S15.E14: Finale

[Yeah No]

2 hours ago, The Solution said:

I think you showed your hand with the use of the word "harping".

Yeah, no.  I have rooted for non-white and/or non-male candidates in many seasons on this show, either because I liked them and their food or thought they deserved to win.  I would list their names but that's not on topic here.  Note that in all cases a candidate's race and/or gender was not the major reason I thought they should win.  For me it's all about the food on this show.  Suddenly this season I've seen a lot of complaining about the racial distribution of the winners on this show in this thread, which I think is insulting to Tom and Padma and everyone that produces and contributes to this show.  I'm sure that if they were accused of what has been implied they'd react pretty strongly to it as I'm sure they take what they do pretty seriously and strive to make the most unbiased decisions possible.  I am getting tired of seeing white men being accused of being subconsciously biased and/or racist whenever a diverse candidate doesn't win.  I think that is very unfair, especially in this case, since this show has such an outstanding record of diversity among its winners.  Tom may have his preferences with food like anyone else but to imply that he's biased towards white men in his judging is what I consider an insult to him.  I am a woman and if I thought he was being unfair to women I'd be the first person to start "harping" about it.

[The Solution]

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

[biakbiak]

6 hours ago, Pepper the Cat said:

I really think the finale cook should be a blind taste testing. The judges should just be told Chef 1 and Chef 2. That way, they could actually judge the food itself, not who they think should win,

To me all of the finales illustrate and this one especially why that is completely unnecessary, they put themselves on the plate and I bet even Waxman who had only judged one of the previous challenges could have guessed which meal was Adrienne's and which was Flamm's and its usually just the core judges who actually matter when it comes to the overall winner and they would clearly know even if it was blind.

[cooksdelight]

Aside from all that, it will never happen on a show like this. I wonder how much say the sponsor who provides the winning prize money has in the game?

[biakbiak]

1 hour ago, cooksdelight said:

Aside from all that, it will never happen on a show like this. I wonder how much say the sponsor who provides the winning prize money has in the game?

Given that Hidden Valley Ranch is currently about their bejeweled 35k bottles rather than their earlier keg promotion I am thinking none.

Edited March 12, 2018 by biakbiak

[Yeah No]

7 hours ago, The Solution said:

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

You don't know me or my history but if you did I don't think you would say that about me.  I think that certain assumptions about me, Tom, Padma or anyone involved with the show contribute to unnecessary divisiveness and are not part of "the solution" at all.

I personally see Adrienne's final two standing as having been encouraged by TPTB precisely because they wanted to give a black female every fair chance of winning.  She would never have been on the cast at all if she were not a serious contender.  I don't think that was a ruse just to appeal to an audience.  And the fact that she lasted to the very end is what I prefer to see as a victory of its own kind.  I was rooting for her all through.  I was a little disappointed when she lost even though I'm happy for Joe.  But I think seeing the glass as half empty wouldn't do any good so I prefer to concentrate on the positives of her journey, which are I think are many.  

One thing about Adrienne that struck me is finding out that her father was a Black Panther.  What an amazing legacy!  Adrienne strikes me as a poised individual who would never go home and claim unfairness after not winning on the basis of being a black female.  She seems to be a modest, positive person that is fortunate enough to be in an environment that has allowed her to achieve much.  This is amazing for an older person like me to witness.  I remember when black women would never be able to ascend to such heights, being on speed dial with Eric Ripert and all that!  Another thing not to forget is that for every accomplished black woman like Adrienne that has achieved much in a traditionally all white career there are usually white men in the background that helped to make it possible.  I prefer to see the positives in this, and I think that is the best way to look at it.

[Chickabiddy]

So a few things...

For the love of Christ let's not delude ourselves that these reality shows are only about the food, the design, the competition yada yada yada. If you truly believe that, I have a bridge to sell you, and am frankly amazed that your naivete has allowed you to live long enough to know how to establish an internet connection to get online to post such a comment. There are always producer manipulations and shenanigans involved to heighten the drama or please sponsors. And let's be real - in real life it isn't only about your skills or talents. It's also about how you look, what you wear, who you know, how big your tits are, how tall you are, how much hair you have, etc.  We have all seen that test where people rated taller male politicians with a full head of hair as smarter and more competent. And sometimes it;s even about hiring the lesser qualified person so that hiring manager doesn't feel threatened by younger, smarter talent. 

