brian kaplan wrote:

Great job by Hung. He has impressed all year, and I don't understand why people could root against him. He has played fair, cooked the best, and was confident in himself. He definitely has soul and passion in his cooking. There is no other way to explain how an individual can achieve the skills and techniques that he displayed. The right chef won, thanks Gail!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 12:50 PM

Gail wrote:

Yes, I do deny his talent in the kitchen. I deny that he should be Top Chef. Dale, you took it hands down. Which Bravo excutive's idea was this? I won't be watching again.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 12:54 PM

Angelica wrote:

I'm soo happy that Hung won Top Chef! I've been rooting for him since the beginning and he deserved to win! Although Casey and Dale are excellent chef, Hung has shine from the very first day! Congrats Hung!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 12:58 PM

Brandon wrote:

Gail-

Thanks for another great analysis of each chef's offerings! You always do a good job of detailing the thought processes behind the judges' table. I definitely agree with your choice of Hung as Top Chef - he has blown me away with his mastery of technique through the entire season. Furthermore, the emotion he has shown in the last few episodes really went a long way to proving he is not cold and heartless - he is just driven to do his best and win! Thanks for a great season - can't wait until Season 4!

Brandon

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:10 PM

Earl L Burrell wrote:

Thanks so much for taking the time to write this blog. You always add a fresh perspective to the show and sum things up really nicely. Plus you're hot!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:12 PM

Lisa wrote:

Gail - Thanks for your blogs this season! From this side of the screen, it appeared that all of the final 3 would have made an excellent Top Chef, but Hung deserved the win ultimately. As a native of the Chicago burbs I hope to hear where I can taste Dale's food soon. Looking forward to next season!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:15 PM

tyler wrote:

WOW i am mad that i missed it but you Gail Wrapped it up so nice i have to watch a re-run of for sure.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:15 PM

Zack wrote:

It doesn't matter how good a chef is on TV. If he comes off looking like an ass in reality, or through the editing of the show, no one is going to want to eat at his restaurant, not even a trained monkey, regardless of how good the food is.

No excuse for dragging this show beyond one hour. It wasn't necessary and simply put, a stupid idea. Where was that filmed? A gymnasium?

This finale proved that Casey had no business being there. She wasn't even close to Top Chef material. She gets rattled too easily.

I was hoping Dale would win, sadly he did not.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:17 PM

alexsim wrote:

I'm so glad Hung won, although it could have been Dale or Casey, too. Just goes to show how an off day can hurt, even when you really do know your stuff. The finale was really thrilling. I kept thinking how much I envied the judges - all that food looked fantastic and it sounds like most of it was great, with a couple of glaring errors. It was also fun to see CJ, Sara, and Howie - and the star sous chefs (love that Rocco!). The reunion show next week should be fun. Thanks to BRAVO for another great season of TC!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:18 PM

Beth wrote:

Gail,

Thanks much for your blog! Completely agree with you on every aspect.

My husband and I were not surprised by the "cook us your best 3 course meal" - but were pleasantly surprised by the fact it was "head to head"...all cooking/serving all at the same time. We just felt like that was the most fair way to do it. Also, I liked the adding of the fourth course - if you stuck with the 3 courses, and had a 3 way tie....GOSH! I don't even want to think about how hard THAT would have been to decide a winner.

We both felt like if there was a dish you wanted to replicate - Hung would be the chef of choice. Go with Casey if you want a "classic rendition"...and Dale, while he's an awesome chef, we weren't sure what we'd get...just that it'd be good.

It was obvious that Casey seemed out of sorts. Don't know if it was the challenge, the altitude or what.

It occurred to me after the quickfire for the "take 2: restaurant wars" was that it isn't that Hung "lacks heart and soul"....I think it's very much heart and soul....because all that is fun for him. One of my nephews - his S.O.P. is "What's fun about this?" and tries to find a way to make stuff fun that isn't typically fun (like standing in line). And then there's stuff that's already fun because you have an innate talent for it - that's Hung. He's got an innate talent for those technical skills, and it's fun for him to put together those dishes in such a way that it's pleasing to the eye and the palate. Fun for him = smurf village.

I've said before I don't touch seafood. Most every challenge I can think of that Hung won was seafood. I don't know - I might have to reconsider my stance if someone is that good at making seafood that it got him compliments from such esteemed chefs to want to hire him and/or rate him in the Michelin guide. Actually, would rather hire him to cook for my husband since he's the seafood fan and would appreciate it more!

Anyway- thanks again for the blog, and can't wait until next season!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:20 PM

Noel wrote:

From the clips at the judge's table we can infer that Gail was probably vouching for Dale's performance. His high points were arguably higher than others while his low points were striking (Gail compared his performance to a rollercoaster). Tiffany was in a remarkably similar situation in the finals, her high's higher than Harold's but her low's a lot lower, forcing the judges to weigh the importance of consistency. As they had in the first season, it came down to execution and consistency. Like Harold, Hung played it cool and disciplined, turning out clean, complex dish's one after the other, finishing it off with a simple, classic molten cake ("as good as any" Gail has tasted.). And how about the praise from Todd English? 3 Star Michelin, WOW! From winning the FCA competition to this. Hung's on a steep upward trajectory and I can't wait to see where he goes next. Congratulations Hung on becoming Top Chef!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:25 PM

Beatrice wrote:

Yay~! Hung won! I'm so happy for him!

He really deserves it. Out of all the three, he seemed to have the most fun cooking in most of the episodes.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:30 PM

Dolores wrote:

First off, I am seriously envious of all you judges--that must have been one great (but filling--didn't you need a salad?) dinner. Would have loved to have been there.

Second, I know a lot of chefs look down their noses at dessert, but honestly--a four course meal should include dessert! People expect and want a dessert! I'm not particulary into sweets myself, but I would have welcomed a dessert after all that MEAT!

Third, the right person one. as for his suppsoed abrasive personality--I really don't see it. This guy is committed, dedicated, maniacal, and a lot of other stuff. But is that such a bad thing? He is an ARTIST, after all.

And personally, I found Hung charming last night and during the last few challenges as well. Who could resist all that exuberance and excitement? He was so genuinely pleased to see Rocco and honored to have him be his sous chef. And then, when it was all over, to thank AMERICA! Come on, that was lovely. A thank you to Mom would have been nice, too, but I won't quibble.

But, in the end, it was all about the food. Obviously, the right guy one.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:32 PM

matt wrote:

Great blog Gail, glad to read your opinions. The Top Chef judges take a lot of undeserved abuse from the audience on these blogs, but it seems to me that you always give excellent justifications for your decisions.

What makes Top Chef a great show and really elevates above other reality competitions is that the judging really is based on the food and the talent of the contestants, and not on what will please audiences or promote juicy drama. Keep up the good work, Hung's victory reinforced all the reasons I have for loving the show.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:35 PM

erika wrote:

The BEST CHEF WON THE SHOW. Finally! For all you Hung haters, I seriously question your reason for loathing him. Yes he's arrogant, but honestly, if you'd been watching the last few episodes, the real Hung came out. He wasn't arrogant. He was excited, eager, competitive, stellar and hoping to impress his chef heroes (the manhattan project episode). He was having FUN. He got along with his other competitors, and he is a team player (except when in a COMPETITION, get it? It's a frickin' competition!) Yet all you guys can see is his manicness, blunt statements, and slight chip on his shoulder. How narrow and judgemental.

He was the best chef on that show. I love Casey and Dale too, but Hung was clearly on another, better level.

Congrats Hung!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:38 PM

j.l. wrote:

Cooking at high altitude was a dirty trick! I live in Ft Collins, CO, which is at 5,000 ft (much lower than the 12,000 of Aspen) and I can barely get anything to turn out correctly! Remember...even in FoCo, water boils at a WAY lower temp, which screws up almost everything. And then baked goods--it's amazing Hung could even throw a cake into the mix!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:40 PM

julia wrote:

It was apparent that Dale was added into the finale because the producers,judges,etc.knew Casey could not compete against Hung. All season she wasalways in the bottom. Dale was terrific as was Hung. It was a great season.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Dottie wrote:

I was very disappointed to see Casey choke under the pressure of the finale. The clear winner was Dale. He has guts, talent and humor. Hung is the best technically. I just felt that he never had enough warmth.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:45 PM

Andy T wrote:

Casey did not taste her pork belly! Oy. Hung does not understand soul, even if his cooking embodies it.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:57 PM

leslee wrote:

For me, this finale was up to the high standards of Season One in terms of the skills: Three superior chefs doing their best, and - in my opinion - the best chef of this season did win. I would have loved to see Dale or Casey win as well, and would have no complaint if they had (unlike Season Two, which was a huge disappointment), but seeing Hung take the prize was satisfying to me on many levels. His life story, his devotion to developing his skills and palate, his incredible focus throughout the season put him ahead throughout the season. Yes, he was often selfish in his behavior, but the decisions are based on food, not personality. Of course, the final meal is the clincher, and he apparently created delicious and creative food. Personality-wise, it was clear that Dale and Casey were more indearing individuals. But the show is about cooking, and in that last show, it was Hung who did the best work. I think we should trust in the basic panel of chefs and not second guess too much, as we didn't actually taste the food and they did. Hung's outright joy at winning the title "Top Chef" was a beautiful thing to see. Congratulations, Hung. You earned it.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 1:59 PM

Gretchen wrote:

Thank you Gail, for a wonderful TC season. I'm sure Hung was the best chef, and as the winner no doubt many opportunities will come his way. However, there may have been even more opportunities if he had not managed to alienate so many people in his climb to the top. I also have to say that the live finale just didn't work for me. It seemed not up to part with the high production values of show. I'm already looking forward to next season, and I hope you will continue to be a part of Top Chef in the future.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:01 PM

Mark Mascolino wrote:

I've often wondered, would it make sense for the judges to do blind tastings of these dishes?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:03 PM

Matt Garber wrote:

I can see now why Hung won; it sounds like he performed very well. However, I wish that his lack of ability to get along well with others would have been taken into account, because being Top Chef is more than just food on a plate.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:04 PM

Jille wrote:

Hi Gale,
I really enjoy you on the show.

