S13.E08: Where's The Beef

[Cheerwyn]

I keep thinking of more ways to meet this challenge.

 

Fish wrapped in banana leaf;

 

North African style meals which are meant to be eaten wth hands and injera bread. That could have been a good theme that kept with the beefsteak ideas but refinned it  a bit.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Cheerwyn

[In Pog Form]

It was definitely whatever the rich version of hipsters are.

There are plenty of rich hipsters. But this was not like that.

I think "yuppie" is a perfectly appropriate term, just one that people don't use much anymore. Yuppies are all about conspicuous consumption and being trendy. Yuppies don't give a shit about being seen as gluttonous and showing off their wealth, they embrace it. Even rich hipsters try to hide their wealth and consumption behind a low-key or "earthy" aesthetic.

 

I keep thinking of more ways to meet this challenge.

 

Fish wrapped in banana leaf;

 

North African style meals which are meant to be eaten wth hands and injera bread. That could have been a good theme that kept with the beefsteak ideas but refinned it  a bit.

I don't recall the cheftestants being asked to refine the dishes. In fact, that's exactly what made most of them fail. Catering to 100 people should have been a good hint they weren't looking for anything fancy, let alone the outright instruction that they were looking for something messy and primal.

Edited January 30, 2016 by In Pog Form

[apollonia666]

Anybody else think WTF when the female chef (no clue what her name is) was talking about how her mother was always concerned with healthy eating & wouldn't let her have sugar, then they showed a picture of her when she was little & her mom & they were both really fat? And she's still big, what was her mother's idea of healthy eating? No sugar but lots of fat? 

I don't get these remarks about Marjorie's size, especially on the same show as Amar and Wesley.  She's got a round face and neck which make her look larger than she is, but if you look at the full body shots of the contestants on the Bravo site or just watch her on the show she's really not that big.  But if the mom felt weight was an issue for her and/or her kid, that might explain the fixation on trying to eat healthy.  

[Auntie Anxiety]

 

SJW complaints about the correctness of the main challenge aside

SteveAC10, there is no one in the world who would ever consider me a social justice warrior nor do I bend over backwards to be politically correct.  My problem with the premise of Beefsteak is the irony which the beautiful people can't seem to acknowledge because this kind of nonsense gives them a chance to pat themselves on the back for their generosity.  To me,it's like having a wine auction to raise money for an alcohol rehab facility.

[snarktini]

I don't get these remarks about Marjorie's size, especially on the same show as Amar and Wesley.  She's got a round face and neck which make her look larger than she is, but if you look at the full body shots of the contestants on the Bravo site or just watch her on the show she's really not that big.  But if the mom felt weight was an issue for her and/or her kid, that might explain the fixation on trying to eat healthy.  

 

Agreed.

 

Also, there are many different definitions of healthy food. Some people have a "back to nature" POV -- you know, the kind of household that only has sprouted wheat bread and if there was a dessert it had carob instead of chocolate -- that has nothing to do with weight. It's about whole, organic, non-processed food, no sugars or junk. That's would be consistent with Marjorie's description.

 

Frankly, for many it's easy to be fat on healthy food just like it would be on junk food. You can eat too much of either.

[biakbiak]

SteveAC10, there is no one in the world who would ever consider me a social justice warrior nor do I bend over backwards to be politically correct. My problem with the premise of Beefsteak is the irony which the beautiful people can't seem to acknowledge because this kind of nonsense gives them a chance to pat themselves on the back for their generosity. To me,it's like having a wine auction to raise money for an alcohol rehab facility.

According to the description of the creation of the event they are completely aware. The LA group came up with reviving the tradition because they thought it would be fun and then decided that if they were having fun they should at least make sure money went to a good cause.

Edited January 30, 2016 by biakbiak

[Lillybee]

Why didn't anyone grill a turkey drumstick and corn on the cob or a whole fish like a trout or a small salmon?