I liked both Joe F and Adrienne. I think both chefs were treated with a lot of well-deserved respect and praise by the judges. What I am having a hard time squaring is that the judges are always yammering about cooking your heart out, taking risks and pushing the creative envelope. I feel like Adrienne did that way more than Joe F did. She was edgy and creative. How can spice cake win over her deconstructed banana pudding? The judges even told her they would have LOVED the dessert if she had not  stressed the banana in it's name and called is something else? WTF? I get that it was a "flaw" but if a semantics change means you would have loved the visually stunning dessert, than fuck you judges. And fuck you judges for letting overdone beef ride and sniping at Adrienne for mashed black eyed peas. Every Monday, I mash some of my red beans in the pot to create a creamier texture. The crack about the peas just seemed a way to justify wanting Joe to win. Over rested beef is such a rookie mistake that it should never get a pass at this level of competition. Tanya went home for citing the temp of lamb at 145 - even though her lamb was done perfectly. 

And since it is Monday and I am that much of a raging bitch, why do so many of these celebrity chefs eat their food with the manners of a field hand?  I am looking squarely at you Tom C. You who are so good at nitpicking every element of the dining experience in restaurant wars should take a good look in the mirror because your hunched over posture at the table and ass backwards way you twist your your fork around to get the food to your mouth IS part of the dining experience. It's not like you don't have the cash or connections to slam yourself into a dining etiquette class to figure that shit out. 

Edited March 12, 2018 by Chickabiddy

[Yeah No]

22 minutes ago, Chickabiddy said:

I liked both Joe F and Adrienne. I think both chefs were treated with a lot of well-deserved respect and praise by the judges. What I am having a hard time squaring is that the judges are always yammering about cooking your heart out, taking risks and pushing the creative envelope. I feel like Adrienne did that way more than Joe F did. She was edgy and creative. How can spice cake win over her deconstructed banana pudding? The judges even told her they would have LOVED the dessert if she had not  stressed the banana in it's name and called is something else? WTF? I get that it was a "flaw" but if a semantics change means you would have loved the visually stunning dessert, than fuck you judges. And fuck you judges for letting overdone beef ride and sniping at Adrienne for mashed black eyed peas. Every Monday, I mash some of my red beans in the pot to create a creamier texture. The crack about the peas just seemed a way to justify wanting Joe to win. Over rested beef is such a rookie mistake that it should never get a pass at this level of competition.

I hear you but it looked to me like what put Joe's food out ahead of Adrienne's was one little factor, and it was the pig brodo in his tortellini dish.  I think that blew the judges away.  Otherwise the two were pretty much neck and neck when stacked up point by point.  It also looked to me like Adrienne might have been trying too hard to be creative and taking risks, and in the process bit off a tad more than she could chew in the execution.  That happens a lot on these cooking competitions.  The judges didn't articulate it that way, though.  I hate it when they seem to focus in on one or two things that make their decision look either arbitrary or contrary to their comments, but they don't give us the big picture, which would have made it make more sense.

[Chickabiddy]

1 minute ago, Yeah No said:

I hear you but it looked to me like what put Joe's food out ahead of Adrienne's was one little factor, and it was the pig brodo in his tortellini dish.  I think that blew the judges away.  Otherwise the two were pretty much neck and neck when stacked up point by point.  It also looked to me like Adrienne might have been trying too hard to be creative and taking risks, and in the process bit off a tad more than she could chew in the execution.  That happens a lot on these cooking competitions.  The judges didn't articulate it that way, though.  I hate it when they seem to focus in on one or two things that make their decision look either arbitrary or contrary to their comments, but they don't give us the big picture, which would have made it make more sense.

Right, but all we have to go on in terms of their judging and what they choose to show. Maybe it seems liked they only focused on one or two things to make their decision because they only actually focused on those one or two items to make their decision. Those editing monkeys can edit the show any way they want to provide the support for why the judges made their decisions. Wouldn't you want to actual broadcast your best reasons or full "proof" for why you made the decision you did? Why show misleading clips that tell only part of the story when the footage that shows the real smoking gun is left on the editing room floor? 

Again, we can only go on what they show us. We can't speculate on what they really meant or what really went wrong. And I still call bullshit on what they showed us. Adrienne's dessert would have been their favorite if she had named it something else and smahed black eyed peas - an actual cooking technique vs. over rested chewy beef.  Come the fuck on judges - give me some better reasons for your choice than that bullshit.  If we want you to win- overcooked chewy beef is okay, but if we want to send your ass packing, we are going to quibble over your decision to smash your black eyed peas. 

[LennieBriscoe]

It wasn't until the moment Adrienne showed her father as a Black Panther (how strangely passe' and yet au courant!) that I even "saw" her as "a Black woman." I was all about the food, and I would like to think the judges (and TPTB) were, too.

I did think Adrienne's show "arc" was to lead to her victory, though, more so than Big Joe's comeback (I never watch "LCK," as I am opposed to its very existence!).

Edited March 12, 2018 by LennieBriscoe

[Chickabiddy]

2 minutes ago, The Solution said:

Another thing not to forget is that for every accomplished black woman like Adrienne that has achieved much in a traditionally all white career there are usually white men in the background that helped to make it possible.  I prefer to see the positives in this, and I think that is the best way to look at it.