However, it really seemed that on the show, and in this blog, that you and the other chefs feel like you have to apologize for the fact that Hung WON. Why?
Hung is very talented, has been consistent and cooks great. Maybe some people liked Dale and Casey better for their personalities, but this contest isn't suppose to be about who likes who more.

I was so surprised that when the winner was announced, you and everyone but (eventually)Padma, ran and hugged and kissed Dale and Casey and poor Hung stood their BY HIMSELF for about 30 seconds. Shouldn't the winner have been the first focus, then the losers? In my humble opinion, Hung has always been somewhat slighted and this slight was glaringly obvious at the end of the finale. Perhaps this was unintentional, perhaps not, but I felt bad for the poor man.

Fortunately, he gets the $100,000 anyway.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:07 PM

Mel wrote:

The viewers all knew prior to Padma announcing that Hung was the winner based on the editing of the time you spent at judge's table. Tom's comment about Dale's lobster dish being, "inedible," basically gave the competition to Hung. I agree wholeheartedly that Hung should have been declared the winner based on this last meal along with the quaility of work he's shown throughout the competetion, but I would've like a little more suspense. Also, having Casey stading there knowing she had no shot was not good for the show.

Gail, just wanted to say that you're right up there on the hotness factor alongside Padma.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:08 PM

Evan R wrote:

Gail, you rock the most! It was great to see so much of you this season, and congrats on the engagement. I thought the finale went perfectly and the judges made the best choice. I hope Dale goes on to many great things because he BARELY missed here, but Hung was well-deserving. Thanks for the insight.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:08 PM

DanC wrote:

Gail,

I truly enjoyed this season's "Top Chef". All the finalists were likeable, unlike Season 2 for me. What did C.J say about Hung in the blind tasting competition?

While I was rooting for Casey or Dale, I knew when Tre got knocked out, it was all about Hung and he kind of knew it as well. Heck, just ask him!

Dale came to the plate ready to play and cooked his butt off. He should be proud of what he achieved and I'm sure he won't have a tough time getting another job after this. Casey on other hand couldn't handle the pressure. She clearly wasn't up to the task and she knew it. She took too many chances and I hope that if this season ever hits DVD (will any of them?), it will be uncensored. She clearly wasn't ready to grab the ball and go to the mound. It's Playoff baseball. Can I use more baseball analogies?

I want to thank you for a great season Gail and once again, you truly add to the watching experience. I think it's tough for the viewer to gauge exactly what is going on because we can't actually taste the food and to the average viewer who eats "In and Out" burgers every day, are we really to understand why a dish needs more acid? Has anyone ever eaten anything with foam on top of it? Your blog did a great job in breaking down why the decisions made by yourself and the other judges. This season was a Grand Slam!

Oh, you looked great once again! Can't wait for Season Four!!!!!!!

DanC

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:11 PM

Greg wrote:

The Hung haters need to realize that they are looking at things with a skewed sense of reality, He's a likable guy and has plenty of ability to get along with others. . . He would not have been able to achieve his position at Guy Savoy without that skill. Furthermore, If you watch some of the later episodes of the season you see a different side of Hung. Remember these programs are edited and produced in a way to add drama to things. People oughta look into it a little deeper before they pass judgement on a person they do not know, or situations they were not there to see --- give people a little benifit of the doubt, I'm sure you would appreciate it if the shoe was on the other foot.

take care,

Greg

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:25 PM

elliot wrote:

everyone needs to shut up about hung winning; it IS about the food on the plate. I wouldnt care if he were a convicted felon; he cooked circles around everyone else for the past 6 months. The fact that the text poll showed Casey getting 56% of the votes is enough to tell me most viewers do not understand the program or the culinary profession.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:30 PM

Karl wrote:

Well earned, Hung! There is not a master chef in the world that would not want to hire Hung above the rest. Gail, thank you for another wonderful blog!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:33 PM

Sharon wrote:

I disagree with Matt Garber. Like the judges said, editing can make the contestants appear differently, but at the same time, this is a competition. I saw that Hung worked very well WHEN IN A TEAM CHALLENGE, but his attitude changed when it was an individual challenge. Again, this is a competition, so I wouldn't expect ANY of the contestants to be helpful with each other. I don't fault Hung on his behavior what-so-ever. I'm sure that when you place a man like him in a kitchen, the real cooking begins. CONGRATULATIONS, HUNG!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:33 PM

Henry wrote:

I can't believe that Hung won. Granted he is an excellent chef and wish him the best of luck. But he should have been eliminated long ago. I do recall the earlier episodes that he was at the bottom three. Also, chef Tom also said that "he doesn't see him in food" but now he is Top Chef. I do believe that the show should be revolved around a point system instead of the best food of the day. This way we would have seen Sam win last year and Tre in the finals this year. I was cheering for Casey. In my book she is Top Chef. Too bad she had an off day, maybe just nervous (especially when Howie is on your side).

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:39 PM

s. wrote:

Thanks Gail, for another wonderful review. I really admire your personality and the way you judge!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:46 PM

Nathan wrote:

Hi Gail,
Ok. I am very disappointed with last night's show because of course, my girl Casey didn't win. But, I'm not going to point fingers on the judges because the viewers got to see her unfortunate final meal. I still respect Casey and may I say, congratulations to Hung because even though I still wish Casey would have won, the Top Chef really emerged.
If Casey is reading this I have to say this: Casey, you're a good chef and a Top Chef in my heart. Things didn't go the way we wanted it to but you made it very far and Congratulations. I can't wait to go to Shinsei and try your food because I know you're a great Chef.

Finally, Gail, thanks for some amazing and insightful blogs. You're incredible and I hope I get to meet you one day. This will probably be my last time watching Top Chef as I will be without a tv for a LONG time, but Top Chef will be in memory as one of my favorite shows of all time. Farewell, Gail.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:46 PM

Patt White wrote:

I truly wish that the final round was more than just what they cooked at that time. Casey has so much more class than any of the others especially Hung, I do believe it is more than can he cook. Who in their right mind would work for Hung, you have the perfect jerk to be on with him, Marcel. Come on, love the show but it really needs to be about the person also. Casey I believe won more events than Hung or Dale and she gets passed over. Why do you have people vote when your not using it?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:55 PM

CAROL wrote:

Well you clowns picked hung...I know how you decided..I know I always go to restaurants hoping for good knife skills and technique. And you didn't like the roe casey used?? but love the "foam" hung used on 2 dishes/it looked like he drooled it out when he was foaming at the mouth ewwwwww

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:56 PM

foodoodancer wrote:

Having served, cooked and managed in many restaurants in NYC, I would have to say of the three, Hung is the obvious choice. Casey and Dale were always on the verge of falling apart emotionally. Who wants to work with someone that mya burst into tears at any monent? The ability to produce under pressure is one of the greatest assets any chef could have. Most great chef's are not known for their compassion in the kitchen. Hung was Top Chef from the get go.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 2:59 PM

Dolphin wrote:

Its often been said that genius does not sit well with other attributes. What is it about Hung that seem to have turned so many off? That he doesn't speak flawless English? That he embodies the "geek" image that we either do not care for, or if we are geeks ourselves - we are deeply ashamed of and full of self-hatred for? - that he is a minority (that really!) should know his place in the oh-so-mighty culinary world? That he declined to reveal how he nearly flawlessly replicated one of the most cherished dish of one of NYC's best restaurants? Maybe he was not nice enough to Dale ( who have been through so much... losing his boyfriend and restaurant), or to Casey (whom we all love, myself included). What is it about Hung that so many have a hang-up on? Look into yourselves I would say, and find the true ingredients that make up your animosity to a hard-working, somewhat arrogant (often a shield for deep-rooted insecurity), always "flavorful" - and to me at least, a deeply worthy Champion - Hung.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:09 PM

Mary wrote:

Good job, Hung. Nothing wrong with being confident and Hung seems to have a very bubbly personality. I would consider it an honor to meet him one day. Love the precision with which Hung prepared his dishes and the presentations were breathtakingly beautiful. Great choice judges!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:11 PM

Mary wrote:

I totally agree with you! This is the best finale of all 3. I and my friends stand by judges decision: Yes, yes, Hung is the TC. I am in tears when hearing the annoucement. All of three are performed well. But Casey went by too much of her grandma's way and Dale would forget one sauce this time, one serving that time, and would lose a customer next time. Only Hung has the combination of prefessional sophistication and the deep love for all styles of food. He will be a master, I do believe that. Thanks for your informative blog and the passion of this show. I coundn't wait the season 4.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:15 PM

Jeremy wrote:

Thanks for the update, Gail. Based on what I've read so far, it does sound like Hung produced the best performance in the last episode, and deserved the win.

