sam wrote:

I'm totally impressed with everyone who made it, and my viewership is completely vindicated by Brian, who has completely proven himself to be an excellent chef despite chef Tom thinking he can only cook seafood. I wanted to point out that Casey looks like the Cook's Chicken lady from Ghostworld. What a great show.

posted on September 19, 2007 at 11:16 PM

Jim Nail wrote:

Unless the content that was shown on the air was terribly flawed, Casey clearly should have won the quickfire challenge. When the chef tasted her dish, he clearly said that he liked it best of all. Then in the kitchen he made it sound like she only got credit for being attractive. I don't get it.

posted on September 19, 2007 at 11:31 PM

CJ Casuto wrote:

Gail, I think you are SPOT ON as to the obvious hurdles Casey had to overcome this entire episode. If you listen to the comments at the Quick Fire by Chef Maccione, he says specifically that Casey's is the best. Yet, when it comes to listing his favorites, he says that he wants to give it to Casey because she is attractive, but awards the prize to Hung. What? Then, at the Elimination, the Chef's say that Casey in the blind taste is best, yet beat her up over using Chicken rather than Rooster, and Hung wins again. This doesn't even count the number of posts that indicate Casey is somehow not great even though she's winning again and again, and is just making it through on her good looks. I think we should all be happy as women that you have a talented female Chef, who has fought her way to the top, is a true professional, and is good looking. She reminds me of Harold a lot. She is respected by everyone and when people need help, she plates, she is supportive at elimination. Bonus for her looking good. She has really also taken a lot and not said a word. Hung almost stabbed her running with his knife, almost made her fall with his spilled oil in the last quickfire and she says nothing. She's a pro!!! Go Casey.

posted on September 19, 2007 at 11:38 PM

Andy B. wrote:

Hi Gail, Congrads on Top Chefs Emmy nomination. I thought T.C. had a very good chance to win. Tonight, I agree with the judges on Sarah's elimination. I also thought, she was the weakest of the five, and should have been eliminated weeks ago. Did not like the way Padma eliminated Sarah. Padma always says the name of the person to leave first. This time she said Dale's name first, followed by you go on to Aspen. Then she said Sarah, pack your knives and go. Padma kinda mislead both of them, and us viewers with tthinking Dale was going home, by saying Dale name first this time. Also glad Hung won both challenges. Seems he's finally stepping up. Also wondering, how come when Casey won her elimination challenges(2x in a row), she got great gifts. 1 A round trip for two anywhere she wants. 2 A nice expensive lab top. While Hung got zero, nada, nothing- for todays elimination win. Certainly not fair. whenever a chef wins a elimination challenge, they should receive a substantial gift.
Onto Aspen for the final four, and anyones game. Who will be Top Chef. I say it will be Dale and Hung in the final two, with Hung being named Top Chef. I guess we will see.

posted on September 19, 2007 at 11:49 PM

Jason wrote:

I respect Gail's talent and success. As far as for to be a food critic? I have to say her has limited taste buds and food knowledge. In my honest opinion, I considered Gail to be the type of eater to prefer eye appeal type of food. In which most young Americans to be, whom knew nothing about flavor and international spices and food preparation.
To say Sara's chicken was undercook, and in previous season she would rather have a duck to be served with a hint of pink?
That is just rediculous. You won't serve me pink duck, chicken, nor pork.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 12:09 AM

Swamp Yankee wrote:

Ms Simmons,

I certainly can't fault the logic that had Sara M be eliminated. I also can't fault Hung for not telling his competition how to make paupiettes of sea bass.

Actually, the only serious fault I find in Hung is his rather cavalier attitude towards safety and cleaning up his messes.

I suspect Hung is slightly more likely to win everything than Casey. Although the other contestants seem, in many ways, to be more pleasant people than Hung (although, for all I know, Casey, Dale, and Brian keep pet constrictors, feeding them on stray kittens), Hung seems to be the best from the technical point of view.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 12:30 AM

Alice wrote:

I have watched Top Chef since the very beginning, I have not missed a Episode in 3 years now, and although I am very sad that CJ and Tre were eliminated so early, those were my top two picks (without being able to taste their food) this is clearly a personal choice. However, after seeing the way that Hung represents himself, I would never work with, buy, eat or associate myself within his restuarants or whichever he choses to create in the future. For me he clearly was at the bottom of my list since day one judging the All - Stars dishes. Just in case anybody was wondering who my choice would be now, I would say that it would have to be either Casey, Dale or Brian.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:05 AM

bridget wrote:

Very happy to see you back. I respect your forthrightness and obvious knowledge and excitement when it comes to great food. I agree with you that this is indeed a CONTEST and Hung's unwillingness to share his "secrets" was understandable...but that said, it is the co-operative spirit of this year's contestants, especially that of Dale and to a lesser degree, Casey, that keeps me tuning in. Unlike other reality shows, which I have to admit are becoming more and more difficult to watch because of their mean-spiritedness, Top-Chef stands head and shoulders or should I say head cheese and pork shoulder above the rest. Although I loved Sarah's head to head with Howie during the restaurant wars where she finally put the somewhat silly little self-important cook in his place, I am glad we are now down to the four chefs I always thought would make it to the finals...well, it was a toss-up between Casey and Tre. Of course not being able to taste the dishes we can only wonder, but like you I do think that the lack of women in the culinary kitchen and in the shows' final contestants is a wonderment. I know that the great cooks in my own life were my mother and grandmother and if I may say so, myself. So kudos to Tiffany, Elia, Lea, Leanne and the others that I suspect are great chefs. Viva la femme!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:08 AM

Andy wrote:

Good blog, Gail.

I recently read that, according to a 2005 survey on StarChefs.com, 89 percent of executive chefs nationwide are male.

Top U.S. orchestras (and I think orchestras are a good parallel to high-end kitchens) used to have a similar lack of women, and all sorts of people said it wasn't about sexism, it was just that women didn't "have what it takes," until those orchestras started holding "blind auditions" (where the auditioners were behind a screen so that judges couldn't tell their sex or race and had to judge them only by their playing). Then - what do you know? - all of a sudden women started getting into orchestras all over the place. A Harvard/Princeton study of blind auditions in U.S. orchestras found that the use of a screen increased the chances of US women in the first round of auditions by 50%, and in the final rounds by 300%. The overall effect of blind auditions has helped increase the presence of women in US orchestras over the last 20 years from about a 5% representation to 36%.

So rather than questioning the feelings that you had at Le Cirque years ago, and Casey and Sara had in 2007, I think we need to accept the fact that gender affects how people evaluate chefs and their cooking.

If you really want to see more women in the finale next season, try running a couple challenges where the judges don't know who cooked what until after they declare the winners and losers. I bet you'll find that - what do you know? - the women suddenly start doing better.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:10 AM

RobertM wrote:

Gail,

Why the constant feminist rants? It's really getting tired and annoying. The simple fact is, being a chef or a line cook in a top restaurant is physically, mentally, and emotionally demanding and brutal and men, by simple luck of nature, are IN GENERAL (NOT ALWAYS) better suited to the task.

I especially don't understand how someone like you, who's been fortunate enough to work in some of the greatest kitchens, can implicity accuse the entire industry of being sexist and misogynistic. To me it's a copout and an excuse. If you want to continue to use this forum as an outlet of your own personal agenda, you better back it up.