The fuck? So now people of color owe white men for the "help, love and support" they gave them along the way with enslavement, Jim Crow, water hoses, lower pay and on and on.

Someone somewhere has a pretty bad case of white savior complex. Holy hell this is right up there with African Americans should be happy they were brought to the Americas as slaves so they don't have to live in modern day Africa. Or maybe it's like Indians who should be thankful for the "culture" that the English brought to them through colonization. Or maybe  it's like the Native Americans who should thank Andrew Jackson for moving them West so white people wouldn't kill them right away to get their land. 

*Shaking My Damn Head*

I truly have read it all today. 

[LennieBriscoe]

11 minutes ago, Chickabiddy said:

If we want you to win- overcooked chewy beef is okay, but if we want to send your ass packing, we are going to quibble over your decision to smash your black eyed peas. 

Yep. Gail's "chewy" was even said in an off-hand manner, as if it were a minor flaw---in the ENTREE.

[Yeah No]

2 hours ago, Chickabiddy said:

Again, we can only go on what they show us. We can't speculate on what they really meant or what really went wrong. And I still call bullshit on what they showed us. Adrienne's dessert would have been their favorite if she had named it something else and smahed black eyed peas - an actual cooking technique vs. over rested chewy beef.  Come the fuck on judges - give me some better reasons for your choice than that bullshit.  If we want you to win- overcooked chewy beef is okay, but if we want to send your ass packing, we are going to quibble over your decision to smash your black eyed peas. 

I think part of the function of this board is for people to speculate on what was really going on behind the scenes on reality shows.  Often it comes out that what some people have speculated is true, and everyone is entitled to their opinion on how to speculate.

2 hours ago, Chickabiddy said:

The fuck? So now people of color owe white men for the "help, love and support" they gave them along the way with enslavement, Jim Crow, water hoses, lower pay and on and on.

That's not what I'm saying at all and I'm sorry you took that from my comment.  I'm saying that before anyone assumes the motivations of any particular white men, such as Tom C. or Eric Ripert, one should consider the particular man himself.  I think it is unfair to make negative assumptions about certain white men based solely on their being white, and to paint them all with such a broad brush, especially the people on this show most of whom probably have very liberal and forward thinking values on human rights and equality, and would probably be very hurt and insulted that anyone would insinuate such a thing about them.    

[Ellee]

Stupid question here. 

Why is the determination of the winner questioned here on these boards about race?

It was quite obvious that the cheftestants got along exceptionally well with each other. It was even more obvious that they supported each other in so many ways.  They all treated the judges decisions as judges’ decisions.  So why should we be different?

I loved this group and enjoyed watching them.  I don’t want any one of them being viewed as short changed in any way shape or form.  It cheats them from being acknowledged for what they each accomplished.  

They were all winners in my book. 

It’s times like these that I wish I could be more of an ‘eloquent’ poster.   I hope everyone sees I’m coming from a good place.   

Maybe someone can refresh my memory ... has there ever been a group like this before?  

[Chickabiddy]

1 hour ago, Yeah No said:

4 hours ago, Chickabiddy said:

Again, we can only go on what they show us. We can't speculate on what they really meant or what really went wrong. And I still call bullshit on what they showed us. Adrienne's dessert would have been their favorite if she had named it something else and smahed black eyed peas - an actual cooking technique vs. over rested chewy beef.  Come the fuck on judges - give me some better reasons for your choice than that bullshit.  If we want you to win- overcooked chewy beef is okay, but if we want to send your ass packing, we are going to quibble over your decision to smash your black eyed peas. 

I think part of the function of this board is for people to speculate on what was really going on behind the scenes on reality shows.  Often it comes out that what some people have speculated is true, and everyone is entitled to their opinion on how to speculate.

Ok. Opinions are like noses. Everyone has one. My point is that placing more value on speculation or what might have been said or what might have been intended is the height of hubris and arrogance when we have all the information that Bravo producers and editing monkeys wanted to show us. I take people at their word and by what they say. They said that Adrienne's dessert was more visually appealing and if not for the name, they would have loved it. They said she should not have mashed her peas, but were clear that Joe's meat was over rested and chewy. This is the same board/show that gave Tanya all that shit about quoting 145 degrees for done lamb even though she cooked it perfectly.  My argument is that their judging in Joe' favor does not match well with how they have judged and punished other cheftestants on this show. It does not match with what they say about wanting chefs to take risks and push the creative envelope. They rewarded a chef for playing it safer and who still had chewy beef in his entree, a boring appetizer and a cake for dessert. I don't rely on speculation. I rely what they have said and done ON CAMERA to support my opinion. 