What rankles for me and many others is the feeling that Hung should have been knocked out weeks ago. Episode after episode, Hung was facing the judges as one of the bottom performing chefs. Your comment about his consistent performance during the season doesn't mesh with what we saw on the show.

Until the last episode, the show focuses on the worst performances. Hung made it through to the end by rarely striving to be best, but rather by being cautious and avoiding being worst. I think that's at the heart of many of us are deeply unhappy with the result.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:19 PM

Vivian wrote:

Gail..
I was so dissapointed to see Casey so out of sorts in the final. I was really torn between my loyalties to my sex, and my love for the tough little guy with the big attitude and greater palate. I would have liked to see a woman win the title, but since the beginning of the show, I suspected that Hung was going to take it. I love his sophisticated style of modern french cooking, and I was even more impressed when he portrayed his heritage in the finals. It was sexy and modern, but it also played homage to those incredible flavors that we find in eastern cuisine.


I like you as a judge, you can be tough, but also be fair. I would like to trade jobs with you one day, and see how you fare in a finale. It would be awesome.

Best regards,

Viv

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:23 PM

Jim D. wrote:

It's 'Top Chef', people, not 'Top Chef Who Plays Well With Others'. Yes, there was the frozen-food team challenge, but this was a head-to-head competition, and Hung played to win. As for his perceived deficiencies in 'people skills', we have no idea based on what little Bravo showed us. I suspect most of the real 'top chefs' in American culinary circles would gladly bring in a talented young man who exhibits such highly-developed skills with both finesse and consistency.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:23 PM

chris wrote:

hung got along just fine with everybody. he cooperated during the menu planning. he just didnt help his COMPETITORS during the season. he never had a problem getting along with anyone. well mabey joey, but come on, joey wouldnt listen to what he had to say. a chef has to be decisive, straight forward, and determined, and hung was all of these things and more this season. Congrats hung, you deserved every bit of that win!!!!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:24 PM

Rob Stumpf wrote:

A few sour grapes here by those who are not too found of Hung. Anyone that thinks the personal popularity or "niceness" of a chef has much to do with how his restaurant does, hasn't paid much attention to the industry. Some of the most annoying and snobbiest chefs around serve the best food are do very well. I personally don't think Hung would make a good friend or a buddy (though I obviously only "know" him from watching him on TV), but I would pay to eat his cooking any day. When I go to a restaurant, I want good food-- not to pal up with the cook or the waitstaff. I wanted Dale to win, but I have to admit that Hung deserved it.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:26 PM

Runa wrote:

I appreciate the judges' fairness and objectivity. So relieved when the name of the winner was announced that this is ultimately a first-rate cooking show, not a personality contest. The winner Hung deserves the coveted Top Chef title. Watching the finale, I did not have favorite. After the cooking and tasting, it was clear Hung should be the winner. The man is so passionate about food and cooking. His energy is unmatched. Most importantly the dishes looked good, sounded great and I am sure tasted wonderful. Hung could be arrogant sometimes and many times abrasive. You have to admit he added some "flavor" to the show! I think he has proved to be a team player when he worked in team. His competitiveness is viewed by many as being a not-so-nice person. The man is there to win! I have no problem with that. I also like Dale, Casey and Brian. All these chefs are winners to me. After the diasterous season two I thought I would not want to watch the show again. I gave it a chance and it did not fail me this time. Thanks for the best season ever! Look forward to the next season.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:26 PM

Linda wrote:

Congratulations Hung - you derserved to win!
Casey - wow - that was really too bad. She seemed to self-destruct right before the judges. Very sad.
Dale - he should be proud as he did great.
I hope the producers can look a little harder and find female chefs who can actually hang in there and win one!! This is getting to be Top Male Chef. But maybe they guys are indeed just better chefs. Time will tell.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:31 PM

Steve Block wrote:

Dear Gail:

Hung was as clear a winner of this competion as could be. From the first show on he was confident, aggressive, focused and meticulous.

The judges made the right call. I can't believe the uproar by some viewers over the decision. People should not confuse his demeanor in a cooking competition with how he would act in a professional kitchen. Selfishness would never be tolerated in a fine kitchen especially at a place like Guy Savoy.

Clever editing made it appear that most of the panel was for Dale and only Chef Tom was for Hung. Your blog (and Ted's) pretty much dispelled that notion.

Anyway, great season, fun viewing and can't wait for season four.

P.S. My daughter is graduating Fordham University in May, can she be your assistant? She's worked internships at Scribner and Marie Claire and been tortured by some of the best without buckling. Shameless parent, sorry.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:35 PM

FanFare wrote:

I thought that the excitement found in Finale Pt. 2 made up for the silliness of Pt. 1. I am glad to know that you judges took your time to consider all factors of the final 3 cheftestants' efforts.

During the course of the evening Todd English stated that he was not blown away by the meal. Was he speaking of the combined efforts of all 3 cooks or one specifically?

I thought that the rightful winner was named. Hung seemed to take his "sous chef" Rocco unde HIS wing and exhibited chefly qualities by giving proper instructions. He supported teammates (on any team) he was on with zeal. He worked with joy on his face. He faced most challenges with glee. Why all the Hung hate? I was not a fan until the mise en place when he broke down that chicken in mere minutes (with a laughing Tom in the background). From that point on, I was intrigued by his speedy ways.

Thanks, Gail - for detailing the outcome of each chefs efforts.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:36 PM

Col Trautman wrote:

Hey Gail - what was up with that make-out session you had with Hung after he was named winner? Is there something you want to tell us about you two?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:45 PM

beth wrote:

I'm surprised at people saying Hung did not get along with the other contestants. What about looking at it this way - the others did not get along with Hung, and could this be because they knew from the very beginning that Hung was the person to beat? I've watched all the episodes and at some point contestants seemed to have issues with each other, not just Hung. Finally, I''m glad the best chef won, congrats Hung! I also want to remind people that Dale's surprise dish, the seared scallops, was cooked by CJ.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:55 PM

jray wrote:

I was sorry to see that Hung won for Top Chef. I will never watch Top Chef again even though it was one of my favorite shows. Apparently, you think top chefs are self-centered, don't help others, make a mess in the kitchen, cause injuries to others, and are arrogant.

What a shame.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 3:58 PM

Enrique wrote:

I know we don't get to taste the food but I do have one observation that makes me think Hung was the best choice.

Hung, more than all the others, seems to be geneuinely happy and fulfilled when he cooks. This never seemed like work to him no matter what the challenges are. He may be irrascible towards others sometimes, but his sheer joy and enthusiasm that he shows when he prepares food makes me think he is truly The Natural. I know Casey is very cool and has great taste instincts and Dale seems like a beautifully grounded and very talented fellow, but after seeing Hung passionately cook his ass off every week, I think I would want to taste his food more than any others. That counts for something...

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:02 PM

Jason wrote:

CONGRATS HUNG! And to all you Hung haters out there...get a clue! Hung was clearly the cream of the crop this season. I couldn't believe the "poll" during the show where viewers still picked Casey to win after her disastrous performance. Come on. Casey, you have a very bright future (it doesn't hurt that you are executive chef at Shinsei in Dallas, and work for the wives of Dean Fearing and Stephan Pyles, two very powerful figures on the Dallas food scene). I just can't get over your not being able to chop onions. Don't you think a top chef should be able to do that? Congrats also to Dale. There is no way I would have expected you to make it as far as you did based on your experience, but you were awesome the past few weeks. However, you yourself admitted you can't cook seafood. That's a pretty big omission from a top chef's repertoire, isn't it? In the end, even though Hung could come off as a cocky little boob, he was by far the most qualified. Andres Soltner and Rocco Dispirito both said Hung would be the one they would want to hire. At this point, Hung probably wouldn't need a job anymore.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:12 PM

Rodsberg wrote:

You say the judges vote with their taste buds and not with their emotions like us viewers, but here's the problem. We restaurant goers do vote with more than our taste buds. When I'm paying for a top flight meal I am paying for the entire restaurant experience. And TopChef markets its reality show based on personality more than performance.

No matter how wonderful his culinary skills, Hung showed himself over and over again to be arrogant and lacking in heart and soul. There's no way that doesn't come through in his food, his table service, and the way he treats the people around him. Even the judges remarked that he his food had often been unremarkable, lacking in expression. Small wonder.

You could not pay me to eat his food. No way.