RobertM

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:17 AM

Nathan wrote:

Hi Gail,
I too am disappointed that there is only one woman left in the kitchen...And I'm a MALE! I'm still pulling for Casey. (Come on Casey, you can do it!) Gail, I told you last week how I had the highest respects on your criticism and realized that you didn't pick on the chefs personally but professionally. Well, I think Tom has a bone to pick with Casey. Every thing she makes he's always looking for a fluke and last week, he seemed surprised she did something good, as if "Oh, a woman did this!?!". I'm not liking it. But you chose Casey as your favorite, not because she was a woman, but because her dish was simply the best. I admire that about you and might I add, it was AWESOME to see you back at the judges table. We've missed you and you finally returned. YAY!!!!! Great to see you back Gail.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:36 AM

RK Ohashi wrote:

People are always talking about Padma and how hot she is but I have to say that Gail Simmons is such a gorgeous, hot, beautiful & sexy woman on top of being an extremely knowledgeable culinary expert! My God!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:50 AM

Phil wrote:

Hi Gail - I really appreciate the show more when you are judging. I find you sexy and smart and enjoy watching you. I couldn't help but notice your evin grin after Dale said that after tasting food "you can tell if someone got laid last night." Hope you had as much fun as I did.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:51 AM

Adriane wrote:

Sexism is absolutley an issue and I question if we will ever have a female win Top Chef. I hope I'm wrong. Even the Bravo poll - who's more talented, the men or the women? was a disturbing bias to even present, as if sex plays a part in their abilities. Too often women are perceived of as "cooks" while men are "chefs". It reminds me of the days when "nurse" was synonymous with a female as "surgeon" was with a male.

Some bloggers suggest Casy has only gotten this far on her looks. Are they kidding me?! Notice NO ONE suggested the same thing regarding handsome male contestants in previous seasons. Casey' has absolutely has earned her way into the finals. Calmly unflappable, her dishes look cleanly and beautifully thought out and prepared. Wish I could taste them!

Terrific episode this week - no gimmicks or silly challenges. And THANK YOU for using chicken at last. This humble staple of the home cook has been neglected for two and a half seasons. Has there been more than one or two recipes in all three seasons that used chicken? At last Top Chef let this simple and inexpensive ingredient shine.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 3:39 AM

nece wrote:

Hi Gail,
I was so glad to see you on tonights panel. You looked so pretty, you were glowing and your make-up was flawless, I guess the engagement is going well...it definitely shows. I am soo glad that you pointed out that Hung made the right decision in the quickfire challenge to stay quiet. I agree 100% that he was smart to keep it to himself. Dale is really getting on my nerves because he keeps talking shit about Hung every chance he gets saying that he doesnt have a heart. He made a comment last week when Hung was cleaning up after himself and didnt help CJ out. Hello, Dale this is a freaking competition buddy and Hung even said that CJ did not ask for his help so why the hell should one of his competitors offer to help him. CJ didnt even seem concerned himself so then why the hell should Hung worry about him. CJ didnt even say anything, it was Dale complaining about Hung because I think he is totally intimidated by him which he should be. Dale is a raging bitch and he's always bitching about Hung. Hung is a smart guy, not only with food but just in general. He's not there to make friends, he's there to compete, which like you pointed out, some of these chefs seem to be forgetting. He's not mean to anybody and he's not getting in anybody's way, he's doing his own thing and he's looking out for himself, which is what they should all be doing, especially this stage in the game. Hung is smart and quick and he finished his dish early on last weeks challenge and then he was cleaning up after himself, he wasnt just sitting there bitching...he did his job so if CJ or any other chef was going too slow, thats not his problem, in fact that tells you right there that their not going to make great chefs if their too slow in the kitchen. He was doing what he should've been doing, which was cleaning up after himself and if he did'nt Dale would've had a field day with that one. And HELL NO he should not tell Dale or any body else how he cooked that dish in tonights challenge!!! I know that you guys already picked a winner and cant go back and change it, I just hope its either Hung or Casey, if its raging bitch, I will have a heart attack!! He so fits the stereo type of the GAY RAGING BITCH, he's disgracing his gay community...and for the love of GOD, would he stop making those stupid analogies that just waist camera time!! Also, he seems to forget a lot, he forgets very essential things and that is not good for a chef! He is lucky that there is always somebody worse off then him so he gets to stay...he is basically hanging on by a thread. Im totally sure he'll be the first one gone next week, hopefully. It's the end now anyway and Im sure he wont be the winner, I'll be suprised if he even remembers what he's competing for, he might forget and think he's there to make half-ass attempts at jokes or he might think he's there to help the others win, you guys better remind him that it's a cooking competition. He might actually forget to cook next week or forget to put the main ingredient in the dish but Im sure he wont forget whatever stupid ass analogy he comes up with, hurray for us. If you actually got through reading all of this, thank you for taking the time cause I know I was kinda going on and on and you have hudreds of these to read, take care...hope your on panel next week.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 4:26 AM

Cathy wrote:

Appreciate your comments, especially about the male dominated world of the elite chef. How ironic that most meals cooked in the home are done by women. I am more of an intuitive cook than a trained cook, so I appreciate what Casey brings to the competition. In the end though I think that Hung's technical skills and classical training may win out. Originally I was rooting for Tre, but now I'm hoping Casey will bring it in the end.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 4:40 AM

Trish wrote:

Hi Gail,
I am glad that you commented on the raw chicken that Sara had served to you. If she does not believe it, she should watch that episode herself. I felt that she and Dale were out of their depth. I really feel that Casey and Hung are going all the way with Hung winning. He may not be the nicest person, but he appears to be a good chef and and his knife skills are amazing. Casey has really suprised me. She has held her own and is doing well. I'm sure she will be a success regardless of what happens. Also, I have to comment that this season has been enjoyable to watch after the nonsense of season 2. This group reminds me of the season 1 contestants. There has been little drama and I really have enjoyed seeing all the guest judges. Can't wait for the finale!!!!!!!!!!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 4:44 AM

Lynda I wrote:

Hi Gail,
Hung won the QF and Elimination on the most important episode to date, yet received no prize... Why??
Conversely, Casey squeaks by with her 2 wins (she created a nice carpaccio but flubbed packaged mousse then she made first class gas food) and received extravagant gifts. What's the deal here?

posted on September 20, 2007 at 7:22 AM

FanFare wrote:

Nice Blog (with the exception of including Ilan as part of the Emmy party. Believe me, he is an albatross...)
I liked this episode greatly. It was interesting to see such an "old school" restaurant still vibrant. The owner was adorable too (being held up by Padma). I was dismayed that he chauvinistically discounted Casey because she was a pretty woman. For shame! "People should not hate her because she is beautiful"...

I found your acceptance of Hung's decision to play it cagey was surprising. It was clear that he would get flack from his "colleagues" on the show. They needed to be reminded that they were actually competitors. Dale's sanctimonious speeches grew tiresome. What a high horse he sat on!

Hung has grown on me from the beginning of the season. I can appreciate his joy of cooking. And Dale, he does enjoy cooking and cooks with plenty of heart. Look at his face!
If Hung did not win the title, he still is a "Top Chef" in technigue and is fascinating to watch.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 7:36 AM

Julia wrote:

In the second episode when shopping Casey asked CJ how much meat he thought she should buy and he would not tell her saying this was a contest. You failed to mention that in your blog but allways manage to mention Hung's faults.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 8:09 AM

Steve wrote:

I agree with hungs choice to not share information , good call , I believe hung is going to win this competition.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 8:31 AM

zmulls wrote:

I'm sorry that it drove you crazy how much the cast liked each other. It's one of the reasons I am enjoying this show and can't watch most other "reality" shows.

I came to TOP CHEF late in S2, and almost never watched it again because it was the episode of cast members practically assaulting Marcel. I come for the cooking, not the sophomoric behavior and real or manufactured drama.

