The real unsung dish of the year: Attica’s terroir, somewhere between sweet and savoury. Freeze dried raspberries, blackberries and blueberries, traditionally dried raspberries, blueberries and cranberries,
dehydrated grated beetroot (semi-cooked), cake crumbs made from organic
local almonds and beetroot, a sorbet of fromage frais, pieces of golden
kiwifruit dressed with lime, a jelly made from avocado oil, a granita made
from sorrel, borage flowers, baby sorrel shoots, mineral salt, black pepper,
clove, cinnamon, nutmeg, toasted barley (brewers malt). As chef Ben Shewry says “simple concoction really…”
Isn’t it annoying when you are a blogger and you agree with something. I’m afraid I agree that Movida’s chef Frank Camorra should be The Good Food Guide’s chef of the year and Attica Restaurant of the Year (although I think another Ben Shewry dish, the low-key terroir, is better than the smokin’ smoked trout broth which now comes with added sound).
I spent more time in the past year or so eating in these places than anywhere else.
And I agree that Giuseppe, Arnaldo and Sons richly deserved the award for best tiling (on a ceiling) and even had my builder mate James check it out.
All I’m left to bitch about is the scoring. But oh what a big debate that is. And the most important thing I’m going to say is in the wrong place at the end of this entry.
To score or not to score?
The argument against scoring is that it encourages lazy readers. I wonder how many people who buy James Halliday’s Wine Companion only buy wines that score 90 plus (I know a few) and people who buy The Age Good Food Guide only eat in restaurants that are awarded at least one hat?
The latest edition of The Age Good Food Guide I think may have timed its launch to coincide with 550 Fairfax jobs cuts and the dumping of editor Andrew Jaspan to hide a serious flaw in the scoring system.
The guide scores out of 20. That’s 7 for food, 3 for wine and wine service, 5 for overall service, 3 for for atmosphere, personality and comfort and 2 for the so-called “X-factor”. But it also introduced an unscored Bacchus category to encompass the grey area somewhere between a wine bar and a restaurant that covers the likes of Bar Lourhina, Movida Next Door and a load of others.
This is within one week of Gourmet Traveller, for which The Good Food Guide’s co-editor John Lethlean (conflicts anyone?) is the physical representative on Victorian earth, making Bar Lourhina as the 100th best restaurant in Australia.
The food and wine at this bar is exceptional, the chairs tall and hard. It is a bar and not a restaurant and the argument from The Age side says that the bar and restaurant shouldn’t be judged alongside each other.
This shows a serious flaw in the way restaurants are ranked using a simplistic listing or scoring system. In theory somewhere with wonderful food and wine but crap atmosphere and service could score 12 out of 20 but could have better food that somewhere that scores 18.
Oh, and while I’m at it, none of these scores takes into account the value for money that you will get. Most people who do pay for meals out of their own pockets (rather than media companies’) as I do, really care about this.
The future of scoring
My proposed system is simple also is ideal for the inevitable online future of the Good Food Guide while still retaining the overall score. Simply use a five star rating system for each of food, wine, service, atmosphere and value.
This, for a start,would allow us to judge the best food out there and allow the punters to choose the best value for their budget.
I’ve no idea of the Good Food Guide economics but inevitably it is under pressure to cut costs. It’s an expensive, valuable if not indulgent positioning tool. But the paper needs to developed it or risk losing its position as it can be argued it has in job and property classifieds.
The future of the Good Food Guide
This is a time to capitalize on the guide and build its online future. Already there is a basic version available for the mobile phone, which needs to be integrated with GPS mapping. But it faces competition from a ragbag of social media applications which are variable at best on their representation of the best of local food and wine. Where eatability scores in Sydney it fails in Melbourne. We are facing online competition from the likes of Tripadviser buoyed locally by its Facebook presence. Inevitably Yelp! and Urbanspoon (which has the neatest shake-your-iPhone-to-find-a-restaurant-interface), with a neat Rotten Tomatoes style aggregation of reviews, will arrive here eventually.
My recipe for scoring
I reckon the way forward is to build a friendly social media application around the the Good Food Guide’s listings (this is a link to the mobil eversion; they aren’t designed for normal browsing) curated by the current editors and sub-editors. The idea would be to keep an up-to-date listing while allowing users to add their own (inevitably moderated) comments and rankings with a Rotten Tomatoes type link interface to other relevant reviews.
When I say linking to relevant reviews I mean even linking to reviews on opposing newspapers.
My view is that Copyright is dead and the future is all about syndicated content and linking, mashing together useful content for the average punter in a meaningful way.
That is to say: become the single best place from where all restaurant content can be explored.
