he obviously doesn't have any of his own. If he were to go in this challenge with his own inspiration (wink, wink, nug, nug, say no more ;) I'm guessing he would of fried leeks and called them scallops because he wanted them to look like a protein! So in Mike's world it is okay for Blais to inspire him, but none of the others because they might surpass Mikey.

Richard all I can say is I hope you didn't let Mike look through your entire book! I'm with all the others who wouldn't eat in his restaurant even if Jen and the Voltaggio's cooked for him.

Oh and by the way, (By Mike I rules) I am going to NJ today to pick up the car he won. He showed it on TV and talked about it, so I guess I can claim it as mine! (Wink, Wink)!

[Rahul]

@JJ @Liz

But how much weight could the judges put on past performances? One Get Out of Jail Free card if the chef is exceptional for the most part, but blew one dish? A pass on an ethnic food challenge because they've shown themselves to be competent with the associated flavor profiles/techniques in the past? I think their decision to focus only on the challenge at hand is less about making good TV and more about making judging easier (which already takes hours from what I've read). I'm guessing that past performances do actually factor into their decisions, in that one judge (or more) will stand behind a particular dish based on their overall experience with the chef's aesthetic/style (i.e. soul). Granted, the Top Chef title loses some of its value if someone like Tiffany is actually in contention. But who here actually thinks she'll end up as Top Chef?

[Liz]

"Granted, the Top Chef title loses some of its value if someone like Tiffany is actually in contention. But who here actually thinks she'll end up as Top Chef?"

I didn't expect Hosea to end up there either. I apologize if that seems mean-spirited.

Anyway, I don't know what the answer is. If the chefs were judged cumulatively, there would be fewer surprises and therefore less drama and therefore perhaps not "good TV". As JJ pointed out, the title "Top Chef" implies the best chef. Maybe they should change the name of the show to "Last Chef Standing". I have less interest in such a show because I want to see the best chefs duke it out in the finale, but that is just a personal preference. At the end of the day it's a business and they will do what they believe will get the greatest amount of viewers.

[bryanD]

"@bryanD - Are you watching the same show as the rest of us? Blais says "I'm trying to get him to look at me - but he won't". Then he finally does and Richard gives him the stink eye wink!"---MH

You're leaving out Mike's wink. Signal SENT by Mike. Signal acknowledged by Richard albeit in a perfunctory manner. Real kid stuff. Post-girl rivalry reconciliation. They'll be fine now.

"He showed it on TV and talked about it, so I guess I can claim it as mine! (Wink, Wink)!"---MF

Among the early All-Stars onscreen chef title cards was one: "Richard Blais, owner, FlipBurger". Was this EVER true?

[Nikki L]

@Rahul - My thoughts when it comes to cumulative judging is that if you are in the bottom 5 episodes in a row, then that should be taken into account if you're in the bottom a 6th time (not saying these are the real numbers, just an example) and you should probably go home. If you're in the bottom 5 times in a row and the 6th time you make a great dish then you got yourself out of the basement. There is no reason in a competition like this, someone should be allowed to skate by. Even the Lisa comparison isn't justified, she at least won one challenge.

On an unrelated note - anyone else notice how they skipped bringing back Jamie or Casey and went straight to Spike? I wondered what the reason was for that...

[DPP]

Is everyone forgetting that when Mike gave Richard second pick of the seafood/sus chef for EC he said "He was an inspiration for my dish today"? I'm not saying Mike wasn't wrong for copping Richard's idea, but let's acknowledge the acknowledgement.

[MH]

Richard said he stole my dish, not my idea. Just shows Mike is feeling guilty for being such an ass-hat!

[mncharm]

I don't mind that the best chef might not win. Not unlike sports, the champion isn't necessarily the best team...that's what makes playoffs exciting.

I can understand wanting a different system, but that's not what this show is. If it were about picking the best chef, it seems to me that contests like this are a pretty poor way of doing it -- why not just go test out a bunch of restaurants?

[jh]

@mncharm: Not unlike sports, the champion isn't necessarily the best team...that's what makes playoffs exciting.