The respect that most of the cheftestants have for each other makes this show a pleasure to watch, not a cheap bitchfest. It's a plus, not a minus.

I'd like to see more about the actual *cooking,* though I realize there are time constraints. I would love for the producers to go back and re-cut some cooking sequences from the challenges, with new voice-overs by the cheftestants as to the techniques and ingredients they are using. That could be a bonus episode or two, a DVD extra, or a web-only feature. I want to hear more about their cooking techniques and less about their interpersonal squabbles.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 8:46 AM

CharmedOne wrote:

Are you kidding? Potato was one of the key ingredients and Hung messed it up! How is he even remotely the winner of this challenge when Casey hit on all cylinders?

posted on September 20, 2007 at 8:50 AM

Ellie Wymore wrote:

I was disappointed their was no blog from Tom Colicchio this morning, but since you also commented on the fact that Casey's coq au vin was not traditional, I decided to add my comments here. I would never pretend I was a chef - just someone who likes to cook for friends and family. In my checkered past I have made coq au vin for dinner parties several times. After all of Tom's comments last night (which were the ONLY negative comments made about Casey's dish) I dragged out my 3 cookbooks from which I have taken my recipes. These include MASTERING THE ART OF FRENCH COOKING by Julia Child, Louisette Bertholle and Simone Beck. Each coq au vin recipe calls only for a 2 1/2 to 3 lb chicken. Nothing is said about a rooster in any of them. If this is the only acceptable way to prepare the dish, someone forgot to tell some of our greatest French chefs.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 9:31 AM

meg wrote:

I love this show, Chef Tom and Padma are my favorites. Was so sorry to see Tre and CJ go. But Gail, I have to say, you are my least favorite component on the show. I think you are a great ambassador for the show and your blogs are interesting, but I feel you let your personal feelings interfere with the selection process and over exaggerate with the negative. It really feels like you had it in for Sara and Hung. It feels like you over exaggerate to sway opinion against 'your target'.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 10:31 AM

dave wrote:

yay! gail is back on tv! gail, you bring so much credibility, beauty and class to this show... you were very much missed these last few weeks. can't wait for the finale!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 10:39 AM

Zack wrote:

Why do you care that it only leaves the competition with only one woman remaining? It wouldn't bother me in the least if there were four women remaining or four men remaining or any combination there of. This brings me back to something I have mentioned several times before, which is as follows:

I really think this show needs to have dishes prepared for the judges so that they do not know who has made them until after they have placed there vote for the winning dish. All that needs to be done is to randomly assign a number to each dish and match it to a number for the judge. Have the number assignments change after each judging. This would also eliminate personality conflicts between the cheftestants and the judges.

As for the judge commenting on Casey's looks, that is unfortunate that any comment was made, but I can't say that I am surprised by it. Given the way this show has been edited, IMO it has been edited to emphasize Casey's looks. If true, that is rather disappointing. It is bad enough to deal with a gender bias in terms of judging and competition within a kitchen, but then to have that exploitation occur through editing just makes the producers of this show look bad.

I am not so sure that it is a gender bias or if it is more of the fact that Casey is an attractive woman and that the bias would be due to her being an attractive female as opposed to be an average looking female. Granted, Sara did not have an easy time in the kitchen. She did not seem comfortable in her surroundings. I don't think that was due to the men, since her quick fire dish was undercooked as well as the elimination challenge dish.

The judges did get it right. I would think under cooking chicken would be an automatic disqualification.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 10:42 AM

Artful wrote:

Finally, after a long insulting-to-viewers season, they managed to put together a show with QUALIFIED guest Judges and interesting challenges. Kudos to whoever is responsible.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 11:16 AM

Christina wrote:

A person in any career has enough trouble prooving themselves withough added obstacles, but sorry, this "poor casey is facing the added 'woman pressure' " talk is really annoying - especially when her biggest competition is a visible minority - I think they have their share of bias as well - How many asian cooks in a french restaurant do you know? And do they not have to proove themselfs just that much more too?
oh yea, and I am female and I don't buy the female bias -

btw what is up with the lack of quick fire prize? It ranges from laptop and airline tickets to padma's cookbook (???sorry but really) and nothing. A bit unfair

posted on September 20, 2007 at 11:22 AM

Bill G wrote:

I agree with you, Hung was under no obligation to teach his fellow competitors how to create the quickfire challenge. In fact I think they are to be criticized for asking. They expect him to help them win?

Bill

posted on September 20, 2007 at 11:25 AM

lon wrote:

Last night's show confirmed in my mind that Top Chef is back to its former glory. With you missing from the judge's table for so long, and Tom and Padma not blogging for several weeks, I was having a severe disconnect from the show.

Please tell the producers that their idea of bringing in more outside judges is a poor concept. There already is a guest judge each week. I understand that you had other committments, but I hope that future seasons are not held during times when your other activities draw you away from Top Chef.

Us avid TC fans rely on the judge's comments since we can't taste the food and we see only quick photos of it on the show, plus we are making judgements on a condensed, edit version of events. When the TC judges are in such a state of flux it diminishes to viewing experience.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 11:32 AM

Patrick wrote:

I think it's obvious that as the competition moves to a finish, getting to the point where it is becoming about the true basics of being a great chef-technical skills, passion, knowledge and creativity-Hung is starting to seperate himself from the remaining contestants. I wonder though, if it comes down to Hung and Casey, your early bias against Hung, coupled with your strong desire for a female winner will sway your vote to Casey?

posted on September 20, 2007 at 11:59 AM

Kevin S. wrote:

Once again, I agree with you. I do have to say that I'd like Hung a whole bunch more if the man would just shut up. To paraphrase Don Corleone, everytime I start to like him, he opens his mouth and POW, I hate him again. I think Casey was a victim of the "Old Boys Club" tonight. That ancient dude in the quickfire gave the win to Hung but liked Casey's better? What gives with that? Then the same thing in the elimination. They like Hung's chicken just fine but the potato wasn't up to snuff. A key part of the challenge, and he wins. I was hoping Casey would get the hat trick but it just wasn't meant to be. As for the prizes, I'm sure it all depends on who or whom is the sponsor of the evening. Of course she's gonna get plane tickets when they're cooking at Continental Airlines. Geez, people, get a grip on reality will ya? Sara's chicken sure looked undercooked to me. She doesn't listen, does she? Gail didn't say raw, she said undercooked and I'm sorry, but unless you're eating the famous French blue footed chickens, salmonella is a major turnoff, believe me, having suffered from it years ago afer a Labor Day cookout. Both duck and pork, nowadays, can be prepared medium to medium rare without worries but chicken, no way! Dale tried, but forgot the sauce and Brian, at least he didn't cook seafood with the chicken, made what looked like a pretty tasty dish. Correct me if I'm wrong but, I didn't here anyone say that the chicken had to be the main focus, just one of the ingredients so using the sausage was just fine as far as I'm concerned. Back to Hung, good for him for not sharing info in the quickfire. That old fan favorite Howie said it best, it's not a team competition and only one person can win. I'm just hoping it's Casey.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 12:20 PM

chris wrote:

My comment is not about the contest this week. It's about a clear change in the way the show is presented. Please, from now on call it the, Padma Show. She's just about all that's seen in the first half of the show. Gail and Ted are seen very intermittently and Tom has been forced into a subserviant "kitchen" position. What is going on? In response, Tom's wonderful, thoughtful personality has gone by the wayside, he's gained weight, and he looks like the equivalent of a CEO that is now working on the line. I miss the old show. Please don't let Padma dictate the flavor of the broadcast. I'm not saying get rid of her. Just use her as the generalist that she is and put chef Tom where he belongs, as the rudder of the Top Chef ship!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 12:25 PM

