the problem here is how incorporated the two are. for example if i'm making something with salty brined olives, and plan on holding back the seasoning on everything else, how the olives are incorporated makes a huge difference here. If the olives are whole, i can't afford to not season everything else. there is too much of a chance that a lot of bites are gonna happen without the olives and be very bland. requiring the diner to figure it out leaves too much room for error. If i dice up the olives together though and put it all together then fine, ill hold back on the season of everything else. if you think the dish's seasoning depends on the diner to chop everything up and mix it together, then consider how to best deal with that when conceptualizing it. To me the eggs looked unincorporated enough, and the first thing that would hit your mouth, so should have been seasoned, ideally with a good finishing salt for her dish like smoked fleur de sel.

I agree that texture is important but its not the end all be all of constructing a dish. There are plenty of worldly dishes out there that are well known for either being crunchy or soft.

You don't need both. Same thing with people complaining about acid levels.

I guess these are pro chefs and pro eaters but I'd appreciate some better criticism by them. It's always too salty / not salty enough, needs more acid, or needs more texture. Wheres the variety?

Don't know if this has been posted yet but saw an ad for this last night.

Blais is my favorite.



http://science.discovery.com/tv/blais-off/

Looks interesting.

Curious - are you a working cook, or in culinary school? Or, are you just some dude who assumes alot of stuff based on watching Food Network shows / reading food blogs?

I only ask because you seem to have strong opinions on the contestants with potentially very little actual information/knowledge.

-Al

http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.c...colicchio.html

In which Tom savages Elia, and Elia is still a stupid ****ing ****.

It also contains this:

Which every doorknob claiming the producers have a say in who goes should read- and know that if you do suggest that, you're calling Tom, who has a reason to protect his reputation, a liar.

I don't usually agree with the rants of Dids (I mean, I agree with him sometimes, not usually his rants):

But I 100% agree on this point, and wish people would stop bringing up the idea that "the producers" somehow influence the decision for drama/storytelling reasons.

First - we get it - Colichio is an "executive producer" of the series. I think Padma may be as well - either way, this is an irrelevant distinction to make w/r/t this topic. For purposes of this topic, and when Colichio discusses it, it's fairly obvious he is referring to non judge producers.

Second - there is *only long term downside* to the integrity of any competitive reality show being blown.

Sure, there may be a slight ratings bump for a couple episodes if they kept a contestant on longer who didn't deserve it food-wise - but if this *ever* got out, the long term damage to the series would be irreparable and viewership likely would go way down.

The same is true for Idol, Dancing With The Stars, SYTYCD etc. - it is just not worth the risk to the franchise for a slight, short-term ratings bump.

BTW - I am pretty sure that Jen's elimination is just further evidence to corroborate the idea that the non judge producers do not weigh in. Jen was clearly a favorite of viewers going into this thing, and also would've added a great competitive element. They even had justification to send another person home (Jaime/Antonia/Tre). But they as I'm sure they always do deliberated based on the food put out.

-Al

i do personal chef work part time. have worked in different parts of food industry for over couple years.

i dont know why you think i have little actual information. more seems like you are doing this to me with very little information. why not point out something specifically i said?

obviously i can judge everything except for actually tasting the dish. i dont think there is a problem coming up with opinions with that level of information. If i judged a dish to be bad but people on the ground raved about it id rethink what i was missing. but this one you could see coming, IMO. Her attitude is what has bothered me more than anything, not the food. i dont think it was so subjective why her food was not well received. you can see it was conceptually flawed, as was parts of the execution IMO. good chefs can sense flaws and dont get pompous like she did. there is nothing wrong with being passionate and happy aobut your food but for her she became her own worst enemy.

So, from the 2 second snippets we saw of Jen actually braising something, you can deduce her "technique wasn't that great"?

I'm just going to go in assuming a woman who trained under elite chefs in the country know how to braise a piece of pork well, and not put much stock in your opinion.

I missed this part, OK, I see you're allowing some room for your thoughts to be wrong. My only question is why even make such wild assumptions in the first place with such limited information? You know this is very similar to when people see a couple hands on WSOP and start saying X player is ******ed donk.

Without specifics this just feels like something a bad food critic might write. What do you mean exactly?

You realize Jen is actually a "professional chef"?

What does this even mean, you don't get "braised meat plain"? I have braised meats plenty of times - outside of the obvious that Jen couldn't add non-proteins to her braising liquid - how do you know what went into her braising liquid, or how she reduced it?

Again, what does any of this mean? I was going to try and unravel/dissect that mess but I won't bother. Just know that it makes absolutely no sense at all as written. I'm not even sure how to assume what you might possibly mean.