And Bravo is posting all over my FB feed an article about why Adrienne (the loser) supports and accepts their decision. Now, maybe I am crazy, but if Bravo judges made a sound decision, why exactly do they need the LOSER to come out in support of their decision as the right one? It seems to me the decision could stand on its own without the LOSER having to swoop in to defend it. But that's just me and my opinion. 

 

1 hour ago, Yeah No said:

3 hours ago, Chickabiddy said:

The fuck? So now people of color owe white men for the "help, love and support" they gave them along the way with enslavement, Jim Crow, water hoses, lower pay and on and on.

That's not what I'm saying at all and I'm sorry you took that from my comment.  I'm saying that before anyone assumes the motivations of any particular white men, such as Tom C. or Eric Ripert, one should consider the particular man himself.  I think it is unfair to make negative assumptions about certain white men based solely on their being white, and to paint them all with such a broad brush, especially the people on this show most of whom probably have very liberal and forward thinking values on human rights and equality, and would probably be very hurt and insulted that anyone would insinuate such a thing about them.    

And for the record, I never brought race or gender into my argument about why Joe F. may have been picked over Adrienne. My only argument  was that judging was off in the Finale based on their past judgments this season, their rhetoric, and the comments they chose to air from judge's table. Maybe Tom likes big fat people more than short skinny people.

It was actually, you, Yeah No, who introduced the topics of race and gender into the exchange by commenting on the benefit that white men have bought to women of color who happen to be chefs in a male dominated industry.  I simply took issue with your implication that white men have been is somehow more helpful to women of color in the culinary industry than they been unhelpful.

And frankly, your post made it sound as if the likes of Adrienne never would have gotten where she was without the help of white men. You seem to miss the point that if the industry were more diverse both with regards to race and gender, Adrienne could have made it on her own merit without needing the 'helping hand" of the culturally dominate white male savior. 

Edited March 12, 2018 by Chickabiddy
because I suffer from l'esprit de l'escalier.

[AriAu]

I hate to bring this up, but none of us tasted ANY of the food, but we were all manipulated by the editing which has the sole purpose of adding suspense. If you want to be mad, it seems like the anger should be directed at the editing monkeys at the Dancing Elves.
But some one who did taste the food was Tom Colicchio and he said that while it was close, it wasn't that close.

http://www.vulture.com/2018/03/top-chef-season-15-finale-tom-colicchio-interview.html

Quote

 

SoWhat was the deciding factor that gave the win to Joe?

We thought the first course went to Adrienne, the next two courses went to Joe, and dessert was neutral. So, that really did it. His beef dish was better and his pasta was better than the octopus. The octopus was good. It was really dry and we all commented on that, and there’s no getting around that. It may have had to do with the charring after it was braised — a lot of things can happen if it were braised and not cooled down in the braising liquid. If it’s roasted, it can dry out. I don’t know what she did, but it was definitely dry. That was really it.

Was it as close as it seemed?
It was close. It wasn’t like his beef dish was way, way better. It was slightly better, and his pasta course was actually stunning. Her first course was only slightly better than his, although his was a little more, I don’t want to say conventional, but I’ve seen that beef. In fact, I did a dish that was very similar to that where we flipped the tuna, it was raw. I actually garnished it with fried sweetbreads. So that was a little more conventional. This one wasn’t as close as other finales.

 

Seems pretty clear to me....and that we got played again, but that the best cheftestant on that day in Aspen won.
 

Quote

 

It was quite obvious that the cheftestants got along exceptionally well with each other. It was even more obvious that they supported each other in so many ways.  They all treated the judges decisions as judges’ decisions.  So why should we be different?

I loved this group and enjoyed watching them.  I don’t want any one of them being viewed as short changed in any way shape or form.  It cheats them from being acknowledged for what they each accomplished.  

 

I think you said it pretty well.

[HawaiiTVGuy]

I was a fan of Adrienne and thought she was more creative and interesting and would have loved for her to win but I think the emphasis that some people online are passing on the criticism of Joe's beef seems to be grasping at straws.  Joe's beef was described as "chewy".  Sure that is not the ideal texture but it isn't like the meat was inedible like certain other proteins we have seen.

Also, the issue with Adrienne's second and third courses were the same, they were dry, no sauce to speak of to finish the dish.  I was thinking the same thing when I saw her plate the octopus dish.  That is all the grits you are going to give?  And she didn't really put the octopus on the grits.  Like they said, having it on a bed of grits probably would have helped with the dryness issue, along with having a sauce.  And her beef dish, their issue with her smashing the peas was that it made it dry.  Again, no sauce, the peas were her starch and from what I could tell there was no broth, so even though mashing beans is a good way to get a cream texture, if the beans are not sitting in a broth of any sort in my opinion it is likely any "creaminess" that one would get normally might have been lost.  I don't recall how it looked on the plate, but it looked like a pile of the beans and additives, not really "lumped" indicating a stickiness or wetness  Again we are not tasting but it doesn't seem unreasonable that could have happened.