Albert C. wrote:

Gail, great to see you again and enjoyed your excellent blog. Totally agree with you about how tough it is for women in culinary careers. My own daughter is a surgeon whom the male doctors refer (or defer) as to her "running with the boys". Same thing for female chefs, they have to run with the boys and prove themselves as talented as them, which Casey has definitely done, and you did yourself, I'm sure. If you said the chicken was undercooked, it was undercooked. Tough break for Sara M. because she was likeable and talented. Can't wait for next week! Ciao!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 12:26 PM

laura wrote:

Thank you for bringing gender issues to the forefront. They were so obvious at Le Cirque; more subtle with the elimination challenge, but clearly tipped the balance in Hung's favor.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:11 PM

Lisa P. wrote:

Hi, was anyone grossed out by the lack of class Dale showed when he mentioned getting ---- and then proceeded to discuss his duet dish. I couldn't get that out of my mind. I like Dale but he should watch his mouth in front of those lovely chefs.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:46 PM

Kaye wrote:

I have to mention the female aspect. When Casey's dish was tasted for the quickfire challenge, the judge stated that it was the best, then voted for Hung. It appeared to me that the same thing happened at the French culinary school. I think Hung is an excellent chef and I would hate to see him win on gender bias.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:46 PM

BFP wrote:

I was disappointed in the way Dale chose to speak in front of the judges. Show a little class.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:49 PM

MY wrote:

I agree with the fellow posters RobertM and Christina.

When you are new and you enter a subculture such as a top kitchen like Le Cirque...of course you will be looked upon with a cold shoulder..your a newbie!!! You haven't proven crap! They don't know you or the way you handle things. If you can get the job done with no whines, complaints, and special treatments you will be respected...no matter what your gender or race. They should not have to accommodate you because your the newbie, you assimilate into their culture.

" It was a very difficult place to work..." Should it be anything else but difficult?

Why does it pain you that the top kitchens are heavily male dominated??? Looks like YOUR the one with the gender issue. Why should it matter?

The cold harsh truth is male and female are not EQUAL. Never have been and never will. A high energy kitchen will probably be more suited for men then women, as well as more attractive to them as a job.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 1:52 PM

SJH wrote:

RobertM (9/20) wrote:
"The simple fact is, being a chef or a line cook in a top restaurant is physically, mentally, and emotionally demanding and brutal and men, by simple luck of nature, are IN GENERAL (NOT ALWAYS) better suited to the task."
WOW. I don't think your blog could have been any more ignorant or insulting. Yes, traditionally, the top chefs in the world are male, but I , for one, am hopeful that will change. I , for one, also hope your caveman attitude towards women will change!!!
PS- as a mother and wife, I'm quite certain I am physically, mentally, and emotionally capable of keeping up with those big, mean and scary male chefs/line cooks.

It would be appreciated by many if you keep YOUR sexist rants to yourself.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:06 PM

John Nelson, Jr. wrote:

Hi, Gail.

I just have to say that if your serving of Sara's dish was "medium-raw" (rare), then every other serving would have been seriously undercoked.

If Casey would have grabbed some tomatoes, her "coq au vin" variant would have made a wonderful cacciatore on a bed of potato slices (especially if she used Chianti instead of the wine she chose).

Hung showed through with his technical prowess. Enough said.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:13 PM

Swamp Yankee wrote:

Ms Simmons,

I find it rather odd that anybody (this means you, among others, RobertM ), in 2007 would be claiming that a woman doesn't have "what it takes" to do any job which is not solely concerned with physical strength. I suggest that chefs have a job that is much easier, physically (who do you think gets those 600lb bariatric surgery patients out of bed?), emotionally, and intellectually than a field that remains dominated by women: nursing.

Actually, if somebody is going to argue that one sex has intrinsic superiority as a chef than the other, recall that the "taste" of food is mostly determined by ones sense of smell, and women tend to have better senses of smell than men.

Yes, Casey is a woman, and quite lovely. Last I've checked there is not a negative correlation between beauty and talent.

Edwin

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:16 PM

Deborah R wrote:

So glad to have you back at judges' table, and especially to have your insights on being a woman chef. Since you feel few things have changed in the kitchen of your former employer, you, too, must have noticed how the chefs at Le Cirque scrutinzed Casey and treated Sara as an irritant. The judge in that elimination challenge may be a fabulous chef/restauranteur but that doesn't mean he could escape his own long-held prejudices. He did, as many have noted, proclaim Casey's dish the best but award the win to Hung while commenting on her looks. Old school, indeed.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:16 PM

Sue wrote:

Wow - bravo Andy, what an amazing finding. I too felt it impossible that women "just don't have what it takes" with so many talented, well-educated and trained women out there today. Yes, I believe there should be one whole episode devoted to blind-tasting or perhaps the whole season and see how many women are left!

And I agree with you Gale (and sorry I never normally do) but the one-sided editing of Dale's point -of-view made it seem like Hung is pure evil for not sharing information. Last time I checked, this IS a competition, is it not? He also railed on him for not helping CJ - what is this a charity gathering?

I have yet to see anything Hung has done that is so wrong besides bad editing and Dale's trash talking. Note -ONLY Dale and no one else's. He needs to stop worrying of other people and focus on making good food. After all, "without heart, food just doesn't taste good" well his food hasn't been good - I wonder why!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 2:22 PM

Joe wrote:

Gail,

I wanted to take a moment and say thank you for your thoughtful and always generous posts on what you felt went on during the show. I enjoy your thoughts and you always add that certain something to the show. Keep up the good work beautiful, you are one of the major things that make Top Chef special.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 3:46 PM

yumi wrote:

It never ceases to amaze me that people who just watch this show on their couch feel justified in predicting who's dish was better, or whether the judges were "correct" in picking the winner. Are you serious? I wasn't aware that you could taste the dish by watching television.

Anthony, Rocco, Lee Ann and Ted start their blogs by giving props to the guest judges for this episode--and still people think that they know better because they watched an edited down version of events? LOL. So you know better, even though you haven't tasted the dishes, haven't heard the full range of debate between the judges, haven't graduated from the CIA, etc.?

News flash fans: if your opinion counted for something, you'd be there in the guest seat judging the food and commenting on it. If you're not there, please keep your critiques to "I like Dale's mowhawk", "Jeez, it must suck to have one testicle" and "Casey sure is pretty." Know your limitations kids.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 3:49 PM

Vic wrote:

I like the idea of an episode with the judges not knowing who made what, just might mix things up a bit. I was very surprised Casey did not win the quickfire challenge as he very clearly said hers was the best. Then to not pick her but comment on her looks was rather strange. I thought he said it in a cute, non offensive way but was offensive was that she did not win even though he said it was best. I think the same on her not winning with her Cog au vin. I really think that was blown way out of proportion. I think most people consider rooster or chicken to be usable for cog au vin evn if coq mean cock. Regardless what if she named it something else would that change what it tasted like? Was Hung's really better?

I find Hung to not be so bad. He helped Sara this time and seems to be very passionate, not just technical. Casey definitely seems to be a little less technically skilled but her creativity and overall results on making a complete dish seem to keep hitting the target. I too don't get the huge differences in the prizes.

I was sorry to Sara go she seemed to have leadership and skill. I was really surprised she did so lousy this week. I cannot see Brian winning as he never seems to really do it right. No matter how good his food was it was not really fitting for the challenge and looked pretty yucky, and it you are going to squabble over names that was not the sheperds pie I know. But no mention of it, perhaps there is a sex bias somewhere.
Thanks for listening!