[RCharter]

I don't get these remarks about Marjorie's size, especially on the same show as Amar and Wesley.  She's got a round face and neck which make her look larger than she is, but if you look at the full body shots of the contestants on the Bravo site or just watch her on the show she's really not that big.  But if the mom felt weight was an issue for her and/or her kid, that might explain the fixation on trying to eat healthy.  

I only think it was because she made the comment, and there was that side shot of her at the WF in some unfortunate mom jeans.  I think if Amar or Wesley made a comment about how they grew up eating healthy I would cast some side eye their way as well.  I normally envision someone that is really focused on healthy eating to look more like that "sassy" chef.  However, I agree that her mom at least tried to eat healthy because weight issues may run in her family. 

[bravofan27]

uproxx.com/tv/top-chef-power-rankings-beefsteak/

 

I had to post this, because it features Amar making his polite "wtf" face, and is pretty much an accurate retell of the disastrous Beefsteak that turned into the equally horrible Stanford Prison experiment in which everyone was sent home crying. 

[theatremouse]

I am annoyed that Phillip won this one because I do very much believe him to be delusional and this only encourages him.

Plus before this episode he'd go out on these wacky limbs and insist it was exactly what he intended. Then he thinks he had some revelation where the judges gave him permission to not pander to them (which he was failing at anyway), and he wins the next challenge basically because he did exactly what was asked of him and almost no one else did, and this somehow proves that his "being true to himself" whatever bullshit confirms his own brilliance? Yeah no.

I appreciated Marjorie's (I think it was her) TH offering remarkably tactful and constructive criticism of his being in charge of his own restaurant at such a young age being perhaps not so much a good thing, in terms of his professional growth.

Edited January 31, 2016 by theatremouse

[RemoteControlFreak]

God, what a dismal statement this Beefsteak event makes.  Apparently wealthy people feel that stuffing themselves with tons of food and drink is a suitable vehicle for making a donation to the LA Food Bank.  How can they be so blind to the hypocrisy in that?

 

And Philip got lucky.  

Edited January 30, 2016 by RemoteControlFreak

[hammaboo]

Why did no one make ribs?  That would have fit the parameters and been messy.

 

I agree with a previous poster, if they all screwed it up, the challenge was not laid out to them well.

 

I think whoever made the side dishes essentially had unspoken immunity, since the meat dishes were really the only ones truly criticized.  There was some minor critiques on the sides, but nothing like the meat critiques.

[Bugfrey Von]

I read once that during the early 1900s (The Gilded Age), rich New Yorkers would throw "hobo parties" where in the guests all came dressed in rags, and there were half smoked cigars throughout the room and people ate dinner out of cans. It was a hoot! You know, to make fun of the poors that we're probably outside of the window at that point freezing or starving to death. This is kind of what this challenge reminded me of. Can you imagine how much better it would've been if they would've taken the food that they were going to feed those bloated rich people and actually taken it to the LA food bank? Mind. Blown. And if there is one thing in the entire world that I hate more then maybe anything is outright waste. I always disliked that Hugh eyebrows guy because I think that he is a highfalutin asshole, but when he threw that piece of meat, I could feel my blood pressure going up. How disgusting, to throw food at a banquet for people who have nothing to eat. Way to go dickhead.

[rozen]

God, what a dismal statement this Beefsteak event makes.  Apparently wealthy people feel that stuffing themselves with tons of food and drink is a suitable vehicle for making a donation to the LA Food Bank.  How can they be so blind to the hypocrisy in that?

 

And Philip got lucky.  

 

How else are they supposed to fundraise? Events like this are much more efficient at extracting dollars than everyone standing around morosely watching a tragic documentary. I've run dinners like this, and the whole point is to overcharge the crap out of everyone, which is doubtless what happened here. The $6K they spent buying the food is probably a drop in the bucket compared to the proceeds brought in.  If Top Chef weren't contractually obligated to Whole Foods, the price tag probably would have been even lower. A big stupid meaaaaaaaaat dinner where the cooking is rustic, and basic niceties are forgone is great penny pinching while fooling everyone into thinking they're having The Best Time Ever. I thought it was a great idea.