I actually disagree with this. When you have a playoff system when a teams has to play a best of 5 or 7 series multiple times to win a championship, I believe those teams earn the right to say that they are the best team. Even for March Madness or the Superbowl, if a 6 seed wins the whole deal, they have a strong case to say that they are best team even if their regular season record doesn't say so. Cinderellas and upsets happen, but if you win 5 or 6 straight games it's not just pure luck that you're winning. I would have said George Mason was the best team if they won as the Cinderella in 2006. (BCS 'winners' have no right to say they're the best.).

The one thing with Top Chef and some of the other reality talent shows is the mindset. You don't need to win every week (like the playoffs). You just have to be better than the loser.

[mncharm]

As a fan of the 1987 Twins -- which is my favorite team of all time -- I can assure you, the best team does not always win. Which isn't to say they weren't a deserving World Series champion -- they won it fair and square, and no one can take that away from them.

But over a 162 game schedule, they won 85 games. 85! Their #3 pitcher was Les Straker, for pete's sake. There is no reasonable argument whatsoever that they were the best team in baseball that year.

Same with the 2007 Pats -- one of the best football teams of all time, in my opinion, but didn't win it all -- or the 1980 Olympic team -- probably would have lost 9 of 10 to the Soviets as Herb told us in Miracle, but they won the one they needed to win.

[Polybus]

@mncharm - thanks for the playoff reference, I was just going to post on that. I seem to remember a certain undefeated team beaten by a Wild Card in the Super Bowl. "On any given day..." and all that. TC is like a sudden death playoff in that regard.

But most of us have known that since Season 1 and we're still watching and talking! :-)

@Liz "Maybe they should change the name of the show to 'Last Chef Standing'.

This is actually a very good idea. When I think of my own personal rankings of the chefs, it has very little to do with who is still here. The best chef is not determined by a narrow set of challenges designed to stress the cooks and bring in the most viewers. Determining who is the best chef is a subjective process, especially to us who have not been able to taste the food of all of the chefs, who cannot determine the chef's knowledge based upon a few facial expressions and who cannot determine creativity from viewing a beautiful plating.

However, I trust the judges to make each EC challenge decision honestly, based on dishes judged head to head. And - like a sudden death football game - the best dish moves its chef onward and the worst falls aside. At the end, you do have a Last Chef Standing.

It is apt.

[Independent George]

Now that we're back to sports analogies, I would note that in football & basketball, matchups are more important than "overall" talent level (and in football, coaching/game planning is about as important as matchups).

[anne]

Just a happy nod to mncharm for the 87 Twins reference. Sweet music!

As for TC lines, "I'll take the white shrimp," has to be up there.

[Chris Hennes]

Statisticians have actually examined how many games would have to be played to guarantee with reasonable certainty that the best team actually wins the championship in normal league play. For Top Chef, starting with a field of 16, it would require over 4000 head-to-head matches (with single elimination it can't be done at all, of course). https://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/26763

[Sprugman]

One way to make the cumulative record matter would be to have a point system. Something like:

- QF top mention: 1 pt
- QF win: 3 pts
- QF bottom: -1pt
- EC top: 3 pts
- EC win: 6 pts
- EC bottom: -3 pts
- EC loss: -10 pts

Chef with the worst record goes home each week. (The exact point values to be adjusted based on some simulations, obviously.) I would do this till the finals to create a playlets affect.

The first half of the season wouldn't change much because no one will have built up many points yet. It would change a LOT of dynamics in the second half, though, not least, the PYKAG moment.

[Sprugman]

err... "Play-offs" effect. Stupid auto-correct....

[paula]

"Playlets." hee. I love autocorrect.

And my favorite TC quote is "Oh! I forgot FLAVOR!" Runner-up: "I could serve monkey ass in an empty clamshell."

[Independent George]

Playoffs? Don't talk about - playoffs?!!! You kiddin' me? Playoffs?!! I just hope we can win a game!.

[alamos woman]

I think a competition billed as 'All Stars" would benefit from some kind of seeding. Perhaps a seeding at the beginning of an All Stars season based on previous performance would seem to be appropriate. Perhaps with a reset at midpoint. In a variation on the TCM scoring, that seeding could result in a percentage of a total point score with the majority of the points coming from Judges' Table on that particular challenge. I am sure the game theory experts can create this more elegantly.

While it would not protect us from mediocrity, I think it might (experts?) protect quality from the one-time goof.

Mike - to have to justify your action is to admit your mistake. Justifying meaning to 'bring back in line with." In this case honorable behavior.

