While I was away in Argentina a couple of weeks ago, the San Francisco Chronicle came out with their annual list of top 100 restaurants in the Bay Area. This list is always contentious (as are most lists of this type) but in particular I always find a lot to argue about with the Chronicle's picks, and this year is no different. One reason this year IS different, however, is that it is the last year in which the Chronicle will have THE authoritative voice on Bay Area restaurants. Discounting Zagat, the Chronicle has never had much competition when it comes to pronouncing what's best in the area. No longer. In October of this year, San Francisco will have its very own version of the Michelin Guide. Michael Bauer is about to get the same referendum as Frank Bruni, and I don't expect the results to be much different.
This year's annual list from the Chronicle has a few changes when compared to last year's, when it comes to the best restaurants (those with 3.5 stars or greater). There are three notable differences:
1. The addition of the newly opened Cyrus and Redd to the list
2. The mysterious disappearance of Campton Place (dropped after the departure of beloved Daniel Humm) and Aqua (now off the top 100 list completely -- did it lose a chef too while I wasn't looking??)
3. The addition of the Dining Room at the Ritz Carlton
Here's my running commentary on the top tables:
Chez Panisse -- Great but not phenomenal in the same way that others are. Definitely belongs in the top group, but I think it should be in the three and a half category.
Fleur de Lys -- Always a mystery to me why this restaurant stays in the top, but admittedly I haven't been in years, so it's time for a return trip.
French Laundry -- Duh.
La Folie -- I wholeheartedly agree.
Manresa -- Ditto.
Dining Room at The Ritz Carlton -- Haven't been but clearly need to go and see what the fuss is about.
THREE AND A HALF STARS:
Acquarello -- Haven't been in ages but think it probably deserves to be here.
Cyrus -- Grudgingly, but only just. Really only their appetizers warrant 3.5 stars.
Dry Creek Kitchen -- Never been, but that won't keep me from making the snarky comment that I think this is one of those restaurants that is on the list for more nostalgic reasons.
Farallon -- Ditto the above.
Farmhouse Inn and Restaurant -- What !?!? I have no idea what this restaurant is doing here. It is nowhere the caliber of these other restaurants. Quaint, yes. Good food, yes. Anywhere close to fantastic? No way.
Gary Danko -- Perennial favorite and deserving.
Jardiniere -- Very strong restaurant, still deserving.
Michael Mina -- Clearly belongs here.
Redd -- Haven't been. Heard good things.
Terra -- Ditto.
Zuni Cafe -- Good food, but not so much better than a lot of three stars that it belongs here.
Check out the full list here.
Now, as for the betting pool on the Michelin stars? Here are my predictions:
And maybe the Ritz based on what I've heard.
Fleur de Lys
and a few more wildcards that will raise eyebrows and/or result in outrage.
If the New York guide is any indication, the one stars will be all over the map.
Vinography Images: Birth of a Grape Introducing The Essence of Wine Book Forlorn Hope: The Remarkable Wines of Matthew Rorick Vinography Unboxed: Week of November 24, 2013 Vinography Images: Down the Row Pinot Days Southern California 2013: December 7, Los Angeles When Should You Not Be Allowed to Be Biodynamic? Vinography Unboxed: Week of November 17, 2013 Vinography Images: Below the Clouds Don't Ask a Dinosaur for Directions
Masuizumi Junmai Daiginjo, Toyama Prefecture Wine.Com Gives Retailers (and Consumers) the Finger 1961 Hospices de Beaune Emile Chandesais, Burgundy Wine Over Time The Better Half of My Palate 1999 KirÃ¡lyudvar "Lapis" Tokaji Furmint, Hungary What's Allowed in Your Wine and Winemaking Why Community Tasting Notes Sites Will Fail Appreciating Wine in Context The Soul vs. The Market 1989 Fiorano Botte 48 Semillion,Italy