I fail to see how giggling Padma was more obnoxious than Hugh literally taking her pork chop and chucking it into the next table. Or smug McOffal Face from Top Chef Masters snarking up a storm.

 

I feel silly, because I always thought of pansy as a gendered slur, not a homophobic one. Though they're often related, so makes sense. 

Edited January 30, 2016 by rozen

[RemoteControlFreak]

How else are they supposed to fundraise? Events like this are much more efficient at extracting dollars than everyone standing around morosely watching a tragic documentary. I've run dinners like this, and the whole point is to overcharge the crap out of everyone, which is doubtless what happened here. The $6K they spent buying the food is probably a drop in the bucket compared to the proceeds brought in.  If Top Chef weren't contractually obligated to Whole Foods, the price tag probably would have been even lower. A big stupid meaaaaaaaaat dinner where the cooking is rustic, and basic niceties are forgone is great penny pinching while fooling everyone into thinking they're having The Best Time Ever. I thought it was a great idea.

There are millions of ways to have a fundraiser for a food bank that don't involve the tone-deaf combination of engaging in gluttony for the purpose of supporting the hungry. As some poster above said, it's like holding a wine tasting to benefit an alcohol treatment facility.

 

I don't object to holding an event, just not this event.  It's not about the money. It's about the idea of stuffing your faces to benefit those who are struggling to find a single bite.  It's offensive.

 

The only "niceties" they gave up were rentals of knives, forks and plates.  How much does this save, really?  And what about the added cost of providing cloth aprons for everyone?

Edited January 31, 2016 by RemoteControlFreak

[JTMacc99]

Regardless of the dumb challenge, I did come to the conclusion that this may be my favorite group of individuals to hit restaurant wars ever, or at least since season 6. Really only one stinker in the bunch and at least a few who look to be worthy of making it to the finals.

[Julia]

How else are they supposed to fundraise? Events like this are much more efficient at extracting dollars than everyone standing around morosely watching a tragic documentary. I've run dinners like this, and the whole point is to overcharge the crap out of everyone, which is doubtless what happened here. The $6K they spent buying the food is probably a drop in the bucket compared to the proceeds brought in.  If Top Chef weren't contractually obligated to Whole Foods, the price tag probably would have been even lower. A big stupid meaaaaaaaaat dinner where the cooking is rustic, and basic niceties are forgone is great penny pinching while fooling everyone into thinking they're having The Best Time Ever. I thought it was a great idea

I donate to food charities, which means that I get a lot of invitations. And the first one I got this year was from one of the most chef-driven food charities in NY, who were asking me to spend [roughly the amount I already donated] for VIP tickets to an event at a fairly high-end venue where I could eat lots of cool cheffy food. IOW, they were asking me to give them an amount I'd already donated with no strings attached in return for their spending a good chunk of it on expenses.

I don't see how that's a good deal for the charity. It sounds to me like a vaguely cheesy way of writing off part of the cost of rubbing shoulders with celebrities near an open bar.

[carrps]

Pretty much all has been said, but I guess I was the only one who heard Jacques Le Merde as Jacques Lemaire? And wondered when did a former NHL player/coach become a food satirist?

[Cheerwyn]

Oysters!

 

I keep thinking of dishes that would have met this challege.

 

There are endless possibilities of oyster toppings. And obviously they're easily served in a shell (but not on a dirty rock).

 

Plus the judges were trying (too hard IMO) to project this gluttonous, decadant vibe -- they would have had a field day with oysters.

 

(edited for typos)

Edited January 30, 2016 by Cheerwyn

[candall]

Isaac's dry sausage. I think the judges were expecting pork and were disappointed by chicken. I really think that it might have been very good and was dinged because of their expectations.

I thought it was stupid to choose chicken sausage, knowing the preconceived notion falls short of "decadent," and then make it his goal to convince the diners otherwise.  Way to pick an uphill battle.