Food fascist
Save money by merging Good Living and Epicure? Ouch! From both journalists and readers.
Become a Facebook fan. Follow me on Twitter.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
I think scoring something subjective will never provide good guide to readers. The discussion of the matter in question gives the reader a far better understanding of what their experience is going to be like and whether they personally will enjoy it. I always listen to what Margaret and David have to say on At the Movies and never their star rating for example.
Scoring is a cop out by the writers and the readers, if you bother putting a restaurant in the good food guide it must be worth checking out or why is it there?! So if you want to highlight the top teir (top 5%?) put them in a special section and leave the rest of the reviews to be READ!
We keep going back to Chimmeys on Bridge Road, Richmond for example because the baked goods are excellent. However each time we comment on the poor atmosphere and unfriendly barely competent staff. Something like that can really only be conveyed through review text rather than a rating.
The sites you mentioned, Yelp! and Eatability both need some serious design changes before I would start using them. Their sites are visually complicated and so not easy to jump into. I’m in the web application trade btw hence the harsh criticism.
Rory, true. The tripadvisor and Urbanspoon come into their own as iPhone Apps, espcially urbanspoon, with its slot machine spinning wheel type interface. Online on a computer they are all lousy.
I thougth GFG got a lot right this year- particularly celebrating talented, low key ppl like Shewry and Camorra.
Glad to see George “The Feta Whore” Calombaris lose a hat.
Think the “Bacchus” category is a bit of a wank- in form, but not in content.
You are right about the future of the GFG being integrated online content, i don’t think they get it yet.
And re Age staff cuts: “You don’t do MORE with less, you do LESS with less.” David Simon, The Wire
I stopped buying GFG many years ago. Too often there are changes in chefs/staff that make considerable change in what you will get in overall experience.
Not so worried about Lethlean writing for Age & AGT. Can see more conflict with sleeping with or socialising with owners of hatted restaurants.
Never been to Press Club, but don’t think it appropriate to include “the frequent upselling of drinks – from bottled water to dessert wines – is unwelcome” in their review. That happens at many other restaurants, and one where what appears to have been offered as a freebie then appearing on the bill (frequently).
Really don’t think the public demotions are productive.
Good Living amalgamating with Epicure ? I don’t think so. In Tuesday’s Good Living the report from Scott Bowles in Short Black
“And the winner is…
With restaurant award season in full flight across the country, attention turned south last night for The Age Good Food Guide 2009 awards. And the Melbourne winner is Sydney. Bennelong chef Guillaume Brahimi has picked up best new restaurant at the awards for his recently opened Melbourne eatery, Bistro Guillaume. In what was believed to be a two-horse race for the award, Brahimi pipped North Bondi Italian Food’s Melbourne clone, Giuseppe, Arnaldo & Sons. The Sydney success follows last year’s snaffling of the Restaurant of the Year award by Neil Perry for his Rockpool Bar & Grill from under the nose of Melbourne restaurateurs. The Age has a history of giving restaurant of the year to an underdog and this year’s choice illustrates that down south you don’t have to be a heavyweight to be the best boxer around. The winner was low-key Attica at unfashionable Ripponlea.”
Guess it has sold papers.
“Not so worried about Lethlean writing for Age & AGT. Can see more conflict with sleeping with or socialising with owners of hatted restaurants.”
Do tell!!!
Neil, I’ll send you an email.
Had to laugh at John Lethlean’s opening to his review today – “I’m getting tired of this. You go to a restaurant to review it because you know it has a new chef, only to discover the “new” chef has gone already. It’s happened several times this year; it’ll undoubtedly happen again.” And in Espresso, Hotel Next has seen change of chef & GM.
And we’re getting tired of paying good money for a guide that quickly becomes meaningless.
So, Ed you are probably right in thinking that we will have to go online – even if just to keep up with who is in the restaurant (this week).
Jessie, good points
Thermomixer, believe me there are many more changes we just haven’t heard about them yet and you’ll have also read it in my column in Xtrafood – Lethlean isn’t the only one writing about this
The deadline is Feb/March for most entries so it is six months out of date on publication. I bet we’ll see more pooling of content between Good Living and Epicure.
Neil, that’s another discussion. I’m just how far I go in public.
I wish we had the equivalent of Zagat here. They amalgamate 10′ of 1000’s of readers views on Food, Decor, Service and Cost with marks out of 30 and ave sort of costs I > $25 M$26-$40 E $41-$64 or VE $66+ or a $ estimate of dinner with one drink. They include adress, ph. no, web address and a pithy review rarely more than six short lines.
Because there are so many contributors it becomes fairly reliable and personal biases are ironed out. They even tell you if there have been very few reviews of a restaurant. How can AGF or GT compare to this???