-Al

its not obvious. he pretends like he has no control over anything consistently when anything questions come up about something other than the judging. he doesnt have control over the format, the way things work, watever. he even acts like he has little insight or means of communicating with the producers. if he just shows up judges and leaves, then his producer title is misleading. think about nigel from sytycd like i mentioned, he is clearly judge who is also involved in the show.

cant speak for others but i dont doubt the integrity of the judges, i agree with you, even if they did have more of an active role producing the show. perhaps some subconscious biases affect them at time, but for the most part i think tom is one of the best judges on reality tv. i extremely doubt they are strategically ever targeting ratings with eliminations.

It's only misleading because people are making assumptions about what it means when it's one of the most vague titles people can have.

I don't think he "pretends" he doesn't have control over these things. I think it's true- because he says it, on his blog- and I'm not sure why people think he would be lying about this.

We talked about this before with Tom.- but I assume at this point it basically means "has an ownership stake and gets % of the profits".

The tinfoil hat stuff is bad with TC because more than more shows they're pretty transparent about how it works. (to the point where the blogs often expose the attempts at story creation the hack editors put forth).

I'm not some looney conspiracy theorist, but I don't agree with some of the statements being made.

The problem here is that the quote is explicitly circumventing the main premise that some people don't think the "judging" ( read: who we watch next week ) is based on the food that was cooked or what it tasted like.

I don't think anyone was ever arguing that the producers were actually tasting the food and deciding who should go ... it kinda does lend itself to more criticism of Tom's circular logic and issue avoidance.

The show is based on the judges subjective opinion about who was the best cook. You don't get judged off the show because you took the longest time to cook your chicken. You don't win because you sweat the least while running around the kitchen. There's no objective scoring mechanism.

If American Idol's vote tallying mechanism was somehow blown as irrelevant, that would be a case where their integrity was destroyed.

Every single week on American Idol up until the viewers start voting is exactly the same scenario as every vote-off on Top Chef. The judges decide. Anyone who doesn't think ratings / marketability / future drama isn't in the back of all the American Idol's judges minds, and most likely whispered into their ear by a little producer birdie, is a little naive IMO.

I don't see it as any different with Top Chef. If it ever did irrefutably come out that the Top Chef producers had some input into who should stay, I don't think anyone would care, nor be surprised.

I know I wouldn't.

This is a solid point and one I didn't address at all. You're right in that the loss of integrity would be much more keen for AI or another voting show.

I don't think the AI comparison (when judges decide) is a fair comparable to Top Chef - although you're correct, the AI Judges don't make the critical calls when it matters most. Unlike of course Top Chef, where the judges decide the ultimate winner.

I could be wrong (and a poll would be actually pretty interesting imo) - but I think if it came out conclusively that the "best dish" didn't always win, and the "worst dish" didn't always get the boot - this would definitely hurt viewership and the franchise might be ruined.

The reason I think this is because a reason people get invested in a contestant/the series is due to their perception that there a better and worse chef (more or less skilled). Since we can only form our opinions of "who is better" based on the judge's supposedly "objective" assessment, our whole understanding of the show, and why we might enjoy it or root for someone, is rooted in this idea that it is a meritocracy.

Without that (imo) critical element - I think Top Chef is a lot less fun and harder to invest in as a viewer.

Just take this thread for example - most of the conversation is around who is a better or worse chef. Oftentimes, we might not even like the personality of the contestant but concede "they are talented."

-Al

He probably means with the limits of the challenge, she couldn't use what people usually use in braising liquids(celery, garlic, onions, wine, etc). At least thats what plain sounds like to me.

I agree with your general point though in that people sometimes get carried away with critiquing through a tv screen, especially on something where the missing factor is so huge (tasting food). At the same time it seems like you are kinda doing the same thing in regards to criticizing his criticism.

As far as technique, I don't remember what all was shown, but if her meat was soggy as Casey said, she did something wrong. Maybe she didn't sear the meat first or something else, I don't claim to know. Yes, she should know how to do it right, but whether him saying her technique is bad is fair or not based on what was shown in the TV show, she did somehow mess it up

But overall I agree with you. Its not like she is worse than the people watching from their couches.

If you mean that I'm being overly critical / too much critique of Zygote's post, you're probably right - but he asked why I thought what he wrote made no sense, so I responded.

That's probably the main thing I was reacting to w/r/t Zygote's post - it felt like he was armchair QB'ing in a pointedly presumptive, ignorant fashion. But he did mention he's a chef so he probably knows more about food than most of the posters ITT.

(Oh the other thing I reacted to in Zygote's post is how he noted "Ripert goes on ad infinitum about 'clean and simple' flavors' - he does? I only have watched a couple episodes of his TV series, and of course on Top Chef - but outside of the general principle that clean and simple is a good thing any person would agree about, I'm not sure what Zygote is talking about.)