Vic

posted on September 20, 2007 at 4:23 PM

Dolores wrote:

Not only was Hung perfectly within his rights refusing to divulge any secrets about how he completed his quickfire, I would say Dale asking was tantamount to trying to cheat. Hung had to figure it out on his own, why shouldn't the rest of them? The judges wanted and needed to see what each individual contestant could do--to have helped Dale would have been subverting the judging, IMHO.

And then to act like Hung was such a meanie and that trying to crib from him was no big deal! Bad sportmanship and a decided lack of class.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 4:51 PM

Shazzer wrote:

"rather have a duck to be served with a hint of pink?
That is just rediculous. You won't serve me pink duck, chicken, nor pork."

I just have to say this: Jason, you're lacking a certain culinary knowledge. (You won't believe how I had to bite my tongue and be civil with that).

Duck is not chicken, it may be served much like steak as far as degree of doneness. For that matter, pork may be served with a "hint of pink" as well.

Gail, you rock! I'm a Food and Wine Mag junkie, I've been to the Classic in Aspen before, and what a gas that is!! I love Top Chef, fan from the start, just keep 'em coming!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 4:58 PM

vic wrote:

One thing I did find interesting was how badly Sara did on this one. I really did not think she was that out of her league at all and besides its not as if cooking chicken, potato and onion is really that daunting. I know the environment and judges were nerve wracking but she is usually the cool one who handles pressure. Also remember how she forced Howie to redo his undercooked hens was it? he must have chuckled when he saw that two raw dishes did her in. Just did not seem like her at all. I don't think she was so out her league. She took charge in the team challenge and she was the only female who handles the bar wars with a smile. She has worked well with most everyone. I do think she should have been eliminated but she just seemed totally off on this epidode.

does seem cooking at the busiest time especially after waiting the longest would be extra nerve wracking for the QF. But then not even seasoning her chicken seemed bizarre.

Still think if Casey had served Hung's dishes and he served hers Hung still would have won.

if you get my drift.

v

posted on September 20, 2007 at 6:14 PM

Bob T wrote:

To Jason who commented much earlier: Were you loaded when you left that message? I don't know why you are criticizing Gail so harshly. While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, it is nearly unintelligible. Are you sure your name isn't Yoda?

posted on September 20, 2007 at 6:25 PM

Matt McCuaig wrote:

Gail,

I'm very sorry that Sara tried to kill you with raw chicken on last night's episode. I'm still pissed off about that 'Who's the sexiest host' text poll they did in the beginning of the season but I didn't think your percentage was low enough for the producers to hire Sara to assassinate you. It was wise to boot her off last night because there's no telling what her backup plan was.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 6:41 PM

Susan wrote:

Have to agree, as a woman who works in a male dominated industry it seems you have to work twice as hard as the men you work with. Sorry...make that four times as had if you're attractive!

posted on September 20, 2007 at 7:17 PM

Bella wrote:

A agree that Dale should not expect another contestant to tell him how to prepare the dish (isn't the whole point of the challenge to evaluated how each person would do the dish themselves?). In my view, Hung was at a disadvantage by going first, for he had the least amount of time to prepare in his own mind how the dish should be made. I think they had 20 min. each to cook, so the final contestant would have something like 1-1/2 hours more to think about how they will prepare the dish than the people who go first.

I think Mr. Maccioni's comment about Casey's looks was out of line. It's no wonder she didn't win the quickfire - he couldn't see her as a "chef" if he could only see her as a woman. Being old-fashioned enough to think his crack was a compliment (so what does that say about Sara?), he's probably old-fashioned enough to think a woman shouldn't win over a man, too. Perhaps he IS unbiased, I wouldn't know - but when he makes those types of comments, it diminishes his credibility, in my mind.

While I think Casey should have won the quickfire, I'm in the minority in thinking the "coq au vin" name for her dish WAS a mistake. In the first episode of Season 3, I thought Clay didn't know the meaning of the term "amuse bouche" and his dish - whether is tasted great or not - was a reflection of that. Here, Casey herself chose to call the dish "coq au vin," then failed to deliver what she promised. While it may have tasted great (perhaps Clay's dish did too?), it wasn't what was advertised, and I do think that is a mistake.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 7:19 PM

moon wrote:

Gail, thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and insight about fine cuisine. I really enjoy your commentary on the show and your recapping in your blog.

Hung maybe the most skilled and classically trained chef left, but I really want to see Casey come through as the winner. For any women in a male dominated field I have the utmost respect.

I'm sure chef Sirio Maccione is a wonderful and charming man, but I couldn't help but feel his comment about Casey's looks as a reason he almost picked her for the quickfire, as typical sexism.

Perhaps one day women will not have to blush politely and overlook the pure sexism that exisits in the work place.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 7:33 PM

Dave C wrote:

I have no doubt there is a level of "sexism" in kitchens, as there are in many occupations to different degrees. At the same time, I hope you (or Padma) don't give any extra favoritism to any female contestants now or in the future. (Btw, I don't think you have at all up to this point.) Women are great chefs but as far as TOP CHEF goes, I don't believe a woman has been the best of either season. Tiffany was extremely talented...but Harold was the best. I hated Tiffany but really liked Elia, but again, I thought both Ilan and Sam were the better chefs. I like Casey this year as well but I do think both Hung and Tre are actually clearly better. Even though the Top Chef is based on the finale....I still want to see the most talented chef win... not the chef most people like cuz he/she's a "team player".

posted on September 20, 2007 at 7:46 PM

Samera wrote:

I cannot even believe RobertM's comment about men "generally but not always" to be better suited in the kitchen. Are you for real?
Someone else posted that finally this episode had the best judging. I agree. Andre Soltner picked Hung for the elimination challenge and I agree but if it wasn't for Chef Soltner, I am sure that the other judges would not have agreed. Chef Soltner is far more credible than Padma and Gail and dare I say Chef Colicchio (although I think Chef Colicchio agreed with Chef Soltner).

posted on September 20, 2007 at 9:06 PM

Connie wrote:

base on my experience of hiring kitchen staff, the majority of the applicants are male and It's VERY hard to hire a equitable ratio of men and woman when 90% of the people that apply is male. The food industry hires based on talent and the ability to produce more then anything else so unless more woman enter and stay in the professional culinary world I'm afraid the ratio will stay the way it is.

posted on September 20, 2007 at 10:32 PM

tcfan wrote:

what was up with casey not winning the quickfire? like the previous poster said, unless the editing SUCKED, by every indication she should have won--the old guy said "it is better than any other", which would have included out of Hung's. i'm not surprised; probably yet another sexist, egotistical owner who'll give it to anyone but a female.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 1:47 AM

Joseph wrote:

Gail...You always point out the lack of female chefs. Well, did you ever stop to think that many women decide to have children and choose not to work for a several years to raise their children? And that those years tend to be the peak career ladder climbing ages of 25-35? Or that many women just don't find the idea of working in a hot, sweaty, frenetic kitchen environment 12-16 hrs a day, 6 days a week, too appealing? Working in a top restaurant is not a 9-5 job.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 2:07 AM

Merrill wrote:

I along with another viewer feel that Hung should have received some kind of killer gift for his two wins! And that in itself makes me think that Casey somehow will be the Winner. UGH...I saw on the vote a chef chopped or topped, had Casey leading this week. I surely hope this isn't due to pretty face. But to get a trip to anywhere, and laptop? You'll are starting to get on my nerves now. I indeed felt that Sara should've been sent packing a while back. And I really got a skosh perterbed at Dale, who felt that Hung should've given his techniques up. Well ..if Hung had done this and Dale lost,,who'd be crying...DALE! Dale do your own thinking and cooking dude.
One more note: chicken poached in butter...oo la la.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 2:34 AM

Joseph wrote:

And "Andy", your Symphony Orchestra analogy is weak and you obviously have never worked as a chef or a line cook in a busy restaurant. Of course women are capable of playing a musical instrument as well as men because talent, dexterity, and determination are qualities that women and men may possess in equal amounts. PHYSICAL STAMINA AND STRENGTH ARE NOT. Last time I checked, orchestra musicians do not play 16 hrs a day, 6 days a week, and in 100 degree temps. Nor do they run around all day lifting and carrying boxes of food, supplies etc.

