DanC wrote:

As a addict of the show, my views were shared by the masses (in accordance to the poll) that Hung is clearly the villain, Casey is the fan favorite and the rest are Switzerland. After hearing Dale, I'm sort of scooting over there. The show is amazing and while I feel sad for Brian's departure, it is a contest and someone had to exit. I can't wait for next week and Gail, you look amazing as always!

posted on September 26, 2007 at 11:33 PM

Tracy wrote:

Hi Gail,
I was absolutely amazed that Hung made it to the finale. I guess I shouldn't be surprised but after his own admission that he would love to showcase his Vietnamese culture in his dishes, why wait until the finale to do this? Why didn't he present this during the competition early on?
As far as Casey's dish tonight, she said that her family knows a lot about Elk and cooking it, hunting Elk, yet it was rare! YUCK! Anything that gamey couldn't taste good rare. Steak is fine, but not such a potent meat as Elk.
Overall, tonight's episode was good. I think the decision for Brian to go was a good one. How many components can one put with a dish without it looking like a "carnival" ?
I just want to say that I think you are really interesting to watch and listen to with your opinions of the dishes as well as your input on everything culinary.

posted on September 26, 2007 at 11:34 PM

Lisa in Florida wrote:

I don't know, you really bug me sometimes. You are often the most verbal and probably the least qualified to be judging. I wish I could actually taste Hungs food. I think you and some of the other judges misunderstand him. I don't think he's conceited at all. I think he's worked very very hard to get where he is and he knows what he's good at and what he's not good at and he's worked very hard for this. To come from his background and to rise up with the knowledge that he has is nothing short of a miracle. I think he's heavenly Hung. As a woman I hope for Casey too. If Hung has to loose I hope it's to Casey. Dale already has won by getting his hope back. I hope you will get over what ever your problem is with Hung because he has so little in life and has worked all his life for this.

posted on September 26, 2007 at 11:36 PM

foodee555 wrote:

Gail....YOU ROCK! ....did those final comments the contestants made actually impact your final decision? We need more of you....Please come back for the full season next time

posted on September 26, 2007 at 11:41 PM

Deborah R wrote:

I was pleased to see you at judges' table tonight, and you've done a nice job filling in some of the blanks from the episode. I know it must have been difficult deciding which of these talented chefs to disappoint. Thank you for explaining why Brian's dish, though apparently tasty, fell just slightly short.

I, too, have had a problem with Hung's unwillingness to listen to other viewpoints or to take constructive criticism. But I think that shows him to be shortsighted, stubborn, and maybe a little immature--not the villain many have painted him to be. Despite the editing, I think his passion came through loud and clear. And I suspect that the emotional restraint he's shown prior to this has a lot to do with his cultural background.

Once people have decided to demonize someone (or put him on a pedestal, as many did with Tre), they refuse to hear any and all evidence to the contrary. But I think Hung is just as soulful in his way as Dale or Casey--and all of them are equally deserving of the title Top Chef.

posted on September 26, 2007 at 11:47 PM

Colin wrote:

After tonight's judging, we can be very confident that Chef Ripert is straight. He was drooling and salivating before he even got to see what Casey has prepared.

posted on September 26, 2007 at 11:50 PM

barbie wrote:

just thought id let you know, you looked great the last couple of weeks....and no i am not gay(back off no offense to anyone)....you look like you dropped 50 pounds and your hair and dress are/were FAB!!!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:19 AM

gary e. wrote:

Gail. you looked great tonite. and this by far was the best show . it was what we all have been waiting for. i was happy for casey winning the quick fire, and i do hope she is the winner of top chef this year....

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:28 AM

Aprill wrote:

Gail, your blog is exceptionally well written and has excellent insight. You communicate the positive and negatives of all chefs equally without taking sides or degrading remarks, it is a refreshing blog to read and I love seeing you on the show, you are very well balanced and articulate. Thanks so much for your insight. (PS- I am not a chef, cook or anyone of importance in the food industry, just got addicted to Top Chef some how and love the show!!!)

posted on September 27, 2007 at 1:24 AM

Josh wrote:

So if Hung's cooking was questioned as to the absence of 'soul' from his dishes and then he waxed poetic about his soulful upbringing for the first time, why was Brian who obviously pours his heart into his end product dismissed and Hung kept around because of his techinical superiority but lack of heart in his creations??

posted on September 27, 2007 at 1:49 AM

wolfefan wrote:

Hi -

I think a lot of people are overlooking that Hung is a first generation immigrant from an Asian country. To wonder why he would not be as demonstrative or transparent emotionally or to claim as Dale did that he doesn't have a heart shows one's (in the literal, non-perjorative sense) ignorance of Asian culture.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 2:22 AM

Kandie wrote:

Suggestion? Wish? Hope? Please bring Trey back for SOMETHING in the finale. Let us see what he could do if given another chance! Season 1--Harold or Tiffany (tie)-- Season 2--Sam(although that breakfast challenge was a mess) but Marcel was great too) --Season 3-- TREY/ Hung can we please have a soul food challenge for season 4?

posted on September 27, 2007 at 2:23 AM

ChefontheRun wrote:

This for me was one of the worst shows of the season. I watch TopChef every week. I am a chef in Los Angeles and I am moving to NYC on Monday. I tried out for TopChef this year. Didn't make the cut (obviously). i am disappointed with this episode because cooking by a river, using a tree trunk as your prep table, one cast iron pan and a propane burner as your cooking medium doesn't translate the TOPCHEF. Cooking for Colorado Cowboys and Girls is not exactly what I would call cutting edge food. No disrespect to teh fine people of Colorado, but being the TOPCHEF means you are the cutting edge of cuisine. You are a trend setter, a risk taker, multi-tasker( i am actually coking Duck Confit and Foie Gras Torchon with Huckleberry Gastric as I write this.) I feel sorry for Eric Ripert. One of the greatest chefs in the world. He seemed so out of place and uncomfortable in the "country". Colorado is a beautiful state, the people seem very nice, but this is not where the best food in the world, let alone the country is being cooked. New York City is where I am moving to test myself against the best in the culiary world. That is where the finals for TOPCHEF should be. Best of luck to the final contestants. You have all done well to make it this far with the"challenges" you have had to conquer.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 2:30 AM

Alicia wrote:

Gail I always love your blog and agree with everything, but seriously, put yourself in Hung's position.. He is an immigrant to this country. Of COURSE his competitive style is cutthroat. I am not saying he is the most endearing person on this show, (I am a Casey fan myself..), but, do not rip him for his dish. He was cooking with a protein usually not considered to be gourmet with as a gambling ticket to the finale (different in past seasons) and did quite well with it. I know of very well your culinary background, and I'd like to see you do that. This is the FINALE of Top Chef Season 3. The Chefs should be preparing meals in the best of institutions, like Season 1.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 2:30 AM

Sue K. wrote:

I think Dale is going to surprise everyone in the finale. I agree with your assertion that Hung is very "robotic" in his cooking, and really doesn't bring any "soul" to his dishes. Casey, while bringing "soul" to her dishes, seems to play it safe too often. Dale has consistently tried to cook "outside the box" and has taken some beating for it. Yet , here he is, in the finale. Because, I feel that's what will set him apart from the others - his willingness to "dare".