-Al

go ahead and make that assumption. your women who trained under elite chefs got kicked off for her techniques, so what your putting stock in, the logical fallacy of appealing to authority (and your doing an even more fallacious version of this) is leading you astray. also i've trained under ripert, as have millions of others, because he offers his advice, techniques, ideas etc. in multiple formats. sure she has an advantage working in an environment like le bernadin and the one on one, but obviously it did not develop enough of an attitude or skill to execute this particular.

also you forget the recipe is up online. this one isnt yet, but her braised pork belly from season 6 is and this put her in the bottom. i could also see the color of the meat, the viscosity and richness of the sauce etc. enough to make some initial judgement. the dish was clearly missing texture - cripsy bacon scattered overtop wouldve ensured seasoning and texture throughout as id mentioend already. ive worked a lot on braising and its tough to get down effectively. the wet meat taste that was described by casey is a common result that takes a lot of technique to get around. clearly jenifer did not have this technique. and FYI, i doubt she has braised much of anything in le bernadin where she got her training. she may have done it at select times, but it certainly not something that she would have been well trained on per se. i would never think it would be a strength a chef coming out of le bernadin acquires necessarily.

i dont think that analogy is correct. i dont see how she can take back the certain attitude she let slip up. she can evolve from it, but not deny it existed. ripert would not tolerate this, or so he claims. listen to his talk at google. read his book on-the-line or here what he's mentioned in other interviews and stuff. he claims to see food passionately and even spiritually and that he doesnt tolerate the kind of ego she displayed. for her to say she only cooks for who matters, for example, or watever, is a disrepsect to the food in the philosophy ripert advocates and what most people would expect from her caliber IMO. that said, she ended pleasing nobody but herself.

also the information is not that limiting. her worth as chef im partially disregarding more from her attitude. she obviously has a ton of skill, but braising and saucing rich dishes are clearly not her forte's. if she made this dish but did not have such confidence, then id say okay she messed up executing but realizes otherwise. but clearly she was lost on herself. she has done braised food unsuccessfully before too.

i realize this and i dont get the point. unless you think some how "professional chefs" are infallible.

and what i mean exactly ive elaborated on quite a bit. just look at that sauce. this is not a broth for white fish. she didnt use roasted bones or anything like that, i can tell before looking at the recipe. im not saying she had them but if she didnt think she could pull this off, then choose a different method. i can expand more, but i dont think you really put much weight on what i have to say it seems, due purely to your own status rankings.

if she thought it was too restrictive for a braised dish why did she choose it? by plain i meant in flavor, style and texture. her sauce looks like water and her meat does not appear properly carmelized/braised. its hard to articulate everything cooking wise, which is why experience is a huge things cooking, but the colors and texture of the meat and suace do not appear right to me from the few shots i was able to see. i can presume for her previous braising recipes how she probably went about it and i think those flaws resonated.

ive seen his show, read several of his books, listened to many of his talks and interviews. you are just going to have to trust me. i can see someone misinterpreting this "simple clean" mantra he preaches and she seems to have been a victim of it, despite her intimate knowledge of ripert. Achieving "simple, clean" is sort of the like the highest acclaim he gives a dish. she seemed to use this to justify everything her dish was lacking, and that is not what ripert means by this when he uses the term. when ripert cooks something like this he will use the words like rustic, rich and hearty and those are not to be confused with simple and clean because it can be both. one could really transform a braised dish to something simple and clean but her angle seem more to blandify and water down a dish and call it simple and clean. just my perspective of it all.

I'm thinking they *must* have some braised fish dishes at Le Bernardin, right? Anyway what confuses me about the above (and your general criticism of Jen's major fail braising technique) - is that my understanding of braising is that it's extremely easy to execute with way more margin for error than other cooking techniques.

Just FYI everything I know about braising is from this cookbook, so if you're talking about stuff outside of this, be curious to hear what that is (you will see from the reviews that this book has been really well received by consumers and cooks alike - and Molly Stevens really goes through the science/technique of braising an in-depth way, imo):

http://www.amazon.com/All-About-Brai.../dp/0393052303
OK - this sort of makes sense, and I trust you.

-Al

Zygote - oh and the "Jen is a professional chef" comment was just a response where you said what elevates an "amateur chef to a professional is etc etc".

Which seemed to imply you were calling Jen an amateur chef for some reason.

BTW - as a total aside, as far as the Jen is arrogant thing, and her technique is bad, or whatever - I think you're probably being a tad overly judgmental - the girl was up for like 24 hours straight, was under a lot of strain, and not thinking straight most likely. Given more optimal conditions, I bet she braises the hell out of that slab of pork and doesn't underseason her eggs.