Let's just all stop with the whole battle of the sexes thing. It's so played out already.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 2:44 AM

kriselda jarnsaxa wrote:

While all the contestants being so "lovey-dovey," as you put it, may have frustrated all of you, for me - at least - it has had one HUGE positive impact on the show, and that is that we've been able to focus more on the food and the techniques used to make it, rather than on all of the personalities clashing like last season. Howie, Joey and Hung have created some drama with their weird and/or bad behaviour, but at no point did it threaten to overshadow the actual competition, and that's a VERY GOOD thing! This season has had more of the kind of feel that the first season had - that of skilled, professional cooks competing by testing their skills - and not that of the second season, which was all about people trying tying to live up to the worst of the "egotistical chef" stereotypes while undercutting each other *outside* of the competition and acting like junior high school students.

I very nearly gave up on Top Chef after last season - in fact, to this day I have yet to watch the 2nd half of the finale. Once I knew it would be Ilan vs. Marcel, it became pointless - I didn't really care enough about either of them to give a damn who won. But then I heard that you were seeking out more professional-type chefs and I thought maybe - just maybe - this season would be worthwhile, and I'm so glad to say that it has been! I just hope you don't make the mistake and try to overcompensate for any frustrations you may have had with the cast actually being nice to each other (for the most part) and get another bunch of buttheads like you had in the 2nd season.

Oh, for posters commenting on Casey losing to Hung in the Quickfire - Tom commented in his blog that, while Casey's dish apparently did taste very good, she did not have the potatoes wrapped all the way around the fish, the way that it should have been. He says that she should have trimmed the piece of fish to fit the potatoes, rather than leave part of the fish unwrapped. Hung, on the other hand, not only created a very good tasting re-creation, he had also successfully recreated the proper technique of wrapping the fish completely. While Sirio's comment about Casey's looks may have been unwise, or even a bit inappropriate in a professional setting (though I do think he meant it as a compliment,) he chose Hung as the winner because Hung had best completed the task by achieving both the right taste and using the right techniques.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 8:41 AM

Kevin S. wrote:

I'd like to correct something I said in my previous comment. I said that Sara didn't listen and that Gail never said her chicken was raw, just undercooked. Well, I just watched the repeat of the show and Gail did indeed tell her the chicken was raw. Sorry bout' that.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 10:55 AM

MQ wrote:

Gail, glad to see you're back!

posted on September 21, 2007 at 11:40 AM

Corey wrote:

This was definitely the best TC episode of all time. No gimmicks, no double-crosses, no bickering; just a straightfoward contest to see who could make the best dish. I hope the producers will learn something from the success of this episode.

By the way, is there any chance that Season Two could be edited so that we didn't have to see Ilan or listen to Ilan or hear anyone talk about Ilan? I'd buy the DVD Collector's Edition in a heartbeat if the editors could do that.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 12:29 PM

Swamp Yankee wrote:

I've claimed I don't like to get into verbal p***ing contests. I lied.

Joseph, I would refer you to the tasks that are performed by the people in at least one profession that has been historically dominated by women: nursing.

Lifting? Who do you think gets those 600lb patients out of bed after bariatric surgery? The doctors? Orderlies, at least in this part of the US are long gone.

Frenetic? I'd say kitchens are at least an order of magnitude less frenetic than an emergency department on a Saturday night.

Long hours? There is a nursing shortage, hospitals (at least around here) are open every hour of every day of the year, and nurses can't leave until their replacements from the next shift come in, and possibly not even then.

Yes, kitchens can be dangerous places to work (and my wife's cousin has the burn scars to prove it). I'm sure that they have their moments of frenzy (although the restaurant kitchens I've seen, on Friday and Saturday night, did not seem to be terribly frenetic, and they were making the entrees to order, not just reheating prepared food).

Edwin

posted on September 21, 2007 at 12:56 PM

bethnor wrote:

JOSEPH--conversely, it does not seem you play a musical instrument. size actually counts. paginini was rumoured to have an 18 inch hand span. one of my violin professors had the pleasure of watching perlman up close; basically he could reach all chords from the third position. one of the most talented violin players i knew was a woman, but playing the brahms actually was physically painful because of the contortions she had to put her fingers through.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 1:07 PM

topcheffanaticfan wrote:

Hi Gail, Glad to see you back.
I agree with evrything you said.
About the prizes, did not they give Hung extra time for winning the quick fire at LeCircique?
Did not they say he would find out in Aspen what the advantage would be?
Usually the winners (previously) did not get presents for winning, but this year books, sponsors, and chef's gave gifts. I don't think the show demanded and Casey just happened to be the top winner on a couple of occassions. purely coincidence.

I am a Top Chef or food or cooking fanatic. I love to cook and invent recipies and anything to do with food. I am blessed with a talent of being able to smell, taste, and change a receipe just from reading it.

The classical French Chicken, One of the true classics. Somehow I felt the show was giving an unsponsored tribute to a great Female Chef, Julia Child, the Restruant LeTec formally in New York (best chicken i've ever eaten) and the humbleness and freshness of the everyday fresh vegetable, chicken, and potato. It was the best episode ever and celebrated pure everyday food just as the Hawaiian Luau did last year with foods from Hawaii. I do see a connection there. Then it will be followed by a fantastic finale. May the best Chef win.

I wish back in the dark ages there had been a place for women in the cooking world. Some journalist like Barbara Fairchild were very lucky to have worked themseflves to the bone to be in the right place and the right time. You, too Gail. Again I say food is my passion and I wish there was a place for me now. But in the meantime I just support the shows and magazines and the computer world of great food. Thanks, for listening.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 2:45 PM

meg wrote:

Gail, I need to apologize. I had commented on you after becoming a fan this season. I just watched season two for the first time and feel my initial comments were off base. I had stated I felt that you tried to influence the other judges unfairly and seem to have your favorites. After seeing season II, I feel I have a better grasp of you as a judge, thus my apology. Thank you.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 3:01 PM

julie larsen wrote:

please put the show on itunes...its the only way i can watch it!! i live overseas and its the only show i look forward to getting.
thanks! Julie

posted on September 21, 2007 at 4:30 PM

brian wrote:

I'm just SOOOO HAPPY you are back! Don't know the reason why you have been so MIA this season. But- If the show's producers think we want to see Ted Allen more than you, they are incorrect. Ted Allen is hilarious and I love when he is on the show. Always happy to see him. But YOU are as IMPORTANT to the show as Tom. If anyone is keeping you from being at that judge's table every week, send them to me! Thanks!

posted on September 21, 2007 at 6:41 PM

Ben wrote:

Arguing online is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard.

posted on September 21, 2007 at 7:10 PM

Jonathan wrote:

Everybody talks about him alomost stabbing someone....these are not novice chefs the ones that would worry would be just to much of a novice to even think about thngs like that, you are not a chef working toward the top, Hung has enough skill and understanding of what he is doing, he spilled stuff? why are you acting like a highschool teacher complaining of spilt shit, you want the one who has the nice personality? This is Top Chef they call it Top Chef not "Novice chef"

posted on September 21, 2007 at 11:14 PM

michael wrote:

Gail, you looked H-O-T!! O.O

Anyways, it's nice to have to back, but so critical. It's nicer to see when you get a chance to get used to the chef's abilities like what Tom and Padma have experienced.