posted on September 27, 2007 at 2:39 AM

ned wrote:

C'mon Gail. Hung is a throwback, sleeping on a cot in the kitchen? working at 14 to help support your family? Working your way up15 years in kitchens to hone your craft? Hung is a throwback to our great-grandfather's generation. Your old immigrant grandfather never complained about the conditions or racism or soul-less cooking, they took it as a blessing to be in the US and just worked harder.
This entire competition, despite his self-declared CPA, Hung's worked hard to keep it professional and never make his hardships or ethnicity a crutch. Instead of slamming him for that, the judges should be sensitive enough not to tell Hung he needs more "asian" soul in his cooking. GIve me a break, the reason you've never heard this story is the same reason why Hung didn't complain at JT that every other competitor this week grew UP around Elk, while he'd never served it or even knew what cowboys eat. Is it a big surprise? He's PROFESSIONAL. He's about the FOOD.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 3:02 AM

george wrote:

i really wish the "hung is technically proficient but lacks soul" conversation would die. as some astute commentators have pointed out, the comment has perplexing racialized overtones, intentional or not, and to me at least, makes no sense. i can get more heart than any of these chefs at my local restaurants, for i'm sure, half the money. there's a difference between "no heart" and your more sound explanation that his flavorings didn't match up well. but what does that have to do with heart? he's clearly the most intent, passionate and dedicated chefs on the show, so how does that not play into describing "heart?" do dale and casey have more "heart" because they're more charismatic or friendly? wtf does that have to do with their food? it basically sounds like some manufactured and ambiguous criteria people are pulling out because they can't figure out what else to say. end it. now.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 3:19 AM

Phong Le wrote:

You're being nice to Hung by sharing inside information on his background. But what does that has to do with his food and how he cooks? As an Vietnamese, I find it very insulting that you would criticize him for not sharing his background or that Judge Tom criticized Hung for not showing more asain influences in his food. Why not ask Dale to show more homosexuality influences in his food, or Casey to show more feminine influences in her food?

posted on September 27, 2007 at 3:24 AM

cb wrote:

As a Viet-American, I understand where Hung is coming from when he isn't completely forthcoming w/ his emotions and background. In Asian families you don't talk about your emotions and how you feel. The new generation tends to do more of it but Hung was born in Vietnam so it's understandable that he's more withheld when it comes to stuff like that. I almost cried listening to him speak during the elimination part. :-(

Hopefully it'll be a Casey/Hung showdown. Dale is good but he's not as consistent w/ his food as the other chefs are.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 6:30 AM

evan wrote:

there is no way hung forgot to use lemon juice;he had 5 minutes to tink about it he was serving chef ripert keep it real

posted on September 27, 2007 at 7:38 AM

Diana wrote:

Gail: Although Hung is unique, he is Asian, which means he probably has certain characteristics that are typically Asian. I am Asian, and I can say that a lot of the Asian immigrants and first generation Americans I grew up with are driven, focused and passionate about what they want to achieve in their lives, but many are not demonstrative, expressive, emotional, etc., which can translate to "robotic" and passionless. I am the daughter of blue collar immigrants, and because of my parents' and my own hard work, I am a successful professional with a Masters degree. I understand Hung's drive and his understated passion (although he talks a big game when he makes comments to the camera alone). Hung's precision is likely the result of focus, thought and planning that has been ingrained in him by parents who wanted nothing more than to build a better life for their children, which in every Asian society, particularly the immigrants, is everything; it's the purpose of life. From Hung's comments on the show last night, it was clear to me his family has that mindset and has a love for food. Although Hung's passion may not be obvious and demonstrated/expressed day-to-day, if you think about how much he has achieved in the culinary world as an immigrant and minority, and not as a chef cooking Asian food but as a French classic chef, you have to believe that he is passionate about what he is doing no matter how understated that passion is.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 8:23 AM

wreatha wrote:

never having elk to eat, i have always thought simply cooking is better than too much.. love this show altho sometimes I think the judges are rather mean.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 9:09 AM

Brian M. wrote:

Gail,

I just have a comment about the criteria you used to select the final three chefs.
It seems you and the other judges dismissed/overlooked Casie's undercooked Elk in the final determination.

Enjoyed the show. On a personal note, its amazing you don't weigh a ton after a season of eating on the show.

Take care,
Brian

posted on September 27, 2007 at 9:10 AM

Sonali wrote:

Gail,

I feel you are very biased against Hung throughout the whole competition. You also seem to unduly favor Casey. While i agree that it would be nice to have a woman win Top Chef, i don't think that should be the only reason for her to win. I hope Hung wins, i think it is all well and good to talk about passion and not deliver. Just because someone is guarded does not mean they do not care about food and/or cooking. As we have seen throughout the show, Hung is the best cook

posted on September 27, 2007 at 9:12 AM

lc wrote:

Hi Gail,
Thank you so much for the link to Daniel Boulud's Paupiette of Sea Bass recipe. I can't wait to try it!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 9:27 AM

Zack wrote:

This is the first season that I have watched Top Chef and I found it interesting for most of the season. Then last night I started to watch the show and I found it boring beyond belief. I don't know if it is because this season has dragged on for so long, or if it is because last nights cooking outside quick fire was not much different than cooking at the beach. I don't know if I will be watching the final episode or not. I am leaning more against watching it than for it.

I didn't want Casey or Hung to win it and now I find myself not even caring if anyone wins it. I don't know what has caused my boredom with the show, but what I do know is that I am not likely to watch another season of it, if this is any indication of how this show is going to be executed.

On a totally different subject, I have given up on the Food Network as well. IMO, it has turned into Beavis and Butthead cooking a.k.a. cooking 101 for morons.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 10:30 AM

Julia B wrote:

Gail,
You have been really biased on your judgments and evaluation on the chefs. We could tell who your personal favorite is and who is not. As a judge on the national TV, you'd better put off your pride and emotions behind and focus on the food. Casey's elk was RAW, not slightly under cooked as you stated. Sara M's chicken was "slightly under cooked", not RAW. We know you like Casey and seldom gave any credits Hung deserves. You act very strongly about your opinions. It's very unfair and biased. We all do not like Hung's defensive attitude, either. He needs time to learn. He is a very competitive person, and very vocal about his feeling as a chef (not bad mouth on others). But his arrogance has NOTHING to do with his cooking and dishes. Hung has to work EXTRA and EXTRA hard to win this competition. Once again, your blog did not help him at all, rather you were biting the dead horse and spreading your dislike of Hung again.

Casey on the other hand has been using her gender and her age to vocalize her desire to win, “I wish a female chef could win TC, I am a young chef….”… She is more mild and cursed every one behind the judges room. Hung talks more about his technical skills and his understanding of the food. You see the differences here.

You guys remind me of Affirmative Action research paper I did in the graduate school. I am not surprised Casey will be the winner and Hung, the true Top Chef, will be the second. In the real cooking society, Hung has already won the heart and soul of real chefs and judges.