My biggest disappointment in the result is that the choice, once again, champions the arrogance that too often comes with the high-end culinary market over what is equally superb but somehow judged as inferior because it is popular.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:12 PM

Former TC viewer wrote:

Gail you are refreshing - I wish you were the "hostess" in lieu of Padma - she tries to hard and you seem no natural. You judge the food, not the person

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:12 PM

Sandra wrote:

I am TOTALLY shocked that the judges picked Dale's and Hung's dishes as their favorites and none for Casey. It's been mentioned on these boards all season long how rampant sexism is in this industry and now we have the evidence.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Matt wrote:

Thanks for the blog. Since it seemed that Hung was the clear winner, due to not having any lows and having some big highs - why all the hours of deliberation?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:25 PM

CR wrote:

Thanks for the insights on the food. I would love a show dedicated solely to what it means to the taste of food to add acid. I'm not quite sure what it does to the taste of food. I find it interesting that many viewers didn't like Hung's personality. I found him to be very personable. As a competitive person myself, I completely understood his behavior. I also think he decided at the beginning to play a role. I am so glad he won, of all the contestants, he consistently produced excellent food. I wish him well in the future!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:30 PM

Bob wrote:

I just want to add a comment about Dale's portion size. I'm originally from Chicago, although I have lived in California for 19 years. With Dale's history of cooking in a Chicago, one would expect him to serve large portions.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:42 PM

jean wilcox wrote:

Hello Gail . . .always enjoy your direct, honest style. You are being very polite in the face of an onslaught of negative viewers who have absolutely no real frame of reference other than a remote TV show. Regardless what others may say, I believe that the decisions made on the show are altruistic . . .that all points are carefully considered and that there are no "pets" or sell outs. Thank you again for artfully making the food come alive for me.
Respectfully,
Jean

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:50 PM

PeachPie wrote:

Gail, great post. Truly. In fact, a bit more objective (sorry dude) than Rocco's blog, which I usually like. But then again, I've always loved your presence on the show and the input you provide.

Very good explanation of the meal and judging process. It must have been a difficult choice.

This was a great finale. It was the first time I wanted all three of the contestants to win. In fact, it was pretty cool watching the show, because I knew that, no matter who got the title, I'd be happy. Now THAT is saying something. And I feel great knowing that, even though they didn't win, Casey and Dale will get a lot from having been in the competition. I think good things will come their way.

Sure, we all know there will be posts blabbing on about Hung winning this from people who didn't like him. Forget about it. You guys did a great job with the judging, and Hung deserved the win.

Congratulations, Hung!

And good job to Casey and Dale!

Gail, you're a great asset to the show and a very beloved judge. Glad you're there and looking forward to the next season.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 4:54 PM

San wrote:

Hung? Hmmmmm.....

The guy who regarded everyone in the kitchen as his subordinate, who turned off the oven in an early episode in an effort to derail a fierce competitor....hmmmmm.

No.

Harold should have won in Season-1. That was the last time I saw anything that made sense on TC. Marcel and his ridiculous, pompous 'foams' and now Hung with his one-track cooking. How do these guys get into the final competition, when someone as accomplished as Tre is eliminated. I guess it's also Top Confidence, not just TC.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:17 PM

Patty B wrote:

Hi Gail! I didn't think Hung was always consistant. There were a few times he was not. I think Hung always went the easy way, the safe way. That being said, I thought Dale or Casey should have won.
During the season, the judges said more than once, you need heart
to cook. I never thought Hung had that. I thought Dale's dishes were more creative, Casey always showed us something different. I love the roller coaster, so does America. I'd love to see Dale and Casey get a cooking show together, How much fun would that be. You were there to taste everything, but I can't believe Casey's dishes weren't note worthy?? And why only one assistant chef on finale day? Hmmm. Anyway. Congrats to HUNG, DALE AND CASEY, THANKS FOR A WONDERFUL SEASON. THANKS TO ALL THE CHEFS
THIS WAS BY FAR MY FAVORITE. MORE HEART MAKES FOR A BETTER ANYTHING!! With love and respect, Patty Boyle, Delaware

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:26 PM

Gail Taylor wrote:

Throughout the competition the judges' panel kept pointing out that Hung had the technical skills which did not compensate for flavor. Even in the last episode it was pointed out he needed acid and flavoring. Tom even said he wasn't "blown" away. The show is obviously going to appoint the Top Chef they want - and not the person with the passion, desire and ability to cook flavorful foods. I won't watch next season !!!! sorry!!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:26 PM

Cathy wrote:

Hung has proven time and again that he is only out for himself. The judges do not care what kind of character a contestant has. They do not care if a contestant does not work well around others in the kitchen, either. I'v lost my enthusiasm for the show because of this. Hope your Happy judges, cause the majority of your viewers are not.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:29 PM

Shayne wrote:

I was completely shocked Hung won.... I have loved this season all the way through and i think Hung was in the bottom of the eliminations more than any... i was very disappointed when Padma said Hung.. I turned off the TV before it was even over. I dont think I'll be tuning in next year :(

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:30 PM

Cara wrote:

Way to Go HUNG!!!

The best won... hands down. Love Casey and Dale.. so sweet, fun and charismatic.. But for a chef.. I want Hung..

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:33 PM

Cara wrote:

Way to Go HUNG!!!

The best won... hands down. Love Casey and Dale.. so sweet, fun and charismatic.. But for a chef.. I want Hung..

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:33 PM

di wrote:

I just find it interesting that in season one the "woman" didn't win because of her personality, she was not liked by the other chefs. Thats a big part of being the Top Chef, was the conversation at judges table. Now, Hung who was unable to play nice with the others is named Top Chef. Whats that about? What message are you sending to women in the industry?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:35 PM

Dottie wrote:

I agree that Hung has been the most consistent and accomplished chef in this competition. However, it bothers me that he appears to have mastered the art of saying whatever he thinks the judges want to hear in order to win. I think his expression of 'heart and soul' in his cooking over the past 2 weeks were contrived. The message I got from Hung was that one should do anything and everything possible in order to win the prize; that ethics must be thrown out the window in order to reach the goal.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:35 PM

Lily wrote:

Very pleased with the outcome and this is the best season yet! Hung is the most deserving winner of Top Chef.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:38 PM

Pamy wrote:

I think the "evil Hung" was a product of editing. If you guys noticed, Hung was pretty cool the entire time we all got into that "Howie's such a jerk" phase, I think that's cuz they can only fit one "bad guy" into each episode.

Oh yeah, Hung had his moments of pure bull-headedness. But it's hard to deny that his pure knowledge of the food and the science of cooking was superior to everyone else. I'm not going to lie. I wasn't rooting for him either. But I can see how the judges came to their decision.

And no...it wasn't sexist that Casey didn't win. Casey choked...badly. She didn't roll with the punches very well in this last challenge. I thought she was going to win this competition...but she didn't bring her A game to Colorado. I do feel badly for Dale. He really performed well and I think that stupid gnocci lost the entire competition for him.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:40 PM

Dolores wrote:

That was a GREAT finale. Such a change from last year; I couldn't even watch that finale as I'd been so creeped out by the whole "let's hang Marcel" thing.

I really like that it wasn't about personality, but about the cooking. Yes! Although, honestly, I find Hung kind of endearing. You certainly can't say he isn't enthusiastic!

And, people, he thanked AMERICA! Come on, how could you NOT love that?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 5:49 PM

cp wrote:

finale skewed towards hung and his raw and slow cooked dishes that arent' affected by altitude.

After 2 seasons of rigging, I finally learned my lesson - this is not a show with integrity.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:02 PM

Dave C wrote:

Great season! I'm glad Hung won and also that the judge's finally saw his "soul" in the finale. I've always thought that even though overall the season's chefs were more talented...that the top chefs from season 1 & 2 were more talented than the top chefs from season 3. But I actually do think Hung might be the most talented of all the chefs from any season. It's really amazing how complex and sophisticated Hung's dishes are, and yet he makes the dish seem so simple and elegant. Thats something all great artists or craftsmen or writers can do, present complex things in a simple fashion, which can only be done when you have a certain mastery of that thing.

On a side note, it seemed that Casey humbly and rightfully gave credit to her 4th dish to Howie. I thought that was classy and the right thing to do. However, it seemed that Dale's scallop dish was entirely CJ's dish and Dale took half the credit. Did the judges talk to the sous-chef's at all before their decision? If Dale had won, that would have been a huge issue. (Just like how Sam helping Marcel with his hearts of palm dish seemed to be one small factor in that decision...and rightfully so.)

Anyways, you are my favorite judge on the panel and can't wait till next season. (Perhaps Tom, Padma, and yourself can be the sous chefs in the finale? =) ).

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:10 PM

Cyndi wrote:

Hung,

I think you were the best chef, you did a great job, and you deserved to win.

I loved the smurf village, that was really creative and it showed you do have a great imagination, and I am sure you also have tons of soul.

I would wish you luck but you really don't need it, you will have a great career.

Rock on Hung!