But you keep looking like that, and it's easy to forget about the food!!!

:D

posted on September 22, 2007 at 2:00 AM

Shelema wrote:

Ms. Simmons I always love your thoughtful approach to food critiquing. You are never snarky or rude in your comments. But I don't understand why you and the other judges are annoyed by camaraderie among the contestants. Lovey dovey is far better than backstabbing, petty tactics to win. I enjoy that they can work with eachother and like eachother because it allows them to focus on the food. Since when is friendly competition a bad thing? I don't mean helping others to your own detriment. I mean competing with integrity.

posted on September 22, 2007 at 5:55 AM

Deborah R wrote:

Joseph wrote:
"[D]id you ever stop to think that many women ... choose not to work for a several years to raise their children? … Or that many women just don't find the idea of working in a hot, sweaty, frenetic kitchen environment 12-16 hrs a day, 6 days a week, too appealing? Working in a top restaurant is not a 9-5 job."

Neither is raising kids, sport.

And as for your further comment " Let's just all stop with the whole battle of the sexes thing. It's so played out already." It won't be played out as long as ignorant little men like you still have a voice in hiring, compensation, and promotion.

At 29, self-taught Casey has already risen to the level of executive chef at a top restaurant--which negates your argument that women don't have the physical stamina to hang with the boys in the kitchen. I work in a different field but have enough confidence in my ability to believe I can compete with anyone--male or female--on merit. If you had that kind of confidence, you wouldn't feel so threatened by the idea of competing with women. The more you protest that Casey doesn't belong, the smaller and sadder you seem.

posted on September 22, 2007 at 1:42 PM

Megan wrote:

Hey Joseph, When I was 21 I was the first woman bartender to be hired at a bar that was one of the busiest bars in the area with 8 bartenders working on a Fri night. They hadn't hired women because they didn't think they could take how physical it was, and the bar staff liked the all boys club. I was 125lbs and moved kegs, carried 3 cases of beer at at time and did all the jobs the men did. Wouldn't ya know, after me they hired more women, but for 2 years I had to prove myself every night with these guys (who ended up being like brothers to me), only earning my stars when I could out pour, out sell and out work them every single night. Later on in my career I worked 60-80 hour weeks in management. There is nothing about being a Chef that is too physical for women. Period.

posted on September 22, 2007 at 4:26 PM

NANCY S - MA wrote:

Bravo to Andy, who commented above:
"If you really want to see more women in the finale next season, try running a couple challenges where the judges don't know who cooked what until after they declare the winners and losers. I bet you'll find that - what do you know? - the women suddenly start doing better."
I have wondered about this. Casey would have won both challenges this week.

I hope the producers read these comments, though I doubt it.

posted on September 22, 2007 at 6:53 PM

Dan wrote:

Gail, you do disservice to your judging neutrality by your blog.

posted on September 22, 2007 at 7:13 PM

susan s wrote:

Thanks, Gail, for legitimizing Casey's comments on the gender issues in the restaurant world. Sorry to say, but I think gender is still an issue in many, many venues.
I'm amazed that cooking -- which is absolutely dominated by women in the home -- is so male dominated in the outside world.
I'm thinking that most men would not be involved in cooking if Mom or Grandma didn't inspire them. The restaurant world seems to be a bizarre twist to that .... I think LeeAnne even addressed that in Season One (at Napa) when she stated that she and Tiffany seemed to break the mold...You know there's truth to this. Your producers, however, should have editted Mr. LeCirque's comments right out of the final product. Guys, was that really necessary for the final cut? Tacky, very tacky.
I totally agree that Hung was under no obligation to share his insights with his colleagues and, to his credit, he just didn't say anything. He could easily have steered them in the wrong direction. Now THAT would have been crappy. He's right. Ultimately, he's in this alone if he's in it to win. But, he only needs to look at the first two seasons to see that alienating your colleagues is certainly not the way to go. Both seasons show that the chef who alienated everyone else was not the winner but the runner-up.
To address one more thing, I would just like to add that it seems totally unfair that some elimination winners won very special prizes while others received nothing. If everyone cannot get a prize then no one should. Yes, winning is its own reward, but, come on! Laptops, business class tickets, invitations to be a guest chef at an event -- these are pretty nice prizes..Was Hung's win or Sara's restaurant wars win any more or less impressive than Casey's canape win? While I like Casey and was happy to see her win these wonderful gifts, I am a little taken aback by the inadequacy of the whole thing. For future seasons, this should be addressed --
As a faithful Top Chef fan, I must admit that I like this season and it's contestants much more than last season. These competitors might be a little too nice -- but, it's far better than the weekly back-biting and fighting of Season Two. That got really tiresome. I appreciate the genuine respect and affection that this season's competitors have for each other. They seem more mature and just nicer. A breath of fresh air after last season's horror.
Keep up the good work....I so look forward to Wednesday nights!

posted on September 22, 2007 at 8:16 PM

Helene Mayer wrote:

I, unlike many of the Hung haters out there, have no problem with Hung. He appears to be a creative and exacting chef. Yes, he may be arrogant and he isn't someone I would choose for a friend. However...his food is unfailingly interesting and I would definately love to eat at a restaurant where he is a chef. I just wouldn't want to work with him. There have been a number of chefs on "Top Chef" who were much more obnoxious than Hung, and far less talented. I'm not at all sure that Hung is the best of the final four, but I don't think that people should fail to appreciate his talent because they don't like him.

posted on September 23, 2007 at 12:07 AM

Jason wrote:

Bob.T,
I can be yoda lol..
Well, I know my cooking and been travel around the world for food. Yet, know my spices and technique very well. I had been o numerous well known restaurants and hate to tell you alot of them fail to shine. I had my fair share sending dishes back to kitchen due to poor flavor and executions.
I don't kiss a person just because he or she is pretty or a star. Gail fails to shine in international tasting for sure.

posted on September 23, 2007 at 1:29 AM

Phong Le wrote:

Can someone please explain to me what "Cooking with soul" means? Dale keeps saying Hung's food has no soul. Ilan last season said Marcel's food has no soul. It seems like whenever someone wants to trash someone else's food, the easiest thing to say is "His food has no soul". What does that mean, exactly?

posted on September 23, 2007 at 3:18 AM

Neanderthal wrote:

RobertM wrote:

"Gail,

Why the constant feminist rants? It's really getting tired and annoying. The simple fact is, being a chef or a line cook in a top restaurant is physically, mentally, and emotionally demanding and brutal and men, by simple luck of nature, are IN GENERAL (NOT ALWAYS) better suited to the task."

GLAD I'm not married to you, caveman.

posted on September 23, 2007 at 2:06 PM

PeachPie wrote:

Robert M....you're saying we woman can do jobs that are "physically, mentally, and emotionally demanding"?

Really? YOU try being a single mother working 50 hours a week with one of the children being autistic. Not only do I (and have, all my life), fit the above description, I handle it better than most anyone I know. And I'm not a beast, either. I'm an attractive, slender woman.

That was one of the most short sighted, ignorant comments I've heard come out of someone's mouth (or keyboard) in a long, long time. Good lord.

posted on September 23, 2007 at 2:16 PM

Swamp Yankee wrote:

Ms Simmons,

How, exactly, do the judges (and producers?) decide on who wins and who is eliminated in each episode?