 

A junk food challenge would have been fun--until they punted it over to Instagram.  I bet Padma was not ABOUT to sample a dozen assorted versions of Cheez Whiz and Ho-Ho's.

[Julia]

Pretty much all has been said, but I guess I was the only one who heard Jacques Le Merde as Jacques Lemaire? And wondered when did a former NHL player/coach become a food satirist?

The chef who played Jacques la Merde on the intarwebs said in one of her outing interviews that her boating instructor called himself Jacques la Merde, although I wonder if it wasn't really Jacques la Mer, under the circumstances.

[ClareWalks]

A local food bank had a fundraising event where they had a soup dinner, and you paid like $30 a person and bought a locally-created bowl (they were pretty fancy) and had soup and bread. Special guest: the guy who played the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld. I thought that was a pretty clever idea! I didn't get a chance to go, but it was really popular. But yeah, that's different from a beefsteak, in that you are eating humble food in more-humble quantities.

[Auntie Anxiety]

How else are they supposed to fundraise?

Sorry about not putting the above in a quote box, but my device wouldn't let me.

Anyway, I realized that it isn't the Beefsteak banquet that I object to. I'm more disturbed by their insensitivity toward the charity, a food bank. If they were having this event for cancer research or victims of domestic abuse or some other such thing, I would have no objection. To me it is about the optics and the tone-deafness.

[Cheerwyn]

How else are they supposed to fundraise?

Sorry about not putting the above in a quote box, but my device wouldn't let me.

Anyway, I realized that it isn't the Beefsteak banquet that I object to. I'm more disturbed by their insensitivity toward the charity, a food bank. If they were having this event for cancer research or victims of domestic abuse or some other such thing, I would have no objection. To me it is about the optics and the tone-deafness.

 

That's a good point.  Even if the food, labor and other expenses were donated or purchased at a greatly reduced price, the idea of a gluttonous feast still doesn't sound right when fundraising for hunger.

[theatremouse]

IOW, they were asking me to give them an amount I'd already donated with no strings attached in return for their spending a good chunk of it on expenses.

I don't see how that's a good deal for the charity. It sounds to me like a vaguely cheesy way of writing off part of the cost of rubbing shoulders with celebrities near an open bar.

Unfortunately, for a lot of rich people, one of the reasons they donate is not just to help the cause, but to be invited to such events and gladly fork over amounts equal to what they already donated to have said chance to rub shoulders with celebrities near an open bar. Memberships benefits often appeal to people, even when said benefit is the opportunity to be invited to pay more money to go to a party. If it seems exclusive, they want the invite. It's not something that ever sits right with me, because it does annoy me to think about how much of my donation went to basically convincing other people to donate, rather than directly impacting...whatever nonprofit...but it's the nature of the beast, and something all development departments deal with: they know some donors want to be wined and dined, some want to go to Events, whereas others just want a well worded argument of what you do and why it's good, and to hand over cash earmarked for a specific project or goal. Different people need to be convinced in different ways and orgs have to balance their asks because of it. So it's not necessarily wasteful on the part of this org to have done some big dinner. They presumably got donations they would not have otherwise, and if the fundraisers are doing their jobs right, what they raised well exceeded the cost of throwing it, even if the nature of the event were somewhat tone deaf. I agree that you can have a big party, and one involving food and chefs and whatnot to raise money for a foodbank without specifically going to the "decadence gluttony" well. But they did, and hopefully the math worked out for them. Edited January 31, 2016 by theatremouse

[rozen]

I donate to food charities, which means that I get a lot of invitations. And the first one I got this year was from one of the most chef-driven food charities in NY, who were asking me to spend [roughly the amount I already donated] for VIP tickets to an event at a fairly high-end venue where I could eat lots of cool cheffy food. IOW, they were asking me to give them an amount I'd already donated with no strings attached in return for their spending a good chunk of it on expenses.