Cyndi

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:21 PM

Susan wrote:

"This is 3-Star Michelin in my book". Hung by a landslide.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:37 PM

Cherie wrote:

Gail, Thank you for staying with the process in your alert and clarifying way; is there anything you can do to get Padma off the show?
We viewers waited all season to enjoy the winner enjoying the win and what does vapid, mindless Padma do? Wander in front of the camera!
Those of us who have been pulling for Hung all season now get to look at the back her head, again. Shoving the microphone into his face and asking paparazzi-type questions, again. How does it feel to win? Leaning over Hung, dangling her hair into our faces again.
This woman dresses like a tramp; contributes nothing of real value to the process.
Please help to find someone else to host next season, please.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:37 PM

Rachel wrote:

Gail, all of the judges did a wonderful job judging in the Top Chef Finale I am happy that Hung won the title of "Top Chef". He deserved to win because, from the beginning, his performance has been excellent in most of the challenges. Casey's performance in the finale was the worst of the three seasons the show has been on television. I don't care whether the contestant is a woman or a man. I care about the talent. Casey kept saying that it would be great if a woman (meaning herself) won "Top Chef". This was disingenuous on her part, because it was self-promotion. At least Hung was honest about his ambition. Casey didn't want "a woman" to win - she wanted to be the woman to win. Sara was sent home, in large part, because her chicken was undercooked. Casey got a pass on the undercooked elk. Remember the Telemundo episode? Lia was sent home for the mushy polenta. Casey was allowed to stay even though her chicken was overcooked, her rice was overcooked and the mole "cough syrup" had a "bitter licoricey taste". I remember other challenges where Casey was given a pass when she should have been sent home.
I was disappointed that Casey's food was mediocre/poor in the show's finale. Casey actually made excuses for her performance. It was embarrassing. I was hoping for better. I am a woman. I can cook. I am an attorney. (Law was once the exclusive province of men.) And when I was Casey's age -people told me that I was quite beautiful. I would never try to influence an audience by proclaiming "Wouldn't it be great if a woman won." Contests should be fair. Best wishes to all. I love Top Chef.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:42 PM

Patricia Dubus wrote:

I felt this season was disappointing and gimmicky (except for the episode at the CIA and CookYour Best Meal in Aspen). The vamping at the last episode was embarassing and I felt degrading for the serious chefs involved. I also felt the heavy hand of the show's producers who I believe often made choices about who packed their knives based on which contestants were "good" TV. (read narsisstic socio-paths) I think it would be a service to viewers to define the term Top Chef at the beginning of the season so we would know before hand that it is only about food not leadership, ability to inspire, problem solve, share power or a host of other human qualities. Qualities, that I am sure actually have a place in really top chef's kitchens.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:48 PM

mayra wrote:

I think Hung did deserve to win. Kudos also to Top Chef for making this season about the food, not about personal drama. I can't wait for next season!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:51 PM

jeff K wrote:

Count me in as one of the ABDs (Anyone But Dale). Top Chef has to be a mature, levelheaded individual, if not for Dave in S1, Dale would take the prize for Top Chef's most grating stereotype for his incessant drama and general jealous bitchiness towards Hung. It's like he's stepped out of 1980s... Dale could take a few pages from Hung, who's stated he's bi but hasn't felt the need to "play" that clown for America's consumption on TV .

Im sad Casey lost but Hung deserved it. Congrats to him, and Gail I think Dale may have been your favorite but your observation that Dale is an "amazingly likable" culinary hero is sooooo off base.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 6:58 PM

Rio wrote:

Thank Gail for the great reading. I just went thru all the blogs. Some or these people need to go to a food show. Judges do not go on personalities just the food. Does a sprint stop to pick up somebody when theres a gold medal for first place. I don't think soooo!!!! Crying about not watching next season. Hilarious! Top Chef is here to Stay! This is not Miss America it is TOP CHEF! Its about An Adventure In Taste. Thank You.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:00 PM

pat wrote:

I have enjoyed this show for many seasons.....

to Bad Hung won.... I found him Arrogant & disliked him from the first episode....

he should be called top human he obviously thinks he is better than everyone else....... i found his comments about the people he was cooking for particularly distasteful

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:01 PM

snaps wrote:

People have their personal favorites but I dont understand the borderline racist attitude of people on this board. You cant knock Hung for his cooking so you take the extraordinarily obtuse stand that despite his skill you wont support him or even watch the show because a person "like him" has won. As an older American the wording and arguments sound distressingly like comments made about african-american sportsmen of past decades, such as Mohammed Ali, whom many americans refused to support because of his "attitude" despite his technical skill and creativity in the ring.
WAKE UP! People this is 2007, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:05 PM

meg wrote:

Loved your blog, Gail. Thank you. And interesting about Howie having a hand in Casey's most successful dish of the finale. Casey was really off and I feel she intimated at judges' table that Howie was part of her downfall. So to hear he actually was the opposite, as it appeared to me in watching the episode twice, is most helpful. Good job, Howie! Am glad you came back and did a class job!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:06 PM

Joo wrote:

Hi Gail, I just want to echo all the sentiments here about how glad we are that the judging was done fairly. As you put it, you judged with your test buds, and not with your emotions. It seemed like some of the judges definitely didn't care for Hung's attitude, but the fact that all of you put it aside to pick the right winner, it makes me believe in the show wholeheartedly after last season's debacle.
Hung is definitely a prickly and polarizing figure, but everyone could see that his consistent quality and flavors among all the final dishes were just too much for Dale's head-scratching inconsistency and Casey's disastrous final meal. Plus, it's fairly obvious that he doesn't behave like a selfish prick in a real kitchen; there's no way someone can be the executive sous chef at a restaurant like Guy Savoy if he wasn't capable of leading people.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:14 PM

quori wrote:

Gail, you have mentioned it here and Ted Allen mentioned it in his blog too...Hung's precision, expertise, and skill are so undeniably profound, that how can anyone question his heart? You don't become as good as he has by not liking the craft itself...point of fact you MUST love it!!!

Having read a number of Bourdain's books, I would dare say if you DO NOT love it, then you should not be there, mainly because its hell. You will not make millions, you will sweat and bleed for little thanks, you will in essence pour out your soul every night at your mise enplace...and the only reward you will get is perhaps a rude gesture or remark from a fellow chef, lin cook, or sous chef.

From day one you could see Hung's abilities were the most refined. When Solltner said of him "I would hire him" and English said "This is a 3 star meal" it was over. English's comment was merely icing on the cake.

Well done by all involved. The contests raised the bar all season long. The challenges were all in all wonderful. And in the end...and most importantly...the Top Chef was truly the Top Chef.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:24 PM

Amanda wrote:

This season of Top Chef completely made up for the terrible 2nd season! Start to finish it was great! I really would have been happy with any of the final 3 contestants winning. I'm so glad Bravo got away from the drama of last season and focused back again on the cooking. The challenges were great, guest judges were fabulous...Thanks Bravo! I'm already looking forward to season 4!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:30 PM

mds wrote:

I want to know how much of the scallop dish did CJ prepare.If u watched the show Remember CJ say that he as preparing the dish byhimself

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:31 PM

Joanna S. wrote:

In response to Sandra: Did you pay any attention to the episode at all? Better yet, did you pay attention to previous episodes, or even the previous seasons? In case it's slipped your mind, two men AND two women are on the final judging panel and NONE of them had particularly glowing things to say about Casey's dishes. Even Michelle Bernstein, who was obviously pulling for Casey, seemed disappointed in her. Then, when Casey was called on her mistakes, she tried to blame Howie, even though it was thanks to him that her last course came out well and her entire menu didn't end up a complete disaster! Or, are you simply saying that they should have awarded her with something anyway just because she's a woman? It shouldn't matter if you're male or female, if you can't put out a better dish than your competitors, you have no business being Top Chef. Period. Get over it and just accept that Casey screwed up, instead of throwing out bitter and childish accusations of sexism. The finale only strengthened my belief that Casey should have left this competition long ago.

I really like Dale and I'm glad he finally had his chance to shine, but like Casey, he didn't have too many great moments getting to the finale. Hung has always shown consistently that he is a superior chef and has been in the top three of both Quickfire and Elimination challenges more than any of the others. Sure, Hung seems arrogant, but it's obvious that he loves his craft and wants to make his family proud. A guy with such devotion to his family isn't all bad. Looking back on the entire season, Hung deserves this win the most. Also, is anyone besides me hoping that he and Rocco really will open a restaurant together? I'd eat there even if I had to empty half my bank account!

Congratulations to Hung...you really deserved it, Chef!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 7:41 PM

Cynthia wrote:

First I want to say that you have been missed this season Gail! I enjoy your insight and feedback. I hope we see more of you next season!
Now, I have to say that I am VERY disappointesd with the winner this season. I know that Casey dropped the ball, which was a shame to watch, but I was impressed by Dale. Especially his last minute dish, that showed real creativity and leadership to pull it off. I definatley agree that Hung is a great techincal cook, no one can argue you that. But, his flavors, creativity, and leadership skills are still lacking; not to mention he is dangerous in in the kitchen! Plus, he has insulted (behind thier backs) every Celebrity Guest Judge you've had on the show if they didn't like his food! I am confused, does he REALLY think he is a better Chef than ALL of them? I think Hung has half the ingredients to be a Top Chef, but he is NOT the whole package yet. He has a lot left to learn and I think there will be some hard lessons in Hung's future.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:05 PM

Maddy wrote:

Excellent finale, one that has met all my expectations. Hung is the clear winner. I rooted for him since the very beginning. Dale's second dish, the surprise one/the scallop, wasn't it the one that CJ fixed? I am a bit surprised that Dale took credit for it.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:09 PM

Suzi wrote:

Why don't some of us like Hung? Let me count the ways. He turns off Sara's oven and denies it. He breaks the truffle oil and denies it. He leaves the crayfish to die on the floor. He yells that he HATES the elk, that he's cooking just for the judges, then lies about it--even Padma seemed skeptical at that one. He belittles the others--I thought if I had to hear about refined and elegant food again, I'd get sick. In the finale alone 2 dished suffered from lack of acid and one from lack of seasoning. Three out of four--nice batting average. Let's see--he stood and watched others struggle without lifting a finger. There's a difference between being competitive and being out for blood. Helping CJ get his stuff boxed wasn't going to hurt Hung's chances. All through the competition he blamed his failures on the judges' lack of comprehension or taste--it seems only Hung has the perfect palate. He apparently, looking at just the edited footage, actually did NOT win at Le Cirque, but sexism won out. And Tom continually stating that Casey's coq au vin didn't contain a rooster makes me wonder who really won, or would have won, that elimination. As in Season 1, when Dave's food was obviously more enthusiastically recieved in Vegas than Tiffani's, he was eliminated for not following directions--having left out one dish, while Tiffani ignored the directions, serving fat laden pork when low fat was the order? Was having three mediocre dishes the Cirque du Soleil performers turned their noses up at better than having two delicious dishes they loved? Folks, we're being HAD. From the conspicuous placement of advertisers' products all over the set, to the heavily edited shows to the seemingly manipulated decisions, this is no more a reality show than is the Simpsons.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:12 PM

Deborah R wrote:

It continues to amaze (and amuse) me that people who have never tasted any of this food will post their certainty that the judges made the wrong decision and accuse them of all manner of duplicity. But what's more amazing is the gracious way you handle these complaints. Thank you for sharing your insights. More than any of the bloggers you help us vicariously taste the chefs' offerings and get a sense of how the judges make their decisions.