[alamos woman]

Oops - Sprugman already said it and I missed reading the last few comments before posting. Apologies for the etiquette error.

[JJ]

Just to add another 2 cents to the cumulative/non-cumulative judging debate (to the other 2 cents in my previous post): It seems to me that the "All-Stars" season would have been an ideal venue for the producers to experiment with a different judging system – something like what Sprugman outlined above. It would have created an additional level of interest to the judging and a different kind of psychological pressure on the contestants. Instead, the producers just "super sized" the series with bigger cash prizes and trips, etc., but without changing anything in the format, a format which is looking a little weary and played out IMO (and the producers are clearly running low on new and creative ideas for challenges; the challenges have gotten bigger and more convoluted, but also dumber). A change in the judging system *only for the All-Stars season* could have reinvigorated the way challenges are organized and evaluated and also allowed the producers to pay tribute to the quality of the contestants.

As to the baseball analogy: I just want to say that while I agree that the semi-finals and finals should be based on what the chefs present on a given day, the competitions leading up to the finals should not. In baseball, a team cannot consistently lose and make it to the semi-finals and finals and win because they've been knocked out of contention prior to this stage. In my view, making the bottom three of the EC is equivalent to a loss. Thus, in baseball, Tiffany would never have a chance to make it to the playoffs, and rightfully so. Being in the MOTP and the bottom of an entire season should NOT allow one to qualify to the finals – especially in an All-Stars season.

[Danny]

Hoo, boy. Back from doing comedy on a cruise ship and 2 very interesting episodes to watch and obssess about. I don't see how they could possibly judge anything than the last dish they ate. First off, if it was cumulative, it would preclude ever having any guest judges (except for the first episode) or a semi-regular like Bourdain who can't make every taping. Second, they are already spending somewhere between 3 and 6 hours doing the judging. Imagine week nine as the judges have to go over all 9 dishes that all the remaining chefs had cooked in the past episodes. This would undoubtedly lead to rehashing what had already been judged and a lot of second-guessing as well (was that Lamb I had 24 days ago really all that good....I'm actually remember the other chef's veal more now).

Forget who loses, who wins each week? Chef one has a poor track record but made a great dish this one week. Chef two has a great track record but made the second best dish of the week. Yikes.

For most diners, it is what have you done for me lately? Unless I know about some big extenuating circumstances, if my friends have a bad meal at a restaurant, I don't care that it was good in the past.....I'm going to be pretty reluctant to return or to recommend it. Tough, but true.

I was sorry to see Dale go, but was it that big of a shock? Not really. He delivered a salt bomb during Fallon week and had served other problematic dishes as well during this season. It isn't like he had served astonishing meals week after week and then suddenly tanked. And that last dish looked like a mess. Never thought out properly and with new things being plopped into his soup that was going to be dumped on that poor unsuspecting fish. I'd love to eat Angelo's food but he seemed to be fairly limited once we left Asian cusine. Baked potato soup was a good idea? Really????

[Sprugman]

Danny: each episode could be judged on its own merit by guest judges. The outcome of that judging would depend on the accumulated points. To be the most impartial, the judges wouldn't know the relative standings in detail. (the regulars would, of course, have a sense of who they'd seen a lot on the bottom.) there could be a computer that takes into account the deliberations and then announces the chef who's going home.

I'm not sure that would make for a better show, but it would fun to see how it changed things.

[Nikki L]

I don't know that an official point system is needed but if someone is consistently in the bottom, then it should be acknowledged when they are doing eliminations.

As for the sports comparison - it doesn't really work here because Tiffany would have never made it into the play-offs. A team that has never won a game shouldn't be in contention for anything. There is no system where that would ever happen. The sports argument could be made for Mike though. He hasn't been in the bottom too much and he's had a couple wins. He's definitely not the best but he hasn't made many critical errors that would merit being sent home. He's just relatively weaker. That's the kind of scenario where an upset is very possible.

[ally]

Richard is far and away the leader now, with the most wins and has been in the losing group the fewest times.

This means he's probably out this week.

:p

[rab01]

For anyone who also watches Project Runway, which used to also be produced by the Magic Elves, cumulative judging doesn't have to be all that complicated. The PR judges regularly mention contestants' prior efforts in their assessment of who stays and goes - even though they too have guest judges at every challenge.