I don't see how that's a good deal for the charity. It sounds to me like a vaguely cheesy way of writing off part of the cost of rubbing shoulders with celebrities near an open bar.

 

People who donate regularly aren't really the ones you're trying to snag with these events. It's people who otherwise wouldn't donate at all. It has to provide some value to them, and if run efficiently (can't say anything about this one in particular), it brings in way more than it costs. Your getting an invite is a bonus, basically. 

 

Should everyone donate as much as they can to help others without such things? Yea sure. It would also help to have a progressive tax structure and social programs to support such people whether the general population is feeling charitable or not, but thems the breaks.

[RCharter]

I totally understand the objections to this particular fundraiser to benefit this particular cause being tone-deaf.  

 

But, I think thats sort of the nature of the area.  Almost a learned tone deafness.  DTLA is one of those areas where there is incredible wealth and incredible poverty.  A lot of the areas are being gentrified so that people who work in the financial district will want to live there.  It is such a startling contrast in lifestyles.  You'll see attorneys, accountants, financial advisers, investment bankers and all other sorts of people making six figure incomes living in the same area as scores of homeless people.  You'll have high rise condos, less than a five minute walk from homeless shelters that have been around forever.  I felt terrible just working down there and I always had to carry dollar bills with me, because I have a soft heart (but not soft enough to hand out $5 bills).  

 

Perhaps people who have the money in those areas have conditioned themselves not the feel the potential hypocrisy in the event, the same way I'm guessing you would have to condition yourself not to just feel a little bad making 250k a year, while you brush by someone who has probably lost a lot of their basic dignity living on the streets.

[meep.meep]

I just find an event where people are expected to tear into cooked meat and fish with their bare hands to be inherently skeevy. It makes me angry that the chefs tried to make it a less disgustingly messy experience, and were then castigated for doing so.

[Julia]

It's an invitation-only VIP event which doesn't seem to release financials. This year's reasonable levels of spending apparently included a whole lot of foie gras, all-you-can-eat filet mignon, acrobats and a 'wine rave teepee' for $150. I'm going to guess $150 doesn't go quite that far at Neil Fraser's actual restaurant. 

 

Leaving aside the ethics and effectiveness of these galas in general, it looks to me as if the food bank is a bit of a fig leaf for that charming fellow from the Simpsons to throw a party for his friends in the case of this one. Which, in fairness, everyone involved seems to admit to. 

 

I kind of have to throw in with the people who are voting for insensitive and kind of gross. 

Edited January 31, 2016 by Julia

[jette]

I agree with Tess23 and Lillybee - chicken quarters or turkey legs both have natural handles and would have been more appropriate for the occasion than Philip's tiny lamb tomahawks.

 

Plus,this was the week for Kwame to work some jerk seasoning magic but it was just too soon after his epic broccoli fail.

[RemoteControlFreak]

Leaving aside the ethics and effectiveness of these galas in general, it looks to me as if the food bank is a bit of a fig leaf for that charming fellow from the Simpsons to throw a party for his friends in the case of this one. Which, in fairness, everyone involved seems to admit to. 

True.

[snowblossom2]

People know that there is stark inequality and that galas are one way to get one time donors. The objection is not to having a gala but the form this particular gala took - the beefsteak. It could have taken any other form of gala and not be as tone deaf as a beefsteak

[candall]

I think the sticking point is "decadent gluttony."   Conspicuous consumption:  no longer cool.

 

(I used to flip through Architectural Digest in the library, pea green with envy.  Stumbling across a copy recently, I had a different reaction.  $22,000 for a little tchotchke teapot?  Who the fuck are these people?)

 

But, as many have pointed out, fundraiser dinners get butts into seats and wallets out of pockets.  As such, I think, go ahead and feed the rich in whatever manner means more food for the homeless.  Directing the proceeds elsewhere, due to the awkwardness of the irony, feels like compounding the problem.

Edited January 31, 2016 by candall

[xaxat]

This episode managed to combine two of the things that most annoy me about the "culinary scene". The fetishization of appearance and the off putting self indulgence of being one of "cool kids".

