November 8, 2006
Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6
There is an inherent contradiction in the world of great food that is also playing itself out in this competition, and it has to do with rules. On the one hand, rules exist for good reasons like providing order to our society, or keeping things fair. Some rules aren’t written but exist through habit and common practice. For example, the “rules” of restaurant dining are commonly understood -- one behaves a certain way at the table, the waiter does his or her thing, a tip rewards good service, etc.
But once you enter the culinary sphere, it gets tricky. A chef who sticks too closely to the rules can close herself off to experimentation and discovery. It seems quaint now, but I opened Craft in 2001 to a firestorm of criticism because we changed the rules on how to serve haute cuisine -- family-style service was fine for a steakhouse or Chinese restaurant, but in a three-star restaurant?
One of the reasons that this week’s Quickfire Challenge was interesting was because it forced our chefs to think creatively with a (very) limited palette of ingredients. Of course, no self-respecting chef would choose to create an amuse-bouche, or any dish, from items in a vending machine. But by making that the “rule” of the challenge, suddenly our chefs were placed on new creative ground. It was interesting to see who used the vending machine rule as a springboard for creativity, and who among them froze up under those circumstances.
Comments
Teri Hamilton wrote:
I have to agree with the decision the judges made to not select a loser. It did appear to me that Betty did not deliberately break the rules and certainly, it was evident she felt badly about her mistake. It wasn't clear if Marcel and Frank were aware of her decision to alter the ingredients. I'm not sure there weren't others that broke the rules, but none were willing to come forward, which is also bad. On a different note, I was glad to see each of the teams seemed to show harmony, except Marcel still seems to be ready to push anyone but himself under the bus.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:17 PM
Cherry Lanchinebre wrote:
Chef Tom, first I think you are a handsome man and enjoy watching you every week.
I just finished watching this evenings show and must say that the so called winners should of been corrected. For Betty and Marsel to change how they cooked is truly WRONG. The sugar level of the children they servered their food were not aware of what they were eating. I liked Betty but to add sugar to her cookies is not what a Top Chef is...
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:19 PM
Victoria L. Caldwell wrote:
Rules are deiinitely important and necessary, but at the same time when you see rules eing violated their is a certain level of responsibility in bring attention to that fact. I really believe Sam to be a non-controversial type person, but I have observed Mia as being a really sore loser! In the episode with the mystery boxes and she made the Fried Frog Legs when she wasn't announced the winner her whole demeanor changed and then she "happily" announced the winner when back in the pantry! I think when considering what is right yes rules are made to be follwed but at the same time when someone is in violation are you speaking up because it's right or because you're mad because you didn't win!!!
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:20 PM
Maria wrote:
I can see where Betty would think she could substitute 2 tablespoons of sugar spread out over all of the portions would not add 60 calories each. Honest mistake. there are some people on this show with real attitude problems. The pastry chef is one of them
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:20 PM
Stacey Ciarrocchi wrote:
During the challenge for the 500 calorie meal (at the camp) the judges asked the black team who had the idea to make the pizza. Frank ended up winning the prize for that challenge. If you watch the tape, it actually appeared to be Betty's idea to make the pizza when they were in the store buying the ingredients. Just thought I 'd point that out.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:20 PM
Frank wrote:
Hey Tom,
Why was there no video of Olive Oil. I mean even if one could not see the Olive Oil being used one could at least I presume note if it was on the table.
I am not sure why the entire preperation cannot be captured on video. Seems to me you might miss something that was airable by not doing so, however, if there must be blank areas of time due to the budget constraints of film could you not rig the cameras to always light up as working even when not so that the contestants would not be able to know when they were and were not being filmed.
I am confused about that.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:26 PM
Luciana DiRuocco wrote:
While I love this show...the editing is a challenge itself sometimes. But the lack of more time at the judges table is sometimes more difficult. This is a on the spot taped tv show...why are the tapes not available to the judges to check..you could even check what we don't see...It would be great to call out the liars/cheaters and get them out of the show.