So, put off your own pride, and judge every one fairly, you could also rise as a star if you are fair, otherwise, you discredit yourself with your emotions and pride (as bad as Hung).

posted on September 27, 2007 at 10:53 AM

Julie wrote:

I think your blogs and comments always come off as insightful and gracious. We all have seen some guest judges whose opinions seemed over the top and mean spirited. I never got that from you. I understand your criticisms of the food and appreciate you taking the time to blog. More importantly I appreciate you posting the link to the Sea Bass Recipe, yum.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 11:28 AM

Culinarydave wrote:

I don't usually write in to these but....Dont you think the quick-fire would have been tough for even the most skilled chef? But love the cowboy challenge...and love you on the judge's panel. You are just sweet!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 11:30 AM

Nathan wrote:

Hi Gail,
Your blog was great as usual and can I say, THANKS FOR SAVING CASEY!!! I was a bit worried when the judges said her elk was raw. I thought that might have been her ticket out of Aspen. But I do agree with the decision to send Brian home. Thanks for giving us that extra info on Hung. I saw a different side to Hung last night...EMOTION! It seemed he was offended when Colichio said he didn't see him in cooking. After going through all that Hung has been through and the drive he has, I would have almost balled out too.I have respect for him now .I'm still cheering for Casey, but I did see someone making a comment that the meal he had wasn't memorable and I also saw Casey scrambling around the kitchen. I hope things don't go bad for her. I really want to see her win. Anyways, thanks again for a great blog, Gail. Onto the finale!!!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 11:41 AM

Virginia C. wrote:

Gail, terrific show last night. These last episodes have been clff hangers! As always, enjoyed your comments and critiques, they were right on. I was a bit shocked at Casey's raw elk. As talented as she is (and coming from Texas), this was a major missfire on her part. I loved your video with Chef Daniel, tremendously interesting. Your blog was outstanding too, as usual. See ya next week!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:03 PM

sheila wrote:

Hi Gail,
Just wanted you to know that I always appreciate your comments at judges table.....you and Bourdain are the only two who actually come straight out and tell it like it is. Speaking of which, where is Bourdain this week. There's going to be a riot if he doesn't blog, ha ha. Can't wait to see you next week.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:07 PM

daisy wrote:

"His energy was convincing but we all were puzzled by why he had not shared any of this before."

Why does it matter whether Hung chooses to wax poetic about his philosophy of food? Isn't this supposed to be all about the food he serves on a plate?

Also--I'd love to hear an explanation of what you call food with "soul." Every single judge kept complaining that Hung was "perfect" but showed no soul--sounds like the made-up criticisms so often thrown at high-achievers....

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:10 PM

Jenny from Maryland wrote:

I am in favor of Hung. His perfectly executed food represents his life long passion about wonderful food, which is the combination of his knowledge of food and years of learning experience with the pride for his career as a high-level chef. All great scientists, engineers and doctors show their “soul” through their precise works, many many times with even “boring” yet consistent efforts. I see his “soul” shining and Rocco sees too. Here is his comment in his blog today:” The judges immediately recognize his dish as technically perfect, yet complain they don’t see Hung himself in his food. I see it.” I hope that judges are more professionally trainined with judging profession. I felt all four have “soul” in their food. It is unprofessional to say that one of the products from Bill Gates has no “soul” and the other has one. The criteria to measure their foods in TC should only go by the quality toward that particular challenge that the standard has been set or agreed in this profession. This is totally a misleading question on your “Chopping Block”-“Will Hung's superior techniques get him to the top, or will his supposed lack of soul get him the chop?” Absolutely MISLEADING to viewers!!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:10 PM

mikey motorsport wrote:

Thanks for your blog. I think all the blogs show the great concern you judges have for the contestants to a greater extent than the TV cameras do. Perhaps, that's because the editors are looking more for exciting television than great food. Having said that, and acknowledging the difficulties we, as viewers, have in understanding the depth of the judging from the sound bites we see, you seem clearly to have a personality conflict with Hung. Perhaps, that's simply a function of film editing and the producers' desire to create a conflict, which, in fact, may not exist. And, to be sure, Hung, clearly, is a lightning rod for criticism given his focus and his awareness of his personal excellence as a chef.
Nevertheless, you seem to judge Hung's dishes on your personal dislike for him rather than the underlying quality of his dishes. In my mind, this is confirmed by the apparent surprise the other judges evince whenever you opine on his food. I sincerely hope you are able to find greater detachment in your judgement in the final challenges than you seem to have displayed so far. It will only enhance an already and justifiably highly acclaimed series.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:23 PM

Candice (not Candi) wrote:

In the first few minutes of the episode, I was saying to myself, "Dale is going home." Imagine my surprise to find out he managed to stay in it, though I don't think he has what it takes to win it.

I think Brian should have been given more credit, but at the same time I agree that he blew it on this challenge.

According to a lot of posters, Casey and Hung are the ones to beat. I'll give them that with Casey, but I have huge issues with Hung.

You said: "Hung... does recognize that he should cook a dish the judges will love, because they are the ultimate decision-makers."

I disagree with his "I don't [care] who I cook for" attitude. How would that fare in a restaurant, if he only cooked great meals for reviewers/critics and food bloggers and said "to heck with everyone else. Their opinion doesn't matter. It's the judges' opinions that count."

I think that's a terrible point of view to have and I don't feel that he has what it takes to be a Top Chef. I agree wholeheartedly with Tom Colicchio in that Hung doesn't put enough of himself into his food. He may be a great technical cook, but his attitude stinks and his food lacks soul. If he makes a great chicken dish, what does that really say about him? That he can really make chicken... in a perfected cookbook fashion... but not with any Hung in it. It's like, "See? It tastes great, but ANYONE could have made it because it doesn't have my personal touch to it."

Well, enough about Hung. I just had to disagree with you on your one point.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 12:32 PM

Emily wrote:

Regarding Hung's reserve:
Most cultures besides our own value the quality of reserve. People in other countries are not brought up to spew their personal feelings and life stories to any stranger who will listen.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 1:01 PM

AJ wrote:

I think you have a problem with Hung. You always seem very critical of his dishes and his attitude. I have to agree with one of the earlier comments from another reader (Lisa). I think Hung has come from a tough family background and has worked very hard to be where he is now and we should appreciate that. He is arrogant sometimes but I think he can be because he is so good. Time and again all the top chef judges (esp. the french culinary school deans) and fellow contestants have commended him on his perfect technical skills and the taste of his dishes. May be coming from the culture he comes from it is hard for him to open up and to bring his "soul" to the food (whatever that means) as the other contestents. I think the audience also needs to stop hating him and should applaud him for striving for perfection. And above all I give him credit for recognizing in last nite's challenge that his dish was not 100%. I have seen some of the other contestants think their food is perfect when it is actually far from it.
I wish Hung all the best to win the finale and hope you, Gail, will not be the reason he loses the final. I don't think Casey or Dale rank anywhere near Hung.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 1:20 PM

Steven Jacobsen wrote:

Gail, I'm glad to see you're back on the show. You're my favorite judge. I love your thoughtful comments, as well.