I was rooting for Casey and just love Dale, but watching the episode and listening to the diners' comments, I thought it was clear that Hung had carried the day--and I'm happy for him. For once I thought no one could argue with the outcome (how silly of me!). But I guess objectivity is a rare virtue--especially among reality-show viewers.

It was great to see both you and Ted at the final judges' table, and I look forward to seeing more of you both in TC4. Until then ...

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:26 PM

TESS wrote:

Say what you want to say!!!

A JOB WELL DONE HUNG!!!! YOU'VE DONE IT!!!
I have been rooting for you from day 1. I am so happy that the best Chef won and that is you HUng!! Way to go!! I have nothing to say but I don't even know you but I am so proud of you and do not change yourself. Your confidence is what made you win because you are confident with what you do best!! So to all let them be jealous!! and that remark of Dale he is obviouly jealous if you have no soul in your food it would have not turned out as wonderful as it is as the judges says "BRAVO" so eat!! Dale you jealous man.. Casey you alright girl..Hung congrats!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:32 PM

Brad wrote:

I find it so interesting that virtually everyone is so adamant about a "correct" winner. None of us got to taste the food, so we have no idea who should have won.

Gail - you and your producers let the viewers down when you present an idea such as every final chef bringing elements from his/her home kitchen, then let it wither on the vine. No mention was made of what - if anything - was used in their final dishes.

Also, Hung had a written recipe for chocolate cake. Why isn't that a violation of the rules? Can anyone explain this?

Can anyone also explain why the final show was in Chicago? Why mention it at all if there's no point?

Thanks. Love the show, but sure wish I could help with the editing!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:48 PM

Scott wrote:

It sucks that there are so many Hung haters out there.

How can you hold so much hate for a guy that cooks with that much enthusiasm and joy? He's always laughing and smiling and having a great time. He may not go out of his way to help his competitors, but it's a competition with $100,000 on the line! Give the guy a break, it's not like he's sabotaging people.

Good job Hung!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:54 PM

Bob wrote:

I must admit that I agree that it is all about the food. I have had the opportunity to eat at Perelli's (Harold's restaurant in the Village) and your judgement was spot on in Season 1.

I would most assuredly love the opportunity to eat a meal prepared by Hung, the technician. I'll bet it is as sublime as you describe.

BRAVO to Bravo for Season 3, no shaved heads, no fights, just a good, clean contest of truly talented chefs.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 8:59 PM

Ray wrote:

Frankly I don't understand what the big deal is about soul. Most of us who eat at restaurants will never know or even meet the chef. It doesn't matter if the chef has soul or not. All I care is if my food tastes good or not...period! Everyone has a soul unless you are a demon.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 9:07 PM

lk wrote:

Great show, all contestants were very talented. I can't imagine how they come up with these recipes. But ultimately it's entertainment so we never really see the entire picture and since we can't taste the food we must bow to those who are there and respect their decision. I was always hoping that Hung would win just because of his passion and technical skills.
I liked seeing Brian at the last meal and hearing his comments. Looking forward to next season.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 9:11 PM

Kim wrote:

Gail!! How wonderful that you managed to be in Chicago, in attendance, for the live finale and STILL manage to post your blog for those of us who truly enjoy your immediate insights.

Your fellow judges could take a page from that book!!

Thank you.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 9:13 PM

Frank wrote:

One word to all the people who think Hung is not nice.

Editing.

TV Shows like Top Chef look for labels: The loud obnoxious chef, the cute sweet chef, etc. The personality conflicts create drama and ultimately high ratings. To increase the value, show producers edit what you see on TV to portray personality.

Heart and soul? Hung showed more heart and soul than Casey or Dale. When competitors say another chef doesn't have heat and soul, I take it as trying to cover up their inferior cooking skills. Dale kept claiming he has "heart and soul" but all I saw was a guy who kept messing up his dish and was on the chopping blocks many times. If showing anger and frustration means you have heart and soul, give Dale the "Heart and Soul" Award. But not even editing can cover up bad food. He redeemed himself at the finale, but he was way too inconsistent.

Casey gets the Congeniality Award for being a nice person (though I was disappointed when she tried to pass the buck in the last two episodes.)

But as others have noted, this is a cooking competition. If you don't like it, there are plenty of other boring non-competitive food shows to choose from.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 9:43 PM

jennifer wrote:

"Unlike our viewers, as judges we vote with our taste buds, not with our emotions."

Exactly. I got so tired of reading people's comments about who really should win. How do we know? We only catch a glimpse of what's going on and taste nothing. As a viewer, I trust you guys to be the ultimate decision makers.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 9:46 PM

Frank wrote:

jray,

Apparently, you've never worked in a kitchen. Most of the top chefs have strong headed personality. Do you think Todd English would have any problem firing a chef who doesn't perform in his restaurant? You screw up once or twice and you are gone. No lovey dovey personality chefs will make it. You have to be fast, precise, have a strong skills, and know exactly what you're doing. All the traits Hung "showed" on the show.

Have you been in the back of a restaurant on a busy evening? It's a mad house in there. If the executive chef isn't strong, even bullheaded in controlling what goes on, the restaurant (especially high end ones) will not be successful.

I could not help but laugh when Dale said something like, "First time I make a dish, it's usally crap, but fourth or fifth time, it's great." Hmm, yes, I sure hope so on the fifth try.

I don't like crap no matter how much "heart and soul" he put into it.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:00 PM

FrankOH wrote:

Hi Gail,

I've said it before, I'll say it again, Loved the shows you are on. You are quite different from the other judges, thankfully. On T.V, you seem so knowledgeable about food, yet you're not afraid to like a dish anyone would like, and you say you do. Bravo to you!
That said, I've got some major issues with the finale. Why would Bravo take the chefs to a place where the altitude is so high that it changes the way things come out? If these chefs are to show their best, how can they? Dales gnochi dish may have come out perfectly. Casey may have been affected by the altitude, if she isn't used to it. Hung seemed to play it safe and he won. I would just think that the producers or the "smart" people who run the show would have thought about the altitude problem. I know how it affects me and it would be a nightmare to me.
I've loved every single season of Top Chef, and this will be my last blog comment because I'll never watch the show again. Truly not because Hung won, I do believe any of the 3 would be worthy, Hung included. What the show does to these cooks for ratings or shock value is sometimes hard to watch. It just seems that they aren't given the chance to show their best. It's not fair to any of them.
Oh, just for the record, I think Dale should have won. The judges came up with every excuse as to why he shouldn't win. The excuses didn't even make sense. It's such a let down to watch all season, to watch someone come close but not quite there, (Hung), win. All season long the judges said Hung didn't show is soul, himself, in his food. Was it really in his last meal? His technical cuts, seemed like what you'd see on a buffet table, everything looks perfect and tastes good, but spectacular, no. Too incongruous for me to watch again. Sorry, I'm just not happy with the ending in the Oprahs green room or something.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:07 PM

precious wrote:

I have been baffled by this show all season. I think many chefs were eliminated when they shouldn't have been. I lost faith in the JT and believed the show lost it's credibility.
I know you judge with your palate and that's a good thing. The problem is many of the chefs who managed to stay on were screwing up big time throughout the season and were allowed to continue on.
Casey (a pretty good chef) screwed up many times in the beginning as did many of the others. I'm saying this based on the remarks made at the JT. Dale is another who failed to get things together until the end. He was allowed to continue on.
Hung who was clearly the best after Tre left, and maybe even before was criticized continuously. Now you say he's been consistent since the first day. I'm a bit confused by your remarks. I do think you are a wonderful judge but I have found inconsistencies in some of your remarks as well as the others. Even the small amount of debate we heard last night, you were ready to give Dale the benefit of the doubt because he was bold even though his dish failed.

I have to say, I think you got it right this time. Hung was clearly heads above Casey and Dale. I don't think the choice was really that hard to make.

I think Casey and Dale tried hard. I'm sorry for Casey that she choked at the last minute. I'm pleased that Dale has found his inner chef again. Culinary is better for the both of them. I don't like Hung but that has to do with his personality and not his ability. He performed well and won TC fairly.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:10 PM

adina wrote:

hey hung-haters... this is not summer camp, it's Top Chef, a competition. hung won because he has the talent and the skills to match it. i live in chicago and frequently do the rounds of fine-dining here. i don't go to chefs joho, trotters, bayless, aruns, tramonto or achatz' restaurants because i want to schmooze with them: i go there to eat, and i don't care if they're on medication or something. it's all about the food, period. go hung!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:11 PM

Ann wrote:

Ms. Simmons, your explanation about what went on behind the scenes provides a good perspective for the viewer. I was disappointed that Casey did not win, but do understand that her items were not to the standard that they should have been for this last competition. My assumption is that she was feeling the effects of the altitude. Both my son and I were sick with headaches and nausea for several days when we visited Breckinridge, CO a few years ago. I can't imagine how difficult it must have been to be on one's best performance when suffering from altitude sickness. I wonder how Casey would have faired had the final competition taken place in the locations from the previous two seasons?

