Comments on: Check, Please! Bay Area: Episode 9 (#109)

By: KR

KR — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:13:02 +0000

I too would like a honest review but you can say the same thing without hyperbole. A "Not worth the effort to travel" or "not good value for money" or "The fish was overcooked " etc is fine or stating the dislike specifically e.g. the lady's critique of the monkfish being tough . A hyperbolic use of "pathetic" or "laughable" sets off a hostile tone which then I feel biases the flow of conversation towards a confrontation.

By: KT

KT — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 22:34:03 +0000

I felt that this was the most interesting episode of Check, Please! I have seen thus far. I have been bored during previous shows where everyone agrees on everything. Some healthy, constructive debate is much more captivating! Sharing your honest opinion is different than attacking or criticizing – if you really didn’t like something, why should you lie just for the sake of being nice? The purpose of this show is to discuss your experience and not everyone shares the same preferences. In each episode, I try to figure out whose taste is the most similar to mine because I would be more likely to share their likes and dislikes. I am positive that I am not the only person who appreciated the “food snob’s” position and honesty. I hold restaurants to very high standards myself, and in a city with so many jewels, I am glad I won’t be wasting a trip and money on restaurants I probably wouldn’t like.

By: km

km — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 01:22:10 +0000

I've been to both Pisces and Aziza. Unfortunately, Pisces' food has really slipped since 2003, but I wouldn't characterize it as 'pathetic' as that horrible Gregory did. Their moule frites (mussels and fries) aren't as tasty as what you'll find in Belden Alley, but if you're stuck on the Peninsula, it's not a bad bet. Aziza is good, but it certainly does not deserve the high praise Gregory gave it, and it's certainly not worth a trip to that dreary end of Geary. Admittedly, the bastiya is as good as they say and it can change your mind. But the drinks are waaaaay overpriced ($10 for a Fez--champagne and pomegranate juice) and the atmosphere reeks of Prada-clad 20-somethings.

By: lmk

lmk — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 04:54:30 +0000

This episode saddened me. It reduced Check, Please! to Jerry Springer for Foodies.

By: KR

KR — Sat, 18 Feb 2006 21:41:12 +0000

I enjoy the program greatly. It is fun to live vicariously even if you do not plan to visit all the great food finds in the bay area.

Episode 9 was irritating.

Especially Gregory – the food snob was annoying.

The use of the word "pathetic" to describe the food in a place chosen by another person at the table instantly soured the atmosphere.

After that, it seemed everybody was trying to outdo others in trashing the others restaurant.

What is the point of watching a program in which every restaurant chosen is trashed by the other two?

Episode 10 by contrast was fun to watch.
I plan to check out Cha Cha Cha soon.

By: KS

KS — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 02:02:04 +0000

This show is my new favorite and I have yet to miss an episode. I hope you will keep the tone civil, shouting matches are not the best way to discuss good food.
What I am annoyed by is the discrepancies in the restaurant quality and this was clearly evident in the Manresa-Bissap episode. The lawyer was clearly expecting 4* food at a small Ethiopian place just because she eats at those kinds of places and had recommended one. So her opinion was not objective and she seemed biased against cheap food instead of being open-minded. People seem to make this show a contest about making their recommended places "win" and seem to compare 2 places instead of weighing the strengths/weaknesses of each place.
How can you expect anyone to compare 2 places when the average tab for Manresa(150) was 10 times the average bill at Bissap Baoabab?
I hope you will guide people to be fair in their reviews because it is the only way to critique food.