The show just keeps getting better and better, because it's about the food. I have to say the lack of "drama" between contestants makes the show better this season. The credibility of the guest judges is insane...eric ripert, daniel boulud, alfred portale, wow.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 1:23 PM

Nick wrote:

I wonder why so many have said that Hung lacks soul. It's just that Casey seems to bring so MUCH soul to her cooking that poor Hung pales in comparison. Can't wait to see if Hung really let's go in the finale, although I would love to see Casey win over the others.

In this round, the judges said of Casey's dish that it was too rare/raw, and Chef Tom said that he didn't enjoy the chunky cauliflower concoction. You remarked that the dish was "not memorable". Chef Eric said that the sauce was very good and you wondered whether that by itself was enough.

Of Hung's dish: all judges agreed he didn't give it 100%, with Chef Tom saying on the episode and you writing here that the summery flavors didn't match the elk.

So, were it a truly blind tasting, wouldn't these two dishes be judged as more flawed than either Dale's or Hung's? Padma and the guests seemed to favor Brian's dish. Was it really the most flawed, the worst? I dunno... Pehaps the tragedy of sending either Casey or Hung home based on this one flawed elk dish was too much. What a tough decision this time. I'm glad that Casey and Hung are going into the finals though, I can see how you guys had to work it that way.

I enjoy your presence on the show. You seem fair and it looks like you try to keep it objective. You bring this wide range of culinary experience. Sometimes when you are tasting a dish and something isn't right, you appear to get angry and upset for just a minute - I find this cute for some reason. You and Tom seem to be sincere and get right down to the food, you both seem honest like that. Oh, also, you're attractive that doesn't hurt either ;-) Anyway, congrats on the success and your engagement.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 1:52 PM

TC wrote:

I like last nights show but I'm again at a loss regarding how the rules change for each episode. Maybe I still have a Tre hangover but last night, if you followed the rules you laid out, Casey should have gone home. Her meat was too rare, you and other judges not said her sides were unmemorable and Tom admitted that he didn't get them. Add to that that out of her whole dish she did one thing right...a sauce..and how can she stay?You end up kicking off a guy who really might have made too much but whose food you guys said was pretty good. The excuse for the Tre episode was that you judge them one competition at a time yet I think Casey got in the finals with her last few weeks performances when we all know she was the weakest in last nights challenge. Not only that but she refused to use her quick fire advantage and said she was saving it. Besides last night Dale has shown nothing throughout the comps and has skated. I hope the rules change next season so unlike losing Sam, Tre and then what happened last night, we actually get Top Chef and not Middle of the Road Chef. Thanks for the hard work and good show.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 2:07 PM

Dorothy wrote:

Playing Devil's Advocate here....now that you all know Hung's story...will his food now taste any differently to you?

posted on September 27, 2007 at 3:07 PM

Jill wrote:

Boy Gail, you can certainly be judgmental.

Of course the chefs were out of their element trying to cook and clean a trout at a campfire within 20 minutes for one of the best chefs in the world!! I don't think that a high maintenence type of person such as yourself would have fared any better.
In fact, I don't think you could do that anymore than you could cook in three inch stilletto heels.
Even Ted Allen and Anthony Bourdain admitted in their blogs that it was a ridiculous quick fire.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 3:14 PM

michael wrote:

Gail, I love you.
As usual, you are disturbingly beautiful on the show.

About the food, I think you were right on. I was more than a little surprised Casey was not able to cook the meat just right and Dale wowed me with his winning dish. In the ep, I didn't see him do anything outstanding, but I trust the panel of Judges' palettes more than anything.

The contestants did seem a bit frazzled though, right off. I guess that has to do with the time off, not being used to the constant pressure the show ramps up on them, I would think they might fare better if the show didn't allow the contestants the break inbetween, but then again, some of them might 'break' under the enormous time away from everything civil and pressure of the show.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 3:46 PM

Lauren S. wrote:

Dear Gail,
I love Top Chef and I have watched the last three seasons with devotion. Unfortunately, the most recent episodes have left me bitter and upset at the Top Chef gods. Sara Mair almost killed you with raw chicken! Do you remember the scene you created about that? I do because you were annoying me with your keen ability to be both rude and audacious while you criticize others and bob your head around in all different directions. I would LOVE to see you compete on Top Chef.

Sincerely,

Your Least Biggest Fan

posted on September 27, 2007 at 5:44 PM

foodie wrote:

I hate to say it but I think Casey was given a pass on this round. With the meat being severly undercooked and no one liking the cauliflower puree, I think she normally would have been sent home for those errors. Of course, we can't actually taste the food, but Brian's dish sounds like it was cooked properly; what's wrong with a lot of ingredients? Better than actual cooking errors, like undercooked meat.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 5:47 PM

Tammy wrote:

I think the show should be judged by different judges each time and by chefs only. I think the only credible judge is Tom but he can also be bias as the show mature and he starts relating to the contestants. Your bias Gail, is obvious. I also don't find you very entertaining or appealing like Padma and Tom.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 5:53 PM

Jimmy wrote:

Unfortunately, you sound a little disingenuous when you talk about Hung. It seems like you are blinded by his arrogance - unable to see him for just his food. Its almost as if it's better you not know the food came from him. Maybe it was the editing, but you clearly had a problem with him in the Rocco DiSpirito frozen pasta episode, denouncing the food as bad tasting and that the end result was equally Hung's fault as was Joey's. Again, maybe it was the editing, but it looked like Tom disagreed with you, saying the food tasted fine, but the pasta was mush, and it was Joey's fault for not listening. Anyhow, I'm not sure what the concern is about Hung not mentioning about his family background, being a struggling immigrant, a minority, growing up with cooking being his life, etc... What would that have to do with him at Judge's Table? He will be humbled perhaps eventually, but we still have to see him for who he is, and not develop any bias because of that.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 6:44 PM

Katy wrote:

To Lauren S and foodie (posted on 9/27/07 5:44PM and 5:47PM respectively)

You nailed it down, the judges were bias, Gail has personal problem with Hung, absolutely. She sides with Casey “being female in a male dominated field”, too bad, it is your choice. You must perform like any male and do not expect any exception; stop whining. Sara M’s rare chicken almost kills her (she made big deal / a show of it) but Casey’s rare elk won’t; it looks terrible on TV, almost like uncooked meat. Gail, did you finish Casey’s dish?

posted on September 27, 2007 at 7:05 PM

Megan wrote:

Gail, just to put on the record for next season - I hope we see more of you judging and less Ted Allen. I am sure Ted is a nice guy and fun to be around - this is nothing personal, but it is just that his depth of knowledge is not nearly what yours is, nor his palate as refined (from what I can tell by comments). Also during judging you are able to verbally tell us more about the dish and why you thought it was good than what Ted is able to articulate. I salute how successful he has become, but there is a huge difference between knowing food because you have tasted a lot of it and knowing it because you have cooked behind a line, and trained under many chefs, AND eaten in many restaurants. I know people like Top Chef for different reasons, but I want to be more educated about food and see the creative meals the chefs come up with. I also really want to know as best as possible how a dish tasted (why I would love to see Mr. Bourdain as a permanent judge because you can almost taste the food when he writes about it). I hope we see more of your judging and excellent commentary next season. Oh, and thanks for that video with Chef Boulud and how to make the sea bass!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 8:18 PM

brian wrote:

How come Dale was allowed to throw out his awful tart and make something else? There is a time limit, and he cooked up the rest of his "back up" dish after time was out. Lame!

posted on September 27, 2007 at 9:39 PM

brian wrote:

Hung plays fair, but doesn't help anyone because it it called Top Chef, not top chef who gets some help from his friends. Also, how is he supposed to put his culture into a dish requiring Elk for cowboys? How come Dale was allowed to throw out his awful tart and make something else? There is a time limit, and he cooked up the rest of his "back up" dish after time was out. Lame! Having the chefs cook in such ridiculous conditions by the lake is a waste of time.

posted on September 27, 2007 at 9:43 PM

kris wrote:

i've said it before and i'll say it again...you have an issue with hung and he could cook the finest meal ever made and you would find something crappy to say about it. and from what i have read in the comments about 90% of the people feel that way. seems to me there must be some truth behind it. casey's stuff always seems ok, dale's seems somewhat better but hungs always seems like the best yet he gets no credit. and what the hell did he get the week he finally won the elimination challenge...nothing?

posted on September 27, 2007 at 10:53 PM

davesterr wrote:

of first gail simmons is finger-licking good.. second hung from he beginnig has shown himself to be the true top chef... third its nothing short of a miracle that casey and dale made it his far.. mind you that casey has only now really began to shine.. before she wasnt really doing much.. dale has always been a mess.. casey im definitely hoping itll be casey vs hung...dale its definitely not the top chef..i mean really am i the only one that notices hes..ok... casey has been showing something lately.. hung is definitly #1.. again gail your the hot one, i dont know why padmas the one getting the attention

posted on September 27, 2007 at 11:05 PM

Candice (not Candi) wrote:

In the first few minutes of the episode, I was saying to myself, "Dale is going home." Imagine my surprise to find out he managed to stay in it, though I don't think he has what it takes to win it.

I think Brian should have been given more credit, but at the same time I agree that he blew it on this challenge.

According to a lot of posters, Casey and Hung are the ones to beat. I'll give them that with Casey, but I have huge issues with Hung.

You said: "Hung... does recognize that he should cook a dish the judges will love, because they are the ultimate decision-makers."

I disagree with his "I don't [care] who I cook for" attitude. How would that fare in a restaurant, if he only cooked great meals for reviewers/critics and food bloggers and said "to heck with everyone else. Their opinion doesn't matter. It's the judges' opinions that count."

I think that's a terrible point of view to have and I don't feel that he has what it takes to be a Top Chef. I agree wholeheartedly with Tom Colicchio in that Hung doesn't put enough of himself into his food. He may be a great technical cook, but his attitude stinks and his food lacks soul. If he makes a great chicken dish, what does that really say about him? That he can really make chicken... in a perfected cookbook fashion... but not with any Hung in it. It's like, "See? It tastes great, but ANYONE could have made it because it doesn't have my personal touch to it."

Well, enough about Hung. I just had to disagree with you on your one point.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 2:03 AM

FanFare wrote:

Dear Gail,

I hated both challenges this week. They paled by comparison to last week's sublime show. The order of these episodes could have been reversed. That is how disconnected to the progression of the contest it truly was. The QF was stupid in concept. Having these cooks prepare river trout in 20 minutes without adequate workspace was insulting to them and the guest judge.

The cowboy challenge was also ridiculous. 3 hours is not alot of time to plan and prepare unfamiliar game. I just found this epsisode frustrating to watch. Your comments about Casey's dish swung radically from, "it's not impressive" to "ok, one component was good" (when Eric Ripert waxed rhapsodic about her sauce). Were you swayed by the other judges to change your tune or was the editing faulty?

We did hear Hung's history. I think he does cook with heart and joy on his face. He simply is not a stand-up comedian like Dale or Brian. He seems reserved and introverted. He should not be penalized for his personality since he is deemed the most skilled chef of all. If you want fun food, go to Chucke Cheese's.

btw: your point on the altitude is actually important. They all just came from sea level. Then they were forced to fly in a hot air balloon. Aspen has one of the higher elevations in Colorado. Without a proper amount of time to get aclimated, the cooks could have suffered from high altitude sickness (which can affect anyone at anytime). That did not seem fair or healthy for them.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 9:21 AM

Don wrote:

Even though the season is not over yet and I don't want to jinx anything, may I say congratulations on a season that finally wasn't disrupted by controversy. The finalists all deserve their spot in Aspen and all are very talented.
One question, any hints on where season 4 is going to be held?
Gail, you are stunningly beautiful woman and the cornerstone of Top Chef. You were deeply missed those weeks you were gone.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 11:08 AM

yumi wrote:

Some of the sentiments from the other posters on this blog had me in tears today, because they show the compassion and understanding missing from your commentary. The judges clearly do not understand or make allowances for Hung's very very different cultural and ethnic background. Asian culture is about emotional reserve, hard work, and family. To force Hung to defend himself by laying his emotions out for display was downright cruel. We keep what you all call heart and soul, very private, and to force him to showboat so you can relate to him on your terms was very hard to watch.
On top of that, you all let it be known that you will not recognize his "soul" unless it's in a dish that starts with pho? Are you serious? He obviously takes pride in his classic training and technique, because he has made a personal decision that those dishes inspire him. Why would you make his win contingent on putting his strengths aside to recreate a dish he might eat at home, because that's what YOU feel a Vietnamese immigrant should WANT to cook? Talk about forcing someone into a stereotype. SHAME ON YOU!

posted on September 28, 2007 at 11:23 AM

Dene r wrote:

I agree with a lot of the responses here that give Hung the credit he deserves. People make some stupid comments like "He doesn't put his soul in his food." Firstly, I think he puts his soul into it just as much as anyone else, but his soul is different.
Secondly, what the hell does "soul" taste like, exactly?
How important is this realistically in the grand scheme of a Top Chef?
I have never eaten in a restaurant and said, "Wow, this dish is great, the amount of soul made it divine."
Thirdly, Hung's personality may be somewhat abrasive and competitive, but as has been stated many times, that is part of his upbringing.
It's ridiculous to say he should have brought more Asian influence in his food before now. His cultural influence is shown in his technique, his attitude, and his knowledge. Is anyone really as ignorant as to say Asian influence in cooking means making fried rice and egg rolls? More soy sauce and ginger?
His culture is reflected in everything he makes, but too many morons just don't see it because they adhere to what THEY feel is an appropriate "Asian influence."
And lastly, again with regard to personalities, looks, and soul:
In top restaurants, the chef does NOT come out and describe the dish to the customer before he/she eats it. We usually have no idea whether the chef is male or female, short or tall, Asian, Black or Caucasian. We are just eating what they have prepared, or in many cases, what they have instructed their line cooks to prepare. So, for the most part (to the person eating) a chef's personality has nothing to do with the food.
Personally, I have never gone miles out of my way to eat at a restaurant where the chef was a pretty, young white woman. I don't avoid restaurants where the chef is competitive or arrogant. I go where the food is good.