It also seems like your comments are completely devoid of an understanding of the obvious fact that these are extreme conditions to be cooking under.

-Al

i agree. definitely im being harsh but i thought that was the point. ripert on his show compares how 5 different kind of waters taste with different wines with different foods. now that is micro anlayizing subtleties. its just how i am with food though. trust me, you dont wnat to hear what i say about my own stuff some times

its just what is done for a food show like this. its over the top critical views of food is part of why i watch. its a show purely about food skill and excution too. and all cooking is done under harsh conditions btw. you dont sleep, you dont stop, its hot disgusting, tensions are always high, etc. kitchen staff are the bottom rung of society. they got paid the worst within the food business and compared to other trades. even dishwashers often made more in places i worked and had much easier hours and work, as odd as that seems.

There have been a lot of words on the last page and I haven't read all of them. My point wasn't that the producers rig the show. It's that Collichio has never admitted to making a judging mistake. In this case the choice was highly subjective; should Jen go for cooking a ****** dish or should Jamie go for literally doing nothing? In his blog Collichio makes it seem like the choice is a no brainer because he made it and therefore is right, which is what he frequently does when there are controversial judging decisions.

you can bet that Jamie will be overly scrutinized for the next few dishes now

FWIW- nothing I said was directed at Pudge.

If the show's medical staff told her to leave and get stitches, I can't see how you can DQ her from that. I assume there's also a the specter of liability issues and what not. Agree that it seemed terribly bitchmade and scornworthy- but I think booting her would have been pretty unfair.

I would agree if someone else cut her finger, but she is the one responsible for cutting her finger and not being able to present a dish.

its hard to think of things these ways. one thing is forsure is the flavor of the sauce is integral. to go back to ripert, he sees the saucier as the most important and difficult station for a high end restaurant. in my experience id agree with him that sauce flavors are the toughest. good sauces are something i couldnt get right for ages while being consistent. the tough part about braising is you have to match all the flavors, get the quantities mostly right (room for adjusting later), see how they will reduce and evolve over time, know how to adjust/revive at the end. mustve been tough for her with no acid for a fatty cut like this, not sure if they had vinegar of any kind, but again this, and a lack of veggies, herbs, bones, watever to add robustness, is something she shouldve considered when deciding to make it. reducing and emulsifying at the end and getting the right texture/richness and seasoning of sauces is not always easy especially if youre reheating. trying to keep it alive for buffet style requires skill too. ripert has a section in his book "return to cooking" all about the difficulties of getting sauces right and why he sees them as the most important part of a chefs development. also i looked back and i was wrong about her being the bottom for her last braised dish. it was liked, at least as a pairing since that was the contest, and the guest judge remarked that "it was the lightest pork belly i've eaten". perhaps her idea of a light sauce can get by when the acutal meat is not as intense as her smoked bacon slab was. she trimmed all the fat in the last one though and had acid, so much more difficult this time around. reading her recipe more thoroughly again though i have to say that her technique then wasnt exactly how i would do it but sounds good to me. personally i try intesify the flavors of the veggies before immersing them in liquid. i'd also try get some browning on the bottom to begin with. Its less about this though and more about making the judgements on spot that count. Obviously a huge plus for her then was that she wasnt so challenged and could add sherry/rice vin., herbs, wine, tomato, veg, soy sauce, etc. Her biggest flaw im starting to think was just choosing to do a braised dish for a challenge like this. that said its my tenth time saying it, if i were going to do that braised dish, i would've forsure at least added texture and cripsy bacon would've been a good choice given the restraints and chance to mirror flavors.

book looks good. might go check it out at the bookstore tonight.

Interesting, thanks for the post. My main takeaway from this is that (and I sort of get it as I've braised stuff before) - why would Jen even decide to "braise" her slab of bacon when she lacked alot of the basic ingredients to do it well and was short on time? Seems like alot of different ways to cook a slab of bacon and get it to be tasty.

And to your overall point before - obviously she didn't execute her braise well (a comment on her technique) if it came out badly.

I'm going to guess it is way too beginner for you, but for myself, I've had it for a couple years, really like alot of the recipes, and still find it quite useful.

-Al

Yea, the staff telling her to leave was what I was thinking at first, for the reasoning that you noted, but from what others were saying during the show, it made me think she just wanted to step out. It honestly doesn't surprise me if she chose this, though I think it was muddled enough to the point where kicking her off might have been unfair.

I don't like marcel, but if IIRC, angelo was out of line touching his dish imo. Jenn deserved to go home after that messed up rant, and a few points in the show made mention of the wet bacon. Unstable bitch, though I did like her work otherwise. Also, yummy casey needs to stay on.