For example, do the judges discuss things until they come to a consensus, or rank the contestants, and come to decision based on something like an Irish ballot?

posted on September 23, 2007 at 3:48 PM

Sharon Greene wrote:

Wow, I never realized just how fragile an ego Tom had until this episode. The stink he's making about the name is ridiculous. What is it about Casey that threatens his and the other male judges egos so much? Is it because she's a woman, because she is "self taught" or both? Both Hung and Caseys dishes tasted great, well flavored and presented well. Hungs was flawed with the heavy potato, Caseys was perfect and hit it on all cylanders. Yet they chose the flawed dish. It's never been more clear than in this episode that it is not "all about the food" as Tom claims

Casey didn't have a chance before the challenge even started. The judges (and Tom) just can't handle choosing a woman over another man. I have no doubt it sticks in their collective craws even more as teachers in a culinary institute that Casey does not have formal culinary training. Heaven forbid they acknowledge a self-taught chef put out a better dish than a schooled chef. The double whammy that she is a woman just scares the heck out of the cavemen even more.

posted on September 23, 2007 at 9:50 PM

johnnyv wrote:

Obviously Jason does not eat at someplace that does not have two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, on a sesame seed bun.

Non-chickenish fowl can be consumed in a medium-rare state, as wel as can pork.

When he learns how to cook, maybe he can comment

posted on September 24, 2007 at 12:00 AM

Dene Ward wrote:

Gail,
I am a fairly new Top Chef viewer, having discovered it this past summer after some serious eye surgery which left me able to see my large screen TV,, but unable to read.
If I remember correctly, you are an editor or columnist or both. However, in the past couple of weeks, the promo for TC has featured you saying, "My chicken was raw. That is UNexcusable." Anyone who writes for a living should be as careful with the English language as she expects chefs to be with the palate. UNexcusable is not a word, and I find it INexcusable that a purveyor of words made that error, and allowed it to be televised over and over in the promos. It is one thing to have a slip of the tongue; it is another to use that very slip as an advertisement for a show that claimes such integrity and professionalism. Perhaps I should be sending this to the producers. Maybe you should be as angry with them for making you look less than competent at your job as I am irritated every time that spot runs.

posted on September 24, 2007 at 10:39 AM

SJH wrote:

This is my second entry (first one 9/20) and I have to laugh at RobertM and Joseph, who should be ashamed of themselves ( I hope that your moms/wives/daughters/sisters teach you a thing or two) After reading other reactions to their sexist,primitive & ignorant blogs, I am happy to see I wasn't the only one that felt the way I did.

posted on September 24, 2007 at 1:38 PM

Amy wrote:

"Ben"....that's hilarious and totally I agree with you!!...lol

posted on September 24, 2007 at 6:30 PM

Km wrote:

No wonder season 2 chefs were so antagonist, given you & your fellow judge's attitude toward this season's chefs.
Yes, this is a competition however, if you truly are the best chef and it is all about the food, execution and concept than what does it matter if you approach these challenges with a one for all, all for one attitude. Especially since there is really nothing gained, at this point from winning a Quickfire!
In the sentiment of Chef Tom It's not TOP STRATAGIST, it's TOP CHEF!!

posted on September 24, 2007 at 9:44 PM

PeachPie wrote:

I meant to say "can't" do jobs.

posted on September 25, 2007 at 6:33 AM

ollie wrote:

To Ben & Amy: 9/21 - 7:10p & 9/24 - 6:30p

You are both ignorant and you are both idiots.

May you never have a challenged child. Or any child, for that matter, so you can't spread your cretinous opinions.

Look it up, stupid.

How's that for online arguing?

posted on September 25, 2007 at 11:54 AM

SJH wrote:

To Ollie (9/25)- kudos to you.

To Ben and Amy- while some of the posted blogs do get a little heated, that's what makes this fun and interesting. I blog regularly to give my opinions, but they are just my opinions. I have blogged strongly worded entries before, but only when someone else blogs something I find offensive. That being said.......SHAME ON YOU BOTH. That you could poke fun at people who have special needs is beyond offensive.

posted on September 25, 2007 at 1:20 PM

Patrick Stitt wrote:

Has anyone on Gail's staff checked/updated her wikipedia entry? Relatively famous people and 15 min famers have larger entries than hers. The entry looks to be written solely for the fact it sounded normal enough for the ending line to be the hook. And while I highly agree with the sentiment, I'm surprised it wasn't removed or edited by a PR group or what-have-you. I'm sure someone has time to sit down and write a couple paragraphs for her. Ciao.
Patrick in Canada

posted on September 25, 2007 at 1:32 PM

Lisa wrote:

In season 1 none of the chefs received gifts when they won a challenge, so why since last season did the winner start receiving them? Just be happy to win and still be a contestant on the show. That is totally ridiculous in my humble opinion.

posted on September 25, 2007 at 1:38 PM

Julie wrote:

I made the potato wrapped bass and found it not too difficult except for the fish bones and the expense of the bass. Also, my potatoes wern't as crispy as I would have liked them , why not?

posted on September 25, 2007 at 2:19 PM

JG wrote:

Can somebody please explain to me how Gail is an expert or authority on cooking and the skills it takes to be a chef? Unless I'm mistaken, she is a magazine editor.

posted on September 25, 2007 at 6:37 PM

Amy wrote:

Oh Ollie...get a sense of humor!

posted on September 25, 2007 at 9:12 PM

evan wrote:

hey gail,I enjoy your judgements and hope you and the show are a mainstay. sexism is real and the comments of a strong woman like yourself have to be heard. top chef should try to be as nuetral as possible and judge people stricly on performance I hope that a woman chef isn't chosen just because she is a woman or a chef is picked because the chef is of a particular race. tc should have won the emmy because it is the best reality tv show ever and is only getting better. big up to all top chef fans looking forward to reading more comments peace

posted on September 26, 2007 at 2:45 AM

nicole wrote:

Can somebody please explain to me how Gail is an expert or authority on cooking and the skills it takes to be a chef? Unless I'm mistaken, she is a magazine editor.

she's the editor of food and wine magazine and a culinary school grad.. i assure you, you dont get to be the editor of a magazine like that without knowing what youre talking about!

beautifully written gail! you should talk to bravo's website programmers about changing your blog photo... it doesnt do you justice at all

posted on September 26, 2007 at 2:41 PM

Chris Stanifer wrote:

JG: She's Gail. That makes her an expert on cooking. If you need more information, check out her bio, or do a little research. Many of us were familiar with her work long before she appeared on Top Chef, and I, for one, appreciate her expertise at Judge's Table.

Which episode were you featured on, JG??? I must have missed that one.

Chris

posted on September 26, 2007 at 6:30 PM

PeachPie wrote:

SJH... thank you. Very, very, very much.

posted on September 26, 2007 at 6:57 PM

TC@100mileshr wrote:

Gail,
Thank you for your insight. I appreciate and respect your opinions. I have to say for all of you that are crying race or gender or whaterver discrimination need to actually watch the show. If you have any common sense and listen to the judges comments (read the blogs) then you woudn't be crying "it's not fair!". This show is supposed to be about cooking and although it took a detour last year compared to the first season, it is back on track. So all of you looking for a reality show and needing to create drama, tune in to American Idol.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 10:11 PM

Grace wrote:

Check out Andy's blog... I think he's onto something. The producers should consider this for Season 4 - tasting the food blind before judging.

posted on October 1, 2007 at 11:27 PM