 

No thanks to both.

[RCharter]

I agree with Tess23 and Lillybee - chicken quarters or turkey legs both have natural handles and would have been more appropriate for the occasion than Philip's tiny lamb tomahawks.

 

Plus,this was the week for Kwame to work some jerk seasoning magic but it was just too soon after his epic broccoli fail.

One again broccoli ruins everything.

[nitrofishblue]

I think I understood the rule of the Beefsteak dinner as it was first explained and I am not a chef. However I sat there with my mouth agape as the chefs went through Whole Foods and were talking about what they planned to prepare. They all went off the tracks as they talked to each other. Some were making fun of Manbun because of the way he was presenting his meat. He was the only one that actually understood the rules. The other seemed so afraid to do something like create huge hunks of beef. It was a beefsteak challenge not make a dainty dish challenge. The judges should have ripped all of them but Manbun a new one for being so stupid.

[Julia]

The classic beefsteak dish is sliced tenderloin dipped in butter on toast, so a certain amount of the macho posturing is kind of silly.

 

However, if they weren't familiar with which tradition of Beefsteak this one was (depending on what side of Manhattan you ate in, some beefsteaks had much fancier food), i don't think they had the information they needed. And since until they started holdling them in Brooklyn, pretty much nobody outside of Jersey had ever heard of them, I think the challenge was described poorly.

[mlp]

 

The other seemed so afraid to do something like create huge hunks of beef. It was a beefsteak challenge not make a dainty dish challenge.

 

I know we didn't hear all the instructions but the last thing we saw was a judge telling the chefs to remember that the diners would have no utensils or napkins so they should plan accordingly.  I think the judges thought they were conveying "caveman" and the chefs were hearing "something easy to pick up and eat with the hands."  That would explain a lot of the decisions we saw being made. 

[Funzlerks]

They were told what old timey beefsteaks were as well as that guests would be provided with aprons but no napkins. Duh. I don't see how the chefs didn't get it. I thought halibut got it, but why would judges be impressed you purchased a whole big piece of halibut if you served it in small portions. How could the judges tell?

I am still waiting for this whole 'I need meat on top of meat!" and "put bacon in my cocktails please!" ridiculousness to end. I also think too much meat is leading to waxed mustaches and women dressing up like fetishy pin ups to work.

Edited January 31, 2016 by Funzlerks

[kittykat]

I don't get these remarks about Marjorie's size, especially on the same show as Amar and Wesley. She's got a round face and neck which make her look larger than she is, but if you look at the full body shots of the contestants on the Bravo site or just watch her on the show she's really not that big. But if the mom felt weight was an issue for her and/or her kid, that might explain the fixation on trying to eat healthy.

Ack I posted something below. My computer is acting weird.

Edited January 31, 2016 by kittykat

[kittykat]

Not to mention that you can eat healthy and still be overweight. Maybe there's a thyroid issue. Maybe it's a crappy metabolism. In my family we have both and it's an uphill battle to lose weight and keep it off because I like food but I also like being healthy...but I really really like food.

That being said I'm no fan of Phillip but his lamb looked delicious and within the parameters of the challenge so...good on him I guess. Though as I said last week, I feel bad for the 3 who get him for Restaurant Wars.

Poor Amar, always a bridesmaid. Hopefully he gets a win soon.

I will also chime in and say part of the issue with beefsteak not being beefsteaky enough was the shopping. Why couldn't they include some choice butchers on tip of WF? The main issue with buying the meat was not enough or dainty portions. Bad challenge planning on the producers part.

The upside: Chris Cosentino. The downside: ugh Hugh. Was hoping we wouldn't see him this season, made me miss Richard.

This episode was grating overall. I'm a little surprised that Chad went over Isaac because usually taste takes precedent over plating but clearly that was the opposite this week. And I was meh on Chad so whatever. That's my consensus this week: whatever

[Julia]

The upside: Chris Cosentino. The downside: ugh Hugh. Was hoping we wouldn't see him this season, made me miss Richard.