I too was surprised at Sam not saying anything in the kitchen at the time; especially having a restricted diet himself he knows the dangers...
Overall Tom and judges...this challenge was great. I'm tired of hearing on the boards why are they doing "crackerjack" challenges? The truth is a chef is someone with dexterity, versatility, on the spot decision making, and someone who loves their craft so much that even a gas station or vending challenge is fun. I refuse to believe that stress conquers all and these are people's true colors -- even if they are the colors they're trying to change about themselves....stephen is a great example.
Thank you again Chefs and Judges!
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:31 PM
dottie b wrote:
When that *#(#*& penguin ad comes up, it essentially erases the type it covers and I have to refresh the page and quickly read that part before the ad appears! Talk about frustrating! It's bad enough having to click on 6 pages to get the article, let alone 12!
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:31 PM
Kevin wrote:
I really love this program.
The competitions are really great.
However I see a lot of back-stabing, this is where I personally draw the line.
This should be a competition of who can create the best food, not who can sabatoge the others.
I hear some chefs stating that they are there to win no matter what, and others talking about creating the best food.
My vote is for the Best Chef, not the worst Chef. The program is titled Top Chef not Biggest Jerk.
Thank You Again.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:34 PM
BC wrote:
Otto left over a misunderstanding, Betty should go too. Also I find the judges to be a little full of themselves. It's just cooking. Good manners cost nothing. I have worked in restaurants and sold products to restaurants. I can only think of a few that would have returned the fruit.
I love the show
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:34 PM
kate wrote:
Talk about playing by the rules, how about just plan integrity? Frank out and out lied! He did not have the idea for the pizza, that was Betty. How she stood there and did not say anything was amazing. Betty is just too nice of a person. Yes, she added 2 extra teaspoons of splenda, but that would have still keep the team under the 500 cals.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:38 PM
kate wrote:
Talk about playing by the rules, how about just plan integrity? Frank out and out lied! He did not have the idea for the pizza, that was Betty. How she stood there and did not say anything was amazing. Betty is just too nice of a person. Yes, she added 2 extra teaspoons of splenda, but that would have still keep the team under the 500 cals.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:40 PM
Gary wrote:
Hey Tom,
I was really taken back by this show this evening. This show is about being a Top Chef and competing by the the rules. After all it is a contest.
I can not believe more investagation was not put into Betty's sugar tampering. She knew what she was doing. Your producers have the incident on video.This was just as dishonest as Otto's exit. I think Bravo did not want to dig into this matter because: "Betty is good TV". The rules work for some but not for others.
The passive aggressive here came from the judges and Bravo TV. This show has went down hill from last season and has definetly lost my rating. The decline is from the quality of the contestants to the new addition Padma the model. I think some lessons can be learned from Tim ( host of: Project Runway) about integrity and taking the challenges very seriously. Oh well it's just sitcom television.
Gary
Bradenton, FL
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:40 PM
Liz wrote:
I have to say that it amazes me that people were possibly cheating with the olive oil, but since nobody was mentioned by name, then they just hid behind their anonymity. Especially since Betty was called out. She freely admitted to her mistake despite the possible consequences, and they just let her hang out there to dry. I agree...competition really can bring out the worst in people. Wouldn't it be great, though, if people won because of talent, teamwork, and creativity, rather than being cowards that can't admit to breaking the rules?