I do have one thing that I find unappealing in the food produced by Hung. I am not a fan of "foam." It does not look appetizing in any way! I think Hung's desire to make it as an immigrant to the U.S. is inspiring. However, based on his behavior in some of the episodes, I do not think that I would like working for him if I were in the culinary business. His carelessness when he spilled or dropped things made him appear callous. Perhaps he did clean up after himself and it was only the editing that made it look like he did not care for the safety of his peers, but that was not what was apparent from the vantage point of the viewers.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:32 PM

Dottie in STL wrote:

Great blog and great season! Last season was a nasty mess with all the unprofessionalism and childish behavior...but this season was a refreshing change. I would have been happy with any of the three chefs winning. I don't see how any of us who didn't actually taste the dishes can say "so and so should have won." I loved Casey but Dale was my personal favorite and I was hoping he'd pull it out. Hung is not a warm and fuzzy man and he's arrogant as heck but he's a perfectionist and focused --he may not the guy I'd want in my personal life (I couldn't take the criticism!) but if I owned a restaurant I'd want him working my kitchen. If I were spending good money for fine dining, I'd want him preparing my meal.

Season Three was great! I for one can't wait for Season Four!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:32 PM

Peter wrote:

I was rooting for Hung (and Tre) from day one, and I'm thrilled that one of the two made it to TC. Hung is an incredibly endearing guy. He's not American-born, he doesn't express himself as most Americans do, and yet the guy really all about working hard and loving work. That's who he is, and it is joyous to see.

You saw it repeatedly this season, just like you saw it in the final episode: When Tom sprung the news about the "surprise" fourth course, we saw Dale's eyes shooting daggers at Tom, we saw Casey looking agitated, and we saw Hung looking... THRILLED! He was happy, he was raring to go, with an ear to ear smile. Virtually everytime the chefs were given a challenge, Hung received it with enthusiasm (maybe not so much with the elk challenge). This goes to show the kind of person Hung is and why I think he won. Food is his passion, his delight, his pleasure. It's so rare to see that kind of spirit in someone, and it makes his spirit just seem really beautiful to me.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:39 PM

Katie in Colorado wrote:

I was extremely disappointed in the finale. As someone who spent 24 years traveling continually on business and who found the trip to a fine restaurant as a just reward for all the hard work, I would never return to a restaurant of Hung's. It's about innovation, not automation. It's about presentation, not knife skills. It's about warmth, not how good your techniques are because of where you attended school. It is about putting yourself into your food, not how many relatives you have in the business. It's about tableside manner, not how quickly you can get the order out. I think that Dale's menu selections were far superior to Hung's. His critques were far better because his products simply were. With Hung, I would always worry about whether he thought what he was cooking for me was "boring" to him or if I ate "baked beans, baked beans, baked beans" because I am from cowboy country. That shows in the food every time. Dale approached everything with enthusiasm and creativity. I really hope he might consider a restaurant in Denver. He was absolutely the best Top Chef and will alway be the winner in my book!!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:39 PM

Gene wrote:

Yeah. Hung!...You deserved it!!!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:52 PM

Peg wrote:

You guys were so wrong in picking Hung. Not a team player, no clue about wrong doings, just uncaring about others.

Casey and Dale were much more soulful and cooked with their heart.

It shouldn't be based on one last challenge.

I will never watch Top Chef again after this fiasco. Boo to the judges. You all just wanted ratings not truth. I am no longer a Bravo fan and will encourage others never to watch Top Chef.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:53 PM

Sue wrote:

Voting with emotions, Gail! How about taking another look at the Finale. Even you were enarmoured with Dale's food that evening...it was so dead obvious. And it was equallly obvious that Casey was being affected by the high altitudes, which most definitely would have affected her decisions the night of the last challenge. Dale, too, not familiar with the high altitudes also had some difficulties with his food. But Hung, who comes from a mountainous country of very high altitudes (I know this because I'm a geologist and I'm also familiar with what high altitude sickness can do to people) would have been the one to have been calm and collected that night. Talk about an unfair advantage! A couple of episodes ago you are telling Hung you wondered if he even belongs in food--now you are on this blog rationalizing your decision and insulting this audience! Please! Some of us are fairly educated people. We may not be using our taste buds, but we have been listening to the comments and been aware of other aspects of this competition from all three seasons. And currently what this panel of judges have been telling us in these past 3 seasons is that the Top Chef is someone who gets drunk in the kitchen (season 1), is disrespectful to others in the kitchen and acts inappropriately (season 2), and can be unsafe and self involved in the kitchen (season 3). I'm really looking forward to what will pan out for Season 4.

posted on October 4, 2007 at 10:56 PM

Joy wrote:

Just want to compliment you on taking time to post a blog. It shows a great work ethic! Bravo Gail, for your fairness, your ability to remain true to yourself, and not getting caught up in the hype of the show. You seem the same now as you did last season, and I have really enjoyed reading your blogs. Kudos!

posted on October 4, 2007 at 11:31 PM

sabina wrote:

I was very disappointed with your guy's choice of top chef. While, yes, Hung has been consistently fabulous technically, I don't think I ever saw true heart. I work with doctors, and while yes a great doctor can be one that is the best technically (and sure when life and death are at stake patients would rather have a skilled jerk than an incompetent sweetie), but a great doctor is the rare person that has both skill and heart. While many, myself included, feel food is life and death (and yes in a way is), being a good chef is both being great technically, but also being great artistically.
While you all have the tough time of judging just on the food, and maybe not seeing all the background work, the road to greatness should be just as big of a factor as the precision in the masterpiece that amounts in the end. While I was never lucky enough to taste either Dale or Hung's food and have to trust your guy's opinions, I would rather have skilled, heartfelt, inspired and unique food from Dale (even with the risk of not liking it), than food from Hung.
Yes, tv shows are edited for ratings etc., but there is no way that all his comments were edited. I'm an immigrant and I certainly don't want Hung speaking for me, and I'm pretty sure America was not happy to see him win.
When someone rejects criticism and feedback as coldly as Hung did, saying that the judges didn't understand him if you didn't enjoy his dishes, is not a sign of greatness. For the average person, criticism of our art is most difficult to stomach, but to a wise person criticism is understood and should be thanked for it gets one to their next masterpiece.
I have no doubt that Hung can be a successful businessman and restaurant owner, but not necessarily someone one would seek out. I think Dale will be the type of chef that people would go out of their way to see "what will he dazzle me with next?!" Not to mention he's just damn funny.
I wish you would have chosen to honor someone with more heart, and not someone who felt he was already entitled to the honor before even starting the show. Hung's lowest point: disrespecting Sirio Maccioni when saying his dish was "easy" and so arrogantly recreated and served it as if to say, are you joking, what chef couldn't make this?

posted on October 4, 2007 at 11:52 PM

Rebecca wrote:

Noel, don't ever, ever, ever compare Harold to Hung again. Ever. Harold is a Top Chef all around, inside and out- he shows Top Chef skills and characteristics not only in his food, but in his attitude inside the kitchen as well as outside of the kitchen. Hung merely shows top cook skills and characteristics.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 1:37 AM

Elise wrote:

Again, again, and again: It's Top Chef not Top Cook or Top Dish- the final challenge reeked of Top Dish, and whattayknow- perfect for Hung. When did the final contestants have to show "Top Chef-like" qualities in the final challenge? Never. They just had to cook their asses out. Again, perfect for Hung. Perfect for Hung that he was paired up with Sara, the only one out of Howie and CJ that didn't have a problem working with him. I recall in Season 1, the previous contestants cooking under Harold and Tiffany were called in to relay what their experience was like, which played a part in the final decision of Top Chef. This did not occur in Season 3. RIGGED.

Bravo should seriously consider changing the title from Top Chef to Top Cook.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 1:43 AM

lynp wrote:

Hung is the best - The best part of all three seasons was when he cut up the chickens.
Casey would have to have been out of her mind to let Howie do the cooking. I saw her when she said that and thought she was making it up as an excuse.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 1:49 AM

Rich wrote:

I think you guys missed the boat in one respect. The challenge was to make the best meal of your life, not to make the best three (then four) dishes of your life. How would you rate a restaurant that served you a 4-course prix fixe dinner of Dale's 4 courses? It simply does not make any sense. How does that kind of meal not end in some kind of dessert? Can you really end off a 4-course meal with the main course? Is heavy, light, medium, heavy a typical progression through 4 courses?

Hung should have gotten huge props for doing the dessert because it showed that he was the only one who was cooking a meal, not just a series of dishes. And cooking a dessert has always been very risky business on Top Chef, so calling it playing safe makes no sense. You know as well as I the litany of chefs who foundered trying to make desserts. Just a few weeks ago the highly regarded Tre fell to a lackluster bread pudding, among other things. At least Hung's cake wasn't out of a box, like the sainted Harold's.