And in terms of dessert, naming issues aside, it seemed like they didn't have enough pudding.  Again, I personally liked the concepts of Adrienne's dishes but it seems like she missed on a couple execution points.

[film noire]

4 hours ago, Ellee said:

Why is the determination of the winner questioned here on these boards about race?

But why wouldn't race (and gender) be part of the discussion of why someone has won? 

Over fifteen season and finales, imo, Colicchio has over-identified with white male contestants  -- maybe because they remind him of himself starting out, or because they cook food he already has an investment in  (or some alchemy of other reasons) but his bias controls the whole contest, even if it's only who ends up in the finale due to LCK.

And I don't buy the whole "You didn't taste the food" argument, because food tasting is subjective, not objective.  Personal bias also controls that   -- familiarity, past emotional connections to foods or food preparations  -- even just thinking about love can make food taste sweeter, for example:

"The finding is important for two reasons, Chan said. First of all, the fact that even water tastes sweeter when people think about love reveals that the emotion isn’t acting on the taste receptors on the tongue, making them more sensitive to sugar. There’s no sugar in the water, after all. Instead, the effect must arise from the brain’s processing of the taste information."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/22/emotions-taste-love-_n_4647125.html

And then add in personal reactions (conscious or subconscious)  to any one chef --  not liking them or finding them unfamilar/other or closely identifying with them as people --  those reactions change how invested you are in someone winning, *before you even taste the food*.  

So when Tom -- as the judge with the most sway --  ignores all of that to claim some perfect objective evaluation because "he tasted the food",  I question his self awareness, and question his assessment during the finale (especially when he drops his own gold standard of "tough protein = can't get past that to give them the win").

And that's why, imo,  race and gender matter when discussing the results on Top Chef.

@aquarian1 --  if this is not considered part of finale talk, can you direct my post to the right forum? I've looked,  but can't figure out where it should go other than here.

Edited March 12, 2018 by film noire

[bobbobbob199]

Why is race and gender being discussed? We want the winner who cooked the best tasting meal...in this case it didn't even seem close, Joe Flamm did.

If the result were that egregious (and solely based on Tom's preference for Joe), there were as many women as men at the Judge's Table--surely some would have spoken up? And as much as we say Adrienne is African American, she is White as well. Not that it matters, just STOP disrespecting the winner based on race and gender. If you have valid critiques of why Adrienne should have won based on what you know of her food, that should be discussed. To me, it seemed like the decision was close to unanimous among the Judges, and this was not a controversial decision like some other Top Chefs.

[susannot]

Those other controversial decisions have also involved  a white male chef winning over a talented black female chef.  The reverse has never occurred. The only other decisions that I can recall generating this much controversy  are those involving Blais.

[FormerMod-a1]

1 hour ago, film noire said:

@aquarian1 --  if this is not considered part of finale talk, can you direct my post to the right forum? I've looked,  but can't figure out where it should go other than here.

I linked to them in my mod note on the last page, which I have now also Announcemetized so it appears on every page.  

[film noire]

4 minutes ago, aquarian1 said:

I linked to them in my mod note on the last page, which I have now also Announcemetized so it appears on every page.  

Thank you!

[Nordly Beaumont]

6 hours ago, Ellee said:

Maybe someone can refresh my memory ... has there ever been a group like this before?  

In an interview on  the "Pack Your Knives" podcast, Chris (Amish-soul food) swore up and down and guaranteed there was never a group that truly liked and respected each other like this group!

[theatremouse]

I was mainly confused by the result because the way they went on how about amazing her first course was made it seem like she'd really need to fuck up the rest. But I guess if the judging is more of a "who won each course and tally 'em up" rather than a sort of...overall mental tally of points from all dishes combined, I guess I can see it. Not saying they use actual point system, but like...the scoring seems to be more like winning sets in tennis vs how many runs do you have at the end of 9 innings in baseball.

[Lura]

I judged the winner IN A REALLY INTELLIGENT WAY!  *sarcasm*

I adored both contestants and liked their picks for sous chefs.  Everyone and everything was equal in my eyes.  So, on to the cooking:

One contestant used an ingredient that I loathed (or think I would if I ever were forced to eat it} in his/her appetizer.  The other contestant had nothing in his/her appetizer that I objected to.  Thus, I chose the winner based on my favorite appetizer, and that was that.

You can find a million things wrong with my method, but it saved me a lot of time and agony over who would win!  : )

[bobbobbob199]

7 hours ago, susannot said:

Those other controversial decisions have also involved  a white male chef winning over a talented black female chef.  The reverse has never occurred. The only other decisions that I can recall generating this much controversy  are those involving Blais.