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:44 PM
Jim Miller wrote:
I am also a little confused by the rules and the application. I was sure the rule for this challenge was the 500 calorie ceiling, not the first days menu or listing of ingredients. This was further cemented in my mind when Suzanne Goin asked one of the contestants if he could not have added a little yogurt to the smoothie to get rid of the over-riding sour taste. Why would it be OK to add yogurt and not OK to change out Splenda for sugar, if the resulting menu is under500 calories. Sugar is a known caloric standard, and addind 2 tablespoons of sugar should have been a simple calculation. If it were under the ceiling of 500 calories, no sweat and nothing was compromised.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:44 PM
Jessica wrote:
I have just a few comments. If the guidelines and rules were so explicit then why did the judges ask the question about changing the recipe and adding yogurt? Did the judges not know the rules themselves until the cheating talk started? I also wanted to know if you were told about the olive oil and none of the chefs fessed up to it couldn't you go back and check the tapes? My personnal opion is the chef who LIED about the olive oil being added should have been gone. Not admitting to it is the same as lying. At least Betty bit the bullet and said hey I screwed up.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:44 PM
Sue H wrote:
I find it interesting that so many of the difficulties this season have included integrity issues. To me, cooking is ALL about integrity and trust...that the sugar-free dessert is truly sugar-free...that the food has been handled properly and safely. The best dish that makes me ill 2 hours later is NOT a winner.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:46 PM
Jan Fontenot wrote:
I'm actually a little sad about the chefs this year. I agree with Gail that last week was disapointing. There were enough emotional problems last year. I think all we would like to watch is what the chef's have to prepare with just a little drama. Love you Tom!
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:46 PM
Jan H wrote:
I agree with the judges decision to not eliminate anyone considering the she did/he did fiasco was way after the fact.
What WILL be their slap on the wrist? No immunity next quickfire? Two chefs sent to pack their knives and go home? Just another seven more days of sitting on the edge of my seat.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:47 PM
Steve wrote:
"We had no proof that extra olive oil or sugar had been introduced into people’s dishes." Are you kidding me? She admitted it!!!! Worse, she only admitted to it when directly questioned. At first, when the accusations were general in nature, she feigned surprise ("...you mean someone changed their recipe???"). I cannot believe you gave her a pass and believed her weasely denial that she knew her cheating was against the rules. Shame on you.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:52 PM
Babs Richards wrote:
This totally thew me by the way Hugo's apparent act of dishonesty was handled. Marisa should of confronted Hugo before they ever got into that car! It would of at least given him the chance to right his wrong. I do have a problem with the way she interrupts her team mates. And for that alone, I don't
trust her either.
And as punishment to Hugo, he's had to watch his deed over and over and over. Enough said other than, I miss Harold, Dave
leighann, and of course (Daves Bitch)
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:54 PM
Veni wrote:
Betty knew the rules...by adding sugar instead of Splenda to a recipe could have harmed a diabetic child possibly leaving your show liable for the child's injury.
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:56 PM
Pam wrote:
I am beginning to feel that Betty is "someone's" favorite.
You were pretty hard on Otto... when I watched the show, all I heard Otto say was that he thought they got the item free... once they were loading the car.
He admitted his mistake... He was harshly scrutinized.
But Betty turns on the tears... and nobody goes home!!!!
I think that's what your blog is all about this week... do you feel a little gilty?
Poor little Betty.... Bull!
She knew the rules just like Otto knew the rules!
But... isn't little Betty such a "sweety?"
Hey guys, keep your minds on TOP CHEF!!!
NOT ON THOSE CUTESY LITTLE FACES & OOHS & AAHS!
I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED!
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:57 PM
Sheila wrote:
I think that sending nobody home was the most fair way to go! But already this season we have somebody "stealing" on one episode and others cheating on another! What's next! It's making for an exciting season of Top Chef that's for sure! I'm just wondering since nobody was sent home tonight, will that lead to a double "pack your knifes and go" elimination or a final 4!
posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:59 PM
sherry wrote:
I think that you should have taken away the winning team. Said no one leaves and no one wins or make the other team the winner. Rules are Rules!! Stay the same, under 500calories and she changed the ingrienents and admited it!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:00 AM
roberta andrajack wrote:
There was no mention in the show that Mia used sugar in the coleslaw. With all the talk of cheating , don't the judges see the film of the cooking?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:01 AM
Alice wrote:
Where did bravo find that poor excuse for a host on Top Chef? She is terrible.She is so fake. Now she is beautiful ,but she does not fit the role. What happen to the one from last season?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:04 AM
Suzanne Mc wrote:
Nothing for nothing, but when guest judge Chef Goin asked who's idea was the Pizza, Frank took credit for Betty's