Yes on the upside, but I think we dodged a bullet on the other one. The thought of Richard and Colin Hanks with a buzz on trying to perform whatever they think manliness is at the same table is in run screaming from the room territory.

[susannot]

I don't fault the fundraising method at all.  Apparently it has been going on for years, successfully.  I am perturbed, though, by either the description of the event, or the chefs' misinterpretation of it.  I am particularly sad over Kwame and Isaac, both of whom I like and both of whom could have f-ing killed it with better tasting dishes.

[Julia]

Only three years, and the only year they publicized the donation it was a derisory amount.

Which, I guess is $20k more than the food bank would have gotten. It just reads distasteful to me that they're spending a huge chunk of the ticket price on bread and circusses so their rich industry friends can go full metal robber baron and publicizing it as a charity event.

[susannot]

I thought it had started in NY before migrating to LA.

[Julia]

I thought it had started in NY before migrating to LA.

It did. This one is three years old. It was a popular gilded-age thing in Manhattan, but it's mostly died out locally, except for Jersey (where a version with sane food costs is a popular fundraiser). There's a hipster one in Brooklyn now.

[xaxat]

Only three years, and the only year they publicized the donation it was a derisory amount.

Which, I guess is $20k more than the food bank would have gotten. It just reads distasteful to me that they're spending a huge chunk of the ticket price on bread and circusses so their rich industry friends can go full metal robber baron and publicizing it as a charity event.

 

I got the impression that it was following in the worrisome trend where some charities raise money so that they can throw ever more elaborate events to raise more money.

 

The Wounded Warriors Project is currently the subject of a lot of criticism for doing that.

 

Another thing that bugged me is that it seemed like they were pretending to want a messy, primal event while really wanting a fine dining experience dressed up as such. I think an old fashioned clam bake or pig roast would have worked better based on what they said they wanted. And neither of those requires formal wear.

[bravofan27]

My 2cents on the charity aspect. I think it'a a win win. Rich fancy people get to maintain their fanciness and dress to the nines and be dignified. Yet they still get to act out their primal instincts and have fun eating and drinking. Colin Hanks is a douche and he appears somewhat special (did enjoy him in Fargo though), however, he is filthy rich and immature, so this type of fundraiser is right up his alley. I hear you with a clam bake, but a clam bake isn't going to bring the big money. You want the rich people's money, you got to throw an event they will show up for. 

 

All this said, it doesn't sound really like a fundraiser. It seems more like a once a year party where they kick back some of proceeds to the food shelf. 

 

After googling, "Beefsteak tickets" I found that Beefsteaks are still around, here and there, and they seem to be not as fancy and not as richy as the one featured on Top Chef. Basically, $40- 55 for 3 hours of beer drinking and steak eating. The yearly beefsteak by Neal Fraser looks like it's about $150, but has different types of meat (i.e. seafood) and craft cocktails. 

Edited February 1, 2016 by bravofan27

[biakbiak]

I don't fault the fundraising method at all.  Apparently it has been going on for years, successfully.  I am perturbed, though, by either the description of the event, or the chefs' misinterpretation of it.  I am particularly sad over Kwame and Isaac, both of whom I like and both of whom could have f-ing killed it with better tasting dishes.

But that wasn't the fault of the challenge that was there fault in execution. Both dishes excited the judges in theory, it wasn't until the judges tasted them that they had a problem and that is on them.

I was under the impression from various articles that this event isn't put on byour the LA food bank but rather a group of friends and than a donation ts made to the food bank.

[susannot]

But that wasn't the fault of the challenge that was there fault in execution. Both dishes excited the judges in theory, it wasn't until the judges tasted them that they had a problem and that is on them.

I was under the impression from various articles that this event isn't put on byour the LA food bank but rather a group of friends and than a donation ts made to the food bank.

I can't disagree with you.