Controversies stemming from the quality of food are perfectly fine and healthy. Nina Compton vs Nicholas was a controversy because she had been producing higher quality food all season and the final votes seemed very close or questionable, not because she was black or she was a woman. Kevin Sbraga was black but he won over two white chefs. Was that controversial? Yes, because his food had been substandard, not because of this race or that of his competitors. Starting a controversy in this case because of race or gender is just not right. I hope this decision does not go down as controversial because there is no reason based on the food alone.

Edited March 13, 2018 by bobbobbob199

[Ellee]

7 hours ago, Nordly Beaumont said:

In an interview on  the "Pack Your Knives" podcast, Chris (Amish-soul food) swore up and down and guaranteed there was never a group that truly liked and respected each other like this group!

I’m not real handy with all these new found gadgets and sources of information.  :D  Haven’t heard of this podcast but will certainly be checking this podcast out. 

Thank you. :D

It’s also good to know that someone  else also believes that this was an extraordinary group of individuals.  

[Fiero425]

On ‎3‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 8:22 AM, Chickabiddy said:

So a few things...

For the love of Christ let's not delude ourselves that these reality shows are only about the food, the design, the competition yada yada yada. If you truly believe that, I have a bridge to sell you, and am frankly amazed that your naivete has allowed you to live long enough to know how to establish an internet connection to get online to post such a comment. There are always producer manipulations and shenanigans involved to heighten the drama or please sponsors. And let's be real - in real life it isn't only about your skills or talents. It's also about how you look, what you wear, who you know, how big your tits are, how tall you are, how much hair you have, etc.  We have all seen that test where people rated taller male politicians with a full head of hair as smarter and more competent. And sometimes it;s even about hiring the lesser qualified person so that hiring manager doesn't feel threatened by younger, smarter talent. 

I liked both Joe F and Adrienne. I think both chefs were treated with a lot of well-deserved respect and praise by the judges. What I am having a hard time squaring is that the judges are always yammering about cooking your heart out, taking risks and pushing the creative envelope. I feel like Adrienne did that way more than Joe F did. She was edgy and creative. How can spice cake win over her deconstructed banana pudding? The judges even told her they would have LOVED the dessert if she had not  stressed the banana in it's name and called is something else? WTF? I get that it was a "flaw" but if a semantics change means you would have loved the visually stunning dessert, than fuck you judges. And fuck you judges for letting overdone beef ride and sniping at Adrienne for mashed black eyed peas. Every Monday, I mash some of my red beans in the pot to create a creamier texture. The crack about the peas just seemed a way to justify wanting Joe to win. Over rested beef is such a rookie mistake that it should never get a pass at this level of competition. Tanya went home for citing the temp of lamb at 145 - even though her lamb was done perfectly. 

And since it is Monday and I am that much of a raging bitch, why do so many of these celebrity chefs eat their food with the manners of a field hand?  I am looking squarely at you Tom C. You who are so good at nitpicking every element of the dining experience in restaurant wars should take a good look in the mirror because your hunched over posture at the table and ass backwards way you twist your your fork around to get the food to your mouth IS part of the dining experience. It's not like you don't have the cash or connections to slam yourself into a dining etiquette class to figure that shit out. 

Hypocrisy is nothing new when it comes to judging; esp. with Tom who's so full of $#!t! He can't keep his comments straight; one day saying "it shouldn't have been on the plate," then reversing himself saying "the plate needed something!" He's such an arse and Gale normally 2nd's every commentary so she has little to no credibility in my book! Parroting everyone in general doesn't look good; "have some integrity and at least act like you have a brain Gale!" ;-)

[Fiero425]

On ‎3‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 9:14 AM, LennieBriscoe said:

Yep. Gail's "chewy" was even said in an off-hand manner, as if it were a minor flaw---in the ENTREE.

In the past they've given us this BS of hours quibbling over their meals! It's hard to believe that makes any sense! Their video commentary on the show only lasts a couple minutes so we're barely breaking the surface of why they judge someone better than the other! ;-(

[FormerMod-a1]

They were nitpicking.  They even said so.  Any negative they said wasn't what we'd probably call big.  So something like "chewy" probably doesn't mean like gum or jerky.  Just not quite as tender as it should be.  Same with dry - that doesn't mean needed a glass of water after, more like a hint of dryness that'd be better if it weren't there.  Also, they like to keep the suspense.  So they try to show an equal number of positive and negatives on each dish and/or chef, I think.  So that leads to being confused with the results.  But this is common in all the skills/competition shows, not just Top Chef.

[Eulipian 5k]

There's a race aspect to the food competition also. Given that they said how close the competition is, and seeing that so many judges knew Spiagga's owner, ate there, and commented on Joe's dish as " I feel I'm at Spiagga eating this" . I think Tom and his buddies agreed that the world needs another Pasta Palace a lot more than it needs a Michelin starred soul food restaurant.