I think that an interesting challenge for next season would be towards the end, when people's personalities have become familiar, for the competitiors to make a dish according to whatever guidelines are set out. Then, they mix it up so that someone else serves it as their own. This would make for more interesting TV than just a blind tasting, but it would be interesting to see how judge's react to dishes they think were prepared by one chef, when they were actually cooked by someone else.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 11:32 AM

Lisbeth wrote:

Hi Gail,
Whatever you say about Hung, he is the one who comes off as a chef who is not afraid of challenge. Each time he is in a difficult situation (e.g. the quickfire challenge with breakfast cereals), he doesn't waste time whining and take on the challenge very quickly. That takes some talent and pugnacity to be like that.
I agree that Hung is not the most sympathetic person to deal with, but they compete for the title of TC, not for being Mr or Mrs Congeniality. Please try to be fair and don't show too much your preference for Casey. That diminishes somehow your credibility.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 11:35 AM

Erkki Corpuz wrote:

Gail,

I love your comments. And you're the best! SO HOT

posted on September 28, 2007 at 12:10 PM

Proxl wrote:

I have to echo what Candice (not Candi :-)) said in her comment. Hung's "Screw it, I'm cooking for the judges," attitude bugs me.

While I think it was a poor planning decision by the TC producers to do "stunt challenges" this late in the competition, I also think that if you're gonna say, "Your challenge is to cook something for the cowboys," then the cowboys' opinion ought to count for something. Whatever happened to the survey cards?

posted on September 28, 2007 at 12:39 PM

Cheryl wrote:

Okay, y'all ragged on Casey for calling her chicken dish coq au vin when she didn't use an old rooster and didn't cook it long enough to be considered the classic dish, but you are calling the most recent episode the "finale" when there's still another episode left. IT WASN'T THE FINALE. A little consistency, please. By the way, Hung's not a villain, or shouldn't be cast as such. It seems to be more of a difference in culture. I find the immigrant story rather compelling. I'm interested to see how he integrates his heritage into his cooking in the final episode.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 12:48 PM

Pamela Thompson wrote:

I'm really tired of you putting down Hung every week. You so clearly dislike him that I'm surprised he's made it this far, and I know he won't get a fair chance at winning from you.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Ollie wrote:

Hey, Gail,

Sorry you're getting some slack, you don't deserve it. I think you are a very fair judge, and one that I love to hear describing the food. You make it come alive for me.

I'm very sad about the negativity of the commenters towards Hung. He has done nothing to elicit such venom. I wish people would think before they spout such hatred for a man they have never met.

I am pulling for Hung to win the whole shebang. I hope his food knocks your socks off next week. Casey's recent wins, the coq and the elk, were dishes she is very familiar with. And although the coq was apparently tasty, the elk was raw, and her side was not tasty. Hung never cooked elk before, yet produced a tasty dish, though apparently not tasty enough. If only two were going to the finals, Casey would probably by out.

I hope that Padma is not in TC4, and if she is, is not at the judges' table. I don't think any host can be an unbiased judge. If she is at the table, she needs to be at the end. She sits far forward in total disregard for the folks on either side of her. Chef Ripert was practically laying on the table to be able to see around her. A u-shaped table might help, with her on the end. Also, the editors seem to love her. But we want more of you judges than her at the judges' table. That is where many have asked for more air time. But we don't want to hear her.

You are looking stunning, and obviously your engagement agrees with you.

Can't wait for next week!

posted on September 28, 2007 at 3:15 PM

Violet wrote:

I am 100% agree with Lisbeth. Gail, be fair. This is TC, not a Mr or Ms congeniality contess. I've watched your altitude toward Hung from the begining.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 4:54 PM

Tyler wrote:

Gail I thought this was all about the food and not the personality of a person. Why are you so disgusted with Hung.
So far as I can remember his food might not have been elimination winners so far you judges have never said it was awful. But now all of you are on the "no soul in his food" train. Why not just announce Casey as Top Chef and move on to Season 4. It is not fair for you to be commenting on people's personality when you yourself isn't as nice. Plus it should really just be the "food".

posted on September 28, 2007 at 5:00 PM

bethnor wrote:

ppl, read what the chefs write before you open your yaps. all blog commenters have said that elk *has* to be served rare to medium-rare. colicchio even says that if customers want something more than medium waiters are to advise them against elk. chicken, to my knowledge, is NEVER served rare or medium-rare. so the comparison b/n sara and casey doesn't fly.

you weren't there, you didn't eat the food.

posted on September 28, 2007 at 5:05 PM

jackie wrote:

The only way that Top Chef is going to work is blind taste tests. You guys are just too biased with beauty pagaent questions and archaic stereotypes to judge the food objectively. Blind taste tests for a t least some of the challenges!!! I'll bet then we would have had totally different results from all three seasons. Tiffani' s food anyone? Hung's food anyone?

posted on September 29, 2007 at 12:50 AM

carie wrote:

Gail
There seems to be a tint of malice in your judging. If the meat is a bit pink you go on a rant and claim yours was raw. Colicchio too seems to seize at straws: -- Casey called it "coq au vin" but it wasn't a true "coq au vin" because she didn't use a rooster. etc. He is like a business man; not an artist/ chef. It points to ineptitude in your abilities to judge. The Culinary Institute episode was such a pleasure because the judges weren't nitpicking - they were critiquing the dishes as masters of the craft. If there is a next TC season, they should get rid of the entire panel of poseur judges and get some real chefs.

posted on September 29, 2007 at 5:42 AM

Jen wrote:

regarding Hung's Vietnam upbringing and traditional Asian "reserved emotion":

Oh please! He is not reserved at all talking a whole load of trash in the individual interviews. The fact is that the viewers know arrogance and unwillingness to learn anything from his fellow competitors is what lies behind his stoic reactions at the JT. It's not that he was hiding his emotions prior to this elimination....he was simply putting on a fake emotional display b/c he realized that was what was necessary to trump Dale and Casey's statements. He's just playing the game. As he gave that rousing speech, internally he was rolling his eyes and wondering why a vote was even necessary, since everyone knows he's the greatest chef on the face of the earth.

posted on September 29, 2007 at 9:32 AM

FrenchFry wrote:

Dear Gail,

It is truly a pity that the judging has come down to who you guys LIKE better... Dale has admitted that he has "crappy knife skills", has a poor sense of smell and taste, "is not known for plating well", doesn't cook fish well, cannot make desserts, gave up goat cheese for chicken, makes poor decisions and on and on. Yet, when he got lucky by ditching the tart for creamed cauliflower & potatoes, & warmly opened up with his sad story at the Finale Pt.1 Confessional, suddenly, the game changed. WOW! If every cook on TC could curry favor by crying a river rather than actual cooking technique (as Hung has consistently done), then rename the title, "Top Sad-Sack Chef".