Was there any discussion at all at Judging Table about the progression of each chef's dishes and whether it was a logical progression? If the challenge is to make a *meal* wouldn't it be worthwhile to examine whether the chefs did, in fact, make a *meal*?

posted on October 5, 2007 at 2:09 AM

Mimi wrote:

Congratulations to Hung. He deserved to win for all the skills and techniques that he showed along with his respect for the art of cooking. It was great to see him use the authentic ingredients and cook his head off. He really showed how much food and cooking is a part of his soul. For the Hung haters out there... just chill. This show is about the food, and if his food is the best he should win. Bless his immigrant heart for thanking America after he won.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 3:45 AM

C Hughes wrote:

Unbelievable. The judges did nothing but moan and groan over Hung's lack of passion and love of food all season and then they went and gave it to him anyway?!?!?! Hung did nothing but fly under the radar all season while Dale and Casey were the true chefs from the get go.
As far as the finale, Dale was by far the better chef. It's not just the skill and precision involved in cooking but the vision that takes the chef on a journey to create really good food and Hung never exhibited that throughout the season. It's always great to have you on the show, Gail, but you guys made a huge mistake. One that has cost you a loyal viewer and anyone else who will listen to me. I've been a devote fan since day one of season one because I love to cook also, but I think you guys truly and completely missed the mark.

Good luck to your future endeavors but I'll be looking for my food fun elsewhere..like maybe the FoodNetwork's Next Iron Chef...at least they seem to want to keep it consistant.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 5:13 AM

Pam E. wrote:

I'm reading comments from the viewers here and I am baffled by their close-mindedness. One said... Hung alienate so many people in his climb to the top that he will be missing opportunities. Hello? Did she not hear Rocco say to Hung that they should open a restaurant together? Hung has so many opportunities now from this win, which he clearly deserves.

And enough with the sexism comments. Please! Casey was totally unfocused and tried to pull off a dish (pork belly) that she would have needed more time to do right. And that roe. Are you saying that if a man put out the exact dishes, the panel would have said they were great? I don't think so. Casey is a great chef, but she was all over the place at the very moment she needed to be focused. Not how a true top chef would behave imo.

Finally, I cannot believe that people don't understand how editing can make people look good/bad. Grow up people! Hung was never the villain and he DOES have soul, which you can see it in his dishes. Some of you say you won't eat Hung's food because he is arrogant. HaHa! Do you think that the four star restaurants you eat at have everyone in the kitchen giving hugs and singing Kum-by-ya? No, those kitchens are full of arrogance, every one of them! The right person won the top honor, so stop crying for God sake!

posted on October 5, 2007 at 5:36 AM

Gene wrote:

A disappointing end to the greatest season yet.

DALE, YOU ROCK!!!!

posted on October 5, 2007 at 8:33 AM

Patricia Learnard wrote:

10-05-07

Dear Gail;

First of all, congratulations to Hung! What an honor and one that he worked hard for. He had some early struggles which he seemed to overcome. He also works well alone versus being on a team.Further, congratulations to Casey and Dale for their strive for perfection in Colorado.

You are so right. As a Viewer only, we don't get a chance to sample the food and base everything on emotion.

I have truly enjoyed the show, the Judges, Contestants, and Guest Judges. The challenges were very interesting, too.

Will catch the Reunion.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 8:36 AM

lc wrote:

Hi Gail,
THanks for the info. I think you all made the right decision. I also think Casy and Dale are great chefs, but Hung clearly won in the end and deserves to be Top Chef.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 8:59 AM

carol wrote:

Gai, love watching you each time at the judges' table.
I'm happy that Hung won the title. As an immigrant who was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth, only God knows how much hard work, dedication, and determination it took for him to be where he is today. He deserves it.
There is no doubt that Hung is the top chef. However as a person Hung needs to grow. Hung can be naive and childish at times, and he doesn't seem to have the maturity and humbleness that his competitors have. I think it'll cost him dearly in the real world if he hasn't realized it.
Again, congratulations to Hung!

posted on October 5, 2007 at 10:02 AM

DJ Hall wrote:

What was absolutely criminal in this Finale was having the chefs cook at 11,500 ft. Yes, it demanded a knowledge of how altitude affects boiling points and other cooking parameters. But far more importantly, you took these folks from sea-level to 11,500 feet with no time for their bodies to adjust to the altitude change. Everyone has a different metabolism and will react to altitude changes differently, but for many people, time is needed for their blood cells to multuply and adjust. It is quite common for people to experience dizziness and shortness of breath when extreme alttude changes are made too quickly, and can even be deadly for some people! Casey's difficult breathing, feeling short-of-breath and woozy was quite apparent!! She was not getting enough oxygen, Dale and Hung did not appear quite as affected by the change, but Dale still may have experienced a bit of cloudiness-of-mind as well, Casey was more fragile.
Most of the time, the twists of the challenges have to do with promoting a product, but there is no point in promoting a mile-high resort few can afford. These fine young chefs had their careers and the prize on the line, and to thoughtlessly compromise their health by taking them from sea-level to 11,500 feet for their Final ewas beyond unfair to them! The change from Miami to Aspen alone is quite remarkable, but to then take them to the top of the mountainsto prepare their finest work was shameful.
Hung did prepare the almost-flawless meal with great focus and heart. But you owe Casey some sort of restitution: alll you have to do is review the tapes to see she was short of breath, woozy and not at her best at all due to altitude sickness.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 10:09 AM

Bill G wrote:

My Plan for Season Four:
Instead of having the judges agree on a winner and loser each week I suggest you adopt a point system.
After each elimination challenge the judges discuss the pros and cons of each dish and then each judge gives the chefs a score from 1-10 (if there were ten chefs, or 1-9 if there was nine chefs, etc.) with number one being best. Whichever chef has the highest total score is asked to pack his or her knives.
These scores carry over from week to week and are cumulative.
This system is used until the chefs are down to the final four and then the playoffs begin. In the playoffs the chef with the lowest season total goes head to head with the #4 chef and the chef with the second lowest season total goes head to head with the #3 chef. Then the two winners meet in the final.
Similar to baseball in that you have to make it into the playoffs based on the standings but once you are in the playoffs the standings don’t matter. Although you could give an advantage to the #1 and #2 seeds for having the best season up to that point.
The advantages:
Chefs who are frequently near the bottom can’t skate through to the final four like Brian and Dale did because there was always at least one person who screwed up worse than they did every week.
Chefs who are consistent and finish with low scores each week don’t get sent home for one bad challenge, like Tre.
Chefs who are frequently near the bottom know they have to go to their A recipes early in the competition because they might need to finish near or at the top to stay in the game. They can’t just cook not to lose; they have to cook to win. This will also penalize those chefs if they manage to make it to the end because they will have already used one or more of their home run dishes earlier in the competition.
Knowing their place in the standings could add a new level of drama between the chefs.
The judges wouldn’t’ have to stay up until 6:00 a.m. in order to come to agreement. They could simply discuss the merits of the competition and vote, thus giving each chef a broad representation of how they did.
The judges could post their score cards on their blogs the next day and I think that would be very interesting for the readers.

An example of how it would work:
Dale scores near the bottom the first three weeks with an 8 each week so he has a three week score of 24.
Tre scores a 2 in week one, a 3 in week two and bombs in week 3 with a 10. After three weeks his score is 15.
Thus Dale is would be sent home before Tre even though Tre came in last in one challenge.
I think this would be a more fair to the chefs and more interesting for the viewers.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 10:16 AM

Claire from Balto wrote:

My entire family was delighted with your choice of Hung. Casey was our heart's favorite, and we wished she had had a better night, but Hung was the chef to be reckoned with from day one. We loved - and respected - his spirit, perserverance, his dedication to craft, his passion for creating food, his perfectionism, his speed,..everything about how he approaches cooking. There is no doubt in my mind that he will develop a fabulous restaurant where people will always experience a wonderful meal worth every penny! We can't wait to make reservations! Congratulations, Hung!

posted on October 5, 2007 at 10:20 AM

John E. Nelson, Jr. wrote:

I am truly happy for Casey, Dale, and Hung. With due respect to the producers, judges, and contestants,however, the title means absolutely nothing! When all is said and done, they still have to get up every morning and do their jobs. Although Hung won the $100,000, my bet is that Casey will win the $10,000 for being the Fan Fave.

Personally, I'd like to see Chef Colicchio appear on "Iron Chef America" battling against Cat Cora, Bobby FLay, or Mario Batali.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Gary wrote:

From your first show, I knew Hung was the front runner and most likely going to be the top Chef. Anyone that could duplicate that vip recipe [ fish wrapped in Potato] like he did is amazing. That was the toughest challange of all 15+ shows. And I was happy not to see all the side shows from season 2 that I thought detracted from the shows purpose, to find a top chef. Am hooked on this series and can't wait for the next one.

posted on October 5, 2007 at 11:00 AM

Tom wrote:

The best Chef won. This is to all the Hung detractors. What exactly did Hung do to the other competitors to deserve such vilification? This not a popularity contest. He was confident and he thought he was the best and said as much so what? He didn't cheat and played fairly. Maybe he was too honest but that is not a fault is it now?

posted on October 5, 2007 at 11:45 AM

MicheleS wrote:

It can not be denied that Hung won this competition fairly, with true dedication and heart. It is unfortunate that his personality and character flaws distracted from hi