This whole season has been Joe F., Joe Snidely, or Bruce's to lose, from the get! It's Top Noodle, didn't cha know?

[Ellee]

4 hours ago, Eulipian 5k said:

There's a race aspect to the food competition also. Given that they said how close the competition is, and seeing that so many judges knew Spiagga's owner, ate there, and commented on Joe's dish as " I feel I'm at Spiagga eating this" . I think Tom and his buddies agreed that the world needs another Pasta Palace a lot more than it needs a Michelin starred soul food restaurant.

This whole season has been Joe F., Joe Snidely, or Bruce's to lose, from the get! It's Top Noodle, didn't cha know?

I actually think that the cheftestants would disagree with this. 

Repeating myself here, these cheftestants treated this as a competition.  They responded as a competition ... saying what they did right and what they did that could have been better.   They openly supported each other.   They actually became friends.   I've never searched the cheftestants after the show was over.  I find myself doing just that.   I'm enjoying the interviews, reading about who is going where and to do what.  I don't do that. 

I think this group stands alone in so many aspects.   I look forward to seeing what each and every one of them do in the future. 

And, another thing that I can say that I've never said before, I would have been happy for whatever two ended up in the finale and for the one that won.  

Edited March 14, 2018 by Ellee

[Lura]

On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 11:15 AM, Fiero425 said:

Hypocrisy is nothing new when it comes to judging; esp. with Tom who's so full of $#!t! He can't keep his comments straight; one day saying "it shouldn't have been on the plate," then reversing himself saying "the plate needed something!" He's such an arse....

Did you ever wonder how Tom manages to keep a straight face?

[Fiero425]

1 minute ago, Lura said:

Did you ever wonder how Tom manages to keep a straight face?

Thoughtful superiority to all concerned? ;-)

[noveltylibrary]

"One of these things is not like the others..."

 

[Fiero425]

1 minute ago, noveltylibrary said:

"One of these things is not like the others..."

 

One great chef and 3 Boobs? ;-)

[iggysaurus]

If race/gender/diversity did play a part in the judging at all, they arguably would've had more reason to select Adrienne than Joe. What I mean is, if Top Chef wanted to generate good PR for themselves, they could've hyped up a whole narrative about picking the "first black female Top Chef." In the current social/political climate, for a show that presumably skews somewhat young and "hip" in terms of viewers (or at least aspires to), they would've absolutely looked better if they did choose a minority so they'd look more progressive.  If anything, they have more to lose in reputation by crowning Joe F, due to social media backlash about "straight white males" just like we're seeing here.  Don't you think that they (the producers, judges, etc) consider that aspect and are aware of how strongly the current tide is leaning toward increased diversity and minority representation? I don't believe producers of a show like Top Chef would do any of this for altruistic reasons but on a cynical level I think they might do it for image reasons. Think about Project Runway, where Tim Gunn outright admitted that the winner a few seasons ago (Ashley) was chosen as the first 'plus size' designer for what some would call "PC" reasons and not because her designs were the best.  Top Chef could've done that here, and more credibly because Adrienne actually IS good ... but they didn't.  So in a weird way, that makes me feel Joe must've won fairly, even though I preferred Adrienne, because they chose him despite Adrienne providing a better 'story arc' overall.  Just my opinion. 

[biakbiak]

Joe Flamm was on the Pack Your Knives podcast and mentioned that the "grano arso" flour he used for his tortellini course was something Sasto had brought with him to the competition but hadnt got around to using. Interesting that they are still allowed to bring some specialty ingredients but that its no longer mentionedon the show, it makes me wonder what other people brought.

[noveltylibrary]

On 3/9/2018 at 4:22 AM, chiaros said:

Yes, Padma didn't have a boobage problem this episode. What a surprise.

[Fiero425]

6 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

Joe Flamm was on the Pack Your Knives podcast and mentioned that the "grano arso" flour he used for his tortellini course was something Sasto had brought with him to the competition but hadn't got around to using. Interesting that they are still allowed to bring some specialty ingredients but that its no longer mentioned on the show, it makes me wonder what other people brought.

Others have admitted to bringing in their secret weapon ingredient with them; season 2 winner Ilan wore out his bottle of saffron the entire season! ;-(

[biakbiak]

1 minute ago, Fiero425 said:

Others have admitted to bringing in their secret weapon ingredient with them; season 2 winner Ilan wore out his bottle of saffron the entire season! ;-(

They are allowed to bring things, my point was that they used to highlight it icluding showing their little lockers, its just not shown anymore.

[Fiero425]

2 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

They are allowed to bring things, my point was that they used to highlight it icluding showing their little lockers, its just not shown anymore.