Please keep it about the food everytime.

posted on September 29, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Larry wrote:

I wish you could watch them cook in the kitchen. I have watch this season from the beginning. I have watch them in the kitchen and it seams that Hung does not watch what he is doing with knifes in his hands. He has no repect for other cooks.

posted on September 29, 2007 at 12:37 PM

Joanne wrote:

Hung, Dale and Brian seem to actually worry about who is going to win. Casey seems to think there's not a problem because it is going to be her. Don't get it.

posted on September 29, 2007 at 5:11 PM

Samera wrote:

It was unbelievable to hear the criticism of Hung that he lacks soul or whatever Chef Coliccihio said about not seeing Hung in food. He's cooking and creating with what is given - is he supposed to be putting asian influences on each challenge - how are you to do that with crazy challenges like running down a super market aisle and getting stuck with waht you chooose or cooking by a river or cooking pasta and freezing it? That's like saying Tre should be putting collard greens and grits in everything - Such severe racial undertones - I am just shocked. And by the way, by the judging tonight, Casey should have been the one to go since her dish got themost criticisms in terms of flavor and taste but she WAS judged according to all previous challenges not this one alone. And Padma so backed off her support - didn't she love brian's the best??? The inconsistency is mind boggling.

posted on September 29, 2007 at 8:16 PM

susan s wrote:

Thank you, Gail, for the extra input on the interviews. What we, as the viewers, got to see seemed staged and very insincere. As much as I love watching him cook, I don't know if I can believe that his heart is really in it. As a bit of an overacheiver myself, I always did my absolute best because that was what was expected and, I can tell you, I did it because it was merited not, necessarily, because I enjoyed it. His diatribe on being raised in a kitchen with the family and extended family of cooks just didn't sound like he meant it. I figured it was just the editing. It's nice to know that was the case.
I thought the elimination was a good challenge -- not as good as last week's, but, solid. But, that Quickfire!!!!! What were they thinking? At least, give your competitors a table to work on! Did the producers listen to Dave's conversation with Harold in Season One? All that was missing from what he described was that they didn't have to "catch" what they were cooking. (I'm taking some liberty here. Dave was talking about going out to the Grand Canyon with a covered wagon and a bow and arrow, but, you get the co-relation. Oh, yeah, and it better be gourmet.)
The only other thing that bothers me about this episode is that it seemed like a big waste of Eric Ripert. I liked the episode he judged last season much better. It just seemed much better suited to his style. This was a little more campy than refined.
I was sorry to see Brian go. He was a good competitor and a very affable guy. But, when he started reading off his list of ingredients, I knew he was doomed...and, of course, someone had to go.
I have mixed emotions about three chefs competing in the finale. However it turns out, I'm sure it will be fun. Love the show and this season certainly was a lot more fun than last season with all the back-biting and fighting. Can't wait until Season 4.
When are we going to have Top Chef NYC?

posted on September 30, 2007 at 12:08 AM

FrenchFry wrote:

hi Gail,
Your comments are your opinions. That's fine. However, as a judge, it should be incumbent upon yourself to be fair and balanced. During deliberation, you sway your vote as the wind blows (or guest judge speaks). In your blog, you tip your hand again one way or the other to show your bias toward or against a competitor. As a judge, you are not supposed to care who wins in the end. Judging should be neutral and based on the criteria stated. However, the criteria changes with the breeze. Perhaps you should be excused from judging TC4 since you cannot remain fair.

posted on September 30, 2007 at 10:28 AM

PeachPie wrote:

Wow, thanks for including that link! Now I'm starving!

posted on September 30, 2007 at 4:40 PM

sparksp wrote:

I was surprised that the chef were surprised to be cooking trout and elk. I had just received the gift of a copy of Flavors of Montana - I had an inkling. Why would they not expect local, western, outdoorsy?

I had a much bigger problem with the horse stall kitchens than with the trout. It's a fish! It's a basic challenge in a bad kitchen. Try having them supervise 20 Girl Scouts to cook international quality trout, and then we can question the relative degree of difficulty.

Meanwhile, horse stalls? This seemed more unsanitary than the roach coah, and that's saying something. Also, the rest of this ep was about western authenticity - and those kitchens reeked of east coast notions about cowboys the way nothing else in the ep did. What did the actual chuck wagon cooks have to say about that, I'd like to know?

posted on September 30, 2007 at 6:48 PM

PeachPie wrote:

Lisa in Florida wrote
"You are often the most verbal and probably the least qualified to be judging."

Um... yeah, right.... she graduated from the French Culinary Institute and worked in La Cirque.

Check out the facts before posting a comment that makes YOU look like someone who's not "qualified" to post a comment.

posted on September 30, 2007 at 7:06 PM

John E. Nelson, Jr. wrote:

Hi, Gail.

The one thing that I don't understand about the contestants' choices in the venison challenge is, haven't any of them ever heard of ROASTING the venison cuts? Personally, when presented with a venison (elk) loin I automatically think of roasting it. With my personal background, that means on halved jalapenos and tomatillos, making a salsa with roasted and fresh vegetables, thinly slicing the meat, and then wrapping the meat, salsa, and a little cheese in a tortilla. The only secret ingredient involved is the "L" word.

posted on September 30, 2007 at 10:32 PM

Brian wrote:

Gail, you are my favorite. I hope you are on every episode next season. Or take over for Padma.

posted on October 1, 2007 at 5:02 AM

Kaitlyn wrote:

I was watching Top Chef on Wednesday night at 10 pm and I was wondering where you got your necklace from. I love it!

posted on October 1, 2007 at 11:28 AM

joe wrote:

Gail- I really enjoy your blogs. They are insightful and give us a true sense of the challenges without going for the jugular. Very classy!

posted on October 1, 2007 at 12:33 PM

Carolyn wrote:

Gail, I am a big fan!!!! I was wondering if there will be another season of Top Chef or is this it?

posted on October 1, 2007 at 2:40 PM

Jane wrote:

Gail (and the other judges for that matter),

Is this a food competition or a "soul" competition? If this is a competition to see who has a "soul" and who is "robotic"? Than shouldn't we have judges with different qualifications? I'm not sure if being a Food & Wine writer or chef-owner suddenly makes you an expert in souls. Just because Hung doesn't wear his "soul" on his sleeve and entertain everyone with "cry me a river" speel about his arduous trek as an immigrant in this country fleeing from a Communist dictatorship, doesn't mean he doesn't have passion, heart, or in your words, "soul." From your blog, it seems like you were more interested in being entertained by the contestants "waxing eloquent" about their lives and "souls" rather than food. Hung is a great chef with an obviously compelling story as an immigrant from a war-torn country. One would have to be blind or historically libotomized not to have known that from the beginning of this competition. Yet, and hopefully I am wrong, you still seem to enjoy being entertained by the Asian "monkey" finally dancing and clapping like all the other contestants. This "soul" episode was absurd and the blogs compliment them well, like a dung beetle to Elephant crap.

posted on October 2, 2007 at 11:52 AM

marie wrote:

Hi Gail,
Thanks for your insightful comments. I believe HUNG is the clear winner as TOP CHEF, as I observed with the previews ......I'm Asian, too, believe me, we are very determine to accomplish our goals here in America. We brought up that way, to have our children do have college degrees and achieve more....hung has the ability to excel more when it comes to cooking, he's very skillful , so focus and so creative, not only he cooks delicious French and American foods but as well as as Asian food...what a diversity.GOOD LUCK ,HUNG.....
By the way, Casey maybe a good cook, but what a girl who speak profanity......