That said, I think there's nothing inherently unfair about ignoring prior performance so long as the contestants know the deal going in. I'm only upset by its lack when they eliminate someone I wanted to watch for a few more episodes.

[Nikki L]

@rab01 The Project Runway judging is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. When they are thinking about who to send home, they definitely take into account who is regularly in the bottom and who they look forward to seeing more work from. That doesn't mean you're always safe if you seem "exciting" but it means one bad garment (or dish) won't send you home if you're otherwise regularly doing really well. A Great collection (or menu) with a couple of bad items is still better than a mediocre one.

[mncharm]

"As for the sports comparison - it doesn't really work here because Tiffany would have never made it into the play-offs."

I give you college football.

[Polybus]

@Sprugman Point System

I couldn't help putting it to the test for All Stars. (Top Chef obsession meets Excel obsession.)

There was no effect at all until Restaurant Wars. At that point, if Sprugman's point system were in effect, the bottom three would have been Marcel -2, Antonia -4 and Tiffany Derry -7. Tiffany would have been sent home and Marcel would have stayed.

It's impossible to project past that point, with Marcel in the competition and Tiffany gone.

But under this system, Richard has now led five weeks, Dale four weeks and Angelo two weeks (the first two weeks). Going into this last episode, Dale was leading with 44 points, followed by Richard with 39 points. Following the episode, Richard was leading with 49 points, Dale was second with 30 points. He would not have been eliminated on a point system.

Just projecting based on points, the current order would be (approximately) Richard, Dale, Carla, Antonia, and Angelo.

[Nikki L]

College Football doesn't have playoffs and bowls are chosen based off of games won and conferences. Yes, sometimes relatively weak teams go to better bowls and the system isn't perfect, but you still have to win at least half of your games to qualify. Once again, Tiffany wouldn't come close (think Washington State) and Mike could sneak in and do better than expected (think Washington).

Yes, I am a Pac-10 person...

[ally]

I do like Project Runway's way of judging, thinking "do I want to see more of this person." I think that TC is very dogmatic in getting rid of the weakest dish this season. If the chaff rises to the top (mixing metaphors, sorry), I think they will just defend that and move on as usual.

I agree with Nikki, high highs and low lows can be much better than "bleh who cares."

[jh]

Toying with an idea akin to Sprugman's, and haven't completely thought it through:

What if every episode, the judges ranked all the dishes from favorite for least favorite. Points based on where you place, either straight 1-n pts for n dishes or something more like NASCAR with weighted ranks if you finish in the top 3. Person with the least number of points leaves (or most, depending on how you do the points).

This could provide a different kind of drama for the judges having to rank the dishes.

[Sprugman]

@polybus, I was hoping someone would do that. :)

[Sprugman]

(And I love the fact that RW was where the points started to kick in. That feels exactly right to me.)

[mncharm]

Not a perfect analogy, but it's close. The regular season in college football is essentially the playoffs -- go undefeated and you have an argument to play for the national championship...even if you faced lesser competition all year.

In Top Chef, under the current rules, unless you're eliminated, you essentially won that week. There is nothing that puts Tiffany ahead of Richard at the moment. She wins this week and she's going to a BCS bowl, whether she has performed as well as others or not.

[Nikki L]

I would actually say that if you end up on the bottom you "lost that week" and that someone with as many losses as Tiffany would never make it in. Otherwise you're bending the rules of a game where there is only 1 loser out of a big group to fit one where 50% of people lose.

[rab01]

A cumulative point system might be more "fair" and would certainly reward the better chefs but I think it risks having a couple of episodes every season where one of the bottom chefs basically quits in the middle of the episode because they know there's no way they can make up lost ground.

I did not like what happened during the first TC Masters season when they cumulated the "stars" from the quickfire with the stars from the elimination. I thought it threw Moonen and Besh off their games knowing that they realistically couldn't survive the round.

The PR judging system would be fine with me but I think Collicchio would be against it because he sounds annoyed enough discussing the current claims of bias in the judging. Since his integrity is mentioned by various insiders as the basis for trusting the integrity of the show, I'm against any change to the judging system that undercuts that.

[Danny]

The analogy with Project Runway doesn't really work. The PR judges, including the guest judges, are given access to the contestants' portfolios of the outfits that were designed for the competition and tapes of the runway shows. That is not possible with TC - certainly not for guest judges and even for permanent judges, memory fades and it seems to me that it would be very difficult for a judge to compare a dish they ate today with one they ate 30 days ago.

[Jeff]

"I do like Project Runway's way of judging, thinking "do I want to see more of this person." I think that TC is very dogmatic in getting rid of the weakest dish this season. If the chaff rises to the top (mixing metaphors, sorry), I think they will just defend that and move on as usual."

That's almost there. Unfortunately that can create a bias in judging, where favorites stick around because a judge likes them.

My fav show with judging was Scream Queens on VH1 (10 girls vying for a part in a horror movie). They really did, from week to week, think about what the girls were accomplishing cumulatively with an emphasis on what that particular week's challenge added to their entire work-in-progress. Was this girl showing improvement and/or did they show us anything astonishing that could have called this performance (bad/good) into judgement? They would even state during judging that if they were eliminating based on work from that week a certain girl would have gone home.

In the end, in both seasons, the finales represented the best actresses there. In both, I thought any one of them could take it.

To me that created the best judging evironment. It avoided the whole American Idol, Project Runway concept of I'm interested in seeing more which can keep horrible people around due to personality biasing and Top Chef's elimination strategy of do your best every week, which eliminates risk taking and emphasizes chance.

Also, Top Chef's elimination strategy is almost economic modeling. It only works if people don't act like people ([many] economic models only work if people are always making the correct financial decisions). Top Chef assumes that chefs will always shoot for the top and execute to the best of their ability. However, many chef's solely work on sticking around (not always to their knowledge) and many make human mistakes.

[Polybus]

@rab01 "I think it risks having a couple of episodes every season where one of the bottom chefs basically quits in the middle of the episode because they know there's no way they can make up lost ground."

This is an excellent argument against the point system. In the scenario I worked out, Richard would already be assured a spot in the finals and the battle for the remaining three spots would be decided in this next episode, with Antonia, Carla, and Angelo hoping for another big mistake from Dale, who would only have to avoid losing the EC to make the finals.

But I still think it's an intriguing concept. And Sprugman really has the QF weighted correctly in relation to the EC. I really like it as a system to play around with.

Now watch Tiffany win LOL.

[Danny]

Jeff, I must guiltily admit to watching Scream Queens and I also liked the judging criteria. I even Netflix'd (it's "Anything is a verb day") the Saw Movie so that I could see the winner do something gruesome with her arm. Face/Off on SyFy also goes in a dierection similar to Scream Queens.

[bryanD]

I could have sworn I had solved this judging problem of ours already. :-)

The answer is in a blind judging system. Each dish is brought out accompanied by a 3x5 card with the dish name or description typed on it. As the judges do their thing, all the chefs stand and observe the tasting and comments via closed circuit television in the next room where the contestants can moan, groan, and squirm. Visible shows of support---or lack thereof---amongst the reacting chefs would supply more "drama" than all the Bottom-3 firing squads lined up in row.
After the tasting, the judges deliberate and the contestants go back to the stew room and commiserate.
For ceremonial purposes, the winning and losing dishes can be brought in and dramatically uncovered Chopped-style. Padma can then tell the losing chef to get the fudge out.
Note that this system provides the contestants with plenty of useful intelligence through the observation of the tasting and critiquing process, which would logically promote a higher level of performance---or interesting failures---all around.

[Jeff]

bryanD: I like the judging system in theory but, however, I feel the best eliminations are when the judges are able to speak to the chefs and ask them, "have you realized what you have done?" When a chef is unable to contemplate why their dish is not good or what good have made it better, they should be leaving. I like that criteria. Excepting the "inedible" eliminations, they really take that into consideration quite frequently and I like that criteria for judging.

For instance, if you have two almost equally bad (or worse, two equally inedible) dishes, you ask each chef where it went wrong and one gets that they overcooked the greens and one thinks it tastes great but they have vastly underseasoned it, the latter should go home.

[karenology]

Just caught up on TC after vacation, and it hurts to see Dale go! I was so sure it was Tiffany's time - nice enough person, but she puts out such boring food week after week.

Someone said way back in the comments that Dale tends to get flustered when he is out of his wheelhouse. I think that's true, and the combination of unfamiliar flavor profiles + sheer number of plates did him in (not to mention exhaustion!). There is a sizeable Vietnamese community in New Orleans; maybe he could have used that as his inspiration and done a sweet-and-sour fish soup with his protein.