Something had to go! They're already super-sizing the episodes trying to get out much as they can out of these guys! An extra ingred. they have in their own TC pantry might not be worth it I guess! ;-)

[IDreamofJoaquin]

I wanted Adrienne to win so bad.  I thought she came a long way during the season and learned a lot about herself as well as her true style of cooking.  She put out some really amazing and beautiful dishes.  I am shocked she didn't.  My husband and I loved both Joe's, Adrienne and Chris and thought all their cooking was exceptional.  It's so hard at the end.

[chiaros]

16 hours ago, noveltylibrary said:

On 3/9/2018 at 4:22 AM, chiaros said:

On 3/8/2018 at 10:49 PM, LeighLeigh said:

Padma dressed appropriately this week. 

Yes, Padma didn't have a boobage problem this episode. What a surprise.

 

You're right. I take it back. She DID have a boobage problem. And she definitely looks like Morticia Addams here, except that even M.A. did not spill her boobs out like that. But P.L. does resemble more this "hair wig model" as shown here, boobs and all.

Somehow she managed to be more "covered up" in the early parts of the episode - maybe that was what I remembered when I made that post.

[Special K]

Maybe she knew Joe's nana was going to be there and wanted to be sure she got a good look.  :)

[amykay9377]

On 3/9/2018 at 3:58 AM, bobbobbob199 said:

For those of you complaining on the "white guy" winning...are we going to make this complaint every time someone wins a judged show? 

Top Chef has done a great job of bringing in a diverse range of contestants, and giving each equal opportunities to succeed. There has always been an equal ratio of men to women, and minorities and LGBT, etc. have been represented liberally. This season alone we had like 75% women or minorities. Honestly, I think they are even overrepresented, considering the industry of head chefs in the US as a whole is at least 2/3 white men, but their representation on the show is like 25%.

THANK YOU!! I'm so over reality competitions holding up minority contestants.

Oh, she's a woman? We've only had 2 woman winners, so she should TOTALLY win!

Oh, she's a gay woman? We've only had ONE gay woman win, so this is in the bag for her!
And then, this ep... Oh, she's a black woman? We haven't checked THAT off our Diverse MInority Bingo Card yet... she's gonna take home the title!
And who cares if shes not a black woman who doesn't cook as good as a straight white male? DIVERSITY!!!!
If she's better, she's better and she should win. If she's not, I don't give a crap how many Diversity Points she has.

THAT BEING SAID, I did love Adrienne and I thought she was good enough to win. I was actually surprised when Flamm took the title.

[Eulipian 5k]

While some may imagine a room where a group of white chefs said 'Oh, she's a woman, black, gay, Asian,? she should totally win!" MANY have had to prove in court in front of white judges that many restaurant owners have said "Oh, she's a woman, or black, or  gay, or Asian,?" don't even let them in the door!" Not even to sit down and buy our food! That is why people suspect that TPTB still harbor those ideas. We may think it's just because we're soo PC but actually all discrimination had to be proven in court before the anti-discrimination laws were written.

Did I really believe blacks wanted to play every football position except quarterback? or none of them were good enough to be a coach? Or that pre-DIVERSITY, none of us wanted to be a cook  in a fancy restaurant? DIVERSITY did not kill BIGOTRY, believe me the EMPIRE is striking back, and they've got a lot of Twitter followers.

[ratgirlagogo]

On 3/15/2018 at 2:04 PM, chiaros said:

And she definitely looks like Morticia Addams here, except that even M.A. did not spill her boobs out like that.

PLEASE.   LIke Morticia would ever have been caught DEAD in paisley.  Padma's doin' Cher here.

[dewelar]

4 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

LIke Morticia would ever have been caught DEAD in paisley.

Or worse, caught ALIVE in paisley.

[chiaros]

21 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

PLEASE.   LIke Morticia would ever have been caught DEAD in paisley.  Padma's doin' Cher here.

 

16 hours ago, dewelar said:

Or worse, caught ALIVE in paisley.

 

Perhaps it might be a notion to consider that paisley, tweeds, tartan, flannel, allblack, leather, frilly lace, whateverelseyouhaveinmind - are but artifacts of the suppositions imposed by *some* folks on what "fashion" or "tone" needs to be. "Fashion" is but an artificial construct lacking provable declarations about a person's (or, even, a FICTIONAL character's) idea of himself or herself.

 

ETA: And, in this vein, I also note that it has been reported that Joe Sasto has several leisure suits including a banana/canary yellow one which he wears at certain functions, and revels in it too. Why not? It sounds like something that would make my lip curl at the corners in both amusement and delight - but I imagine fashionistas would recoil in horror at even the very notion of it. Because they wouldn't be caught dead (or alive) in it?

Edited March 18, 2018 by chiaros