posted on October 2, 2007 at 12:04 PM

outback11367 wrote:

in the FCI challenge, you actually blasted sara for her undercooked chicken. it was a toss up between sara-s well conceptualized but poorly executed jamaican chicken vs dale's poorly conceptualized and poorly executed chicken duet. it was sara who took the fall. in this episode, it was very clear that casey's dish was terribly undercooked and not slightly as u wrote. even eric ripert who knows more than anybody what being undercooked is commented on that. and yet she made it to the finale over brian. yes his dish lacked focus. it was a clearly ambitious take on elk. but it did have flavor. the concept was there but i suppose the time constraints limited his ability to perfect his dish. hmm i just wonder what tipped u and the other judges in casey's favor? looking back, dale's dish in the fci episode clearly had no focus with the absent honey sauce and yet he slid by...
this episode clearly showcased the talents of hung who had never cooked elk until the challenge. as most of the readers have pointed out, there is no need for him to be a tem player this late in the game. everybody is competing for the same prize. and hung is trying not to lose sight of the prize. he did demonstarte his being a team player. try to recall sara's comments in the restaurant wars. she did say nice thing s abt him about trying to ask her what else he could do. and in that quickfire challenge,. he knew that something is on the line for the team, so he would clear the table for the next teammate.

posted on October 2, 2007 at 4:05 PM

Kiki wrote:

I read someone's blog who stated they would like to have a "blind" taste test to determine who wins the challenges but that would eliminate Chef Tom's visit to the prep area to witness how contestants are handling the challenge. I think the Top Chef should be well-rounded as the position requires the ability to lead and develop staff to make the entire experience for the diner memorable. Personalities do play an integral part behind the scenes of any great restaurant. I believe Casey is the most well-rounded chef of the group but was also surprised she wasn't eliminated on the black and blue elk. I really like the way Dale responded to the judges, how he found himself again. He has already won something more important than the title "Top Chef", he has won back confidence in himself and his abilities. Gail, I find myself riveted to your comments and insights. They make sense and you always make great points on each dish, good or bad. Love this show. I am anxious for the finale. Good luck to all.

posted on October 2, 2007 at 10:11 PM

Max wrote:

"Oh please! He is not reserved at all talking a whole load of trash in the individual interviews. "

Yes.

To all you Asians who were offended by Gail's critique of Hung: she wasn't making a generalization about all Asians. She was talking about one person. I find it hilarious that you want her to make racial assumptions. Give her a break and stop being so racist.

Whether Hung is Top Chef material or not is for the judges to decide.

posted on October 3, 2007 at 6:29 AM

Irena wrote:

Gail,

Sorry, but you are way too predictable versus Tom, Padma, and guest judges. You strongly reprehended Casey's dish, but as soon as Chef Eric said that he did like Casey's smoked tomato butter sauce you immediately changed your mind and agreed with him just adding that you are just not sure if it'll be enough. I really like Tom's comments, he knows about the food and he loves what he is doing. You are getting a lot of compliments and mostly concentrating on how you would look next episode. Hung is an immigrant like me (I am from Europe, he is from Asia) and the culture and the way people self-express themselves are different all over the world, not better or worse, just different. Casey is beautiful, Hung controversal, Dale has a very sweet prsonality - they all are remarkable and great chefs, but maybe some contestants deserving the title of Top Chef unluckily left the competition already? I can't wait for the finale tonight and the twist - I saw Hung's face at the preview. Sorry if I hurt your feelings...

posted on October 3, 2007 at 10:44 AM

Jeff wrote:

Outback11367:

While chicken/poultry is dangerous to serve rare due to the dangers of salmonella, beef (or elk) can be served rare or even raw (carpaccio). So Casey's rare elk was no a reason for disqualification. Serving it rare was a preference.

However, the issue of serving rare poultry should be applied to Hung as well. Sous vide is a cooking method that is currently prohibited in NYC because, while it can appear to cook the chicken thoroughly using a slow and low temperature, it does not necessarily kill all the bacteria and can present a potential danger to the diner. In this case, the judges at the FCI.

So while Sara's chicken served to Gail may have been pink, Hung's chicken posed a similar risk to eating it as well.

posted on October 3, 2007 at 10:47 AM

Greg Wells wrote:

Gail, I hope you will grace us with your beautiful sexy self, (oh that's right it is a cooking show!). Anyway I am tossed up between Casey and Hung. No offense Dale but even a 5th grader can count to 18. Tre and Howie could have been there instead of Brian and Sara. Something tells me that those guys would handle Aspe style cooking, on there own without the cowboy hat and bad cooking!

posted on October 3, 2007 at 12:30 PM

Fred Lewis wrote:

Gail as everyone tells you,you look fantastic. Dropped a few lbs. did'nt you? As a regular Top Chef veiwer and Top Chef in my own Place, I wonder why you guys kept SIDESHOW BRIAN(FULL OF MALARKIE) And CJ (crawl under and hide and let everyone else work) around for so long. There were several better Chefs, you guys just do not seem to know a straight answer, even when you get one. REUNION FOR 3 Lia,Casey,Hung,Howie,and TRE!

posted on October 3, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Joo wrote:

Jeff:

NYC's sous vide ban is because if a food is sous vide'd improperly, it might pose a health hazard. Also, due to sous vide's rising popularity here in America, some cooks out there are trying to sous vide everything they can, which is not a good idea obviously for untrained cooks.

If done correctly, there are no safety issues. The French have been doing it since WWII, and you'd think they'd stop doing it if it was an unsafe practice. Plus, no other cities have followed NYC's suit. Also, a quote from an article at Nation's Restaurant News:

"A spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declined to discuss the new regulation in New York, but reported that the agency has no record of anyone in the United States becoming ill after eating food prepared through sous vide."

posted on October 3, 2007 at 5:12 PM

Claudine Pepin wrote:

Hi Gail - I am so very glad so see you back - you are the gracious voice of reason and you know and love food!
Thanks so very much!! Cheers~
Claudine Pepin

posted on October 3, 2007 at 10:17 PM

laura wrote:

I think Gail is being unfair to Hung, no matter how hard or good of a dish he makes, Gail always try to find something wrong with it. Casey should have went home last week. Apparently, no judges liked Casey's dish. it was undercooked and had a tons of problem. i thought it was worst then brian. i really want hung to win, but i also don't want hung to win, because he deserves better then winning this show. winning this show doesnt mean anything more, because this show has loose its value. so i want hung to win just for the heck of it, but wish he will find his success somewhere else. the judges needs to improve on season 4 or else it won't be a show after that.

posted on October 3, 2007 at 11:33 PM

maxine kressel-taub wrote:

i am an avid viewer of top chef. season 3 was by far the best. finally the best chef won.... i think it would be helpful if when you initially pick the contestants, you should do a background check on their resumes. you could then check their restaurant menus for sauces. every season you ask each chef if they have made a certain sauce before. i believe that most of them have and say nothing. i base my theory on the fact that prior to you asking that question, certain chefs show no creativity in their sauces. i would be happy to assist you.
thanks again for a great season.

posted on October 10, 2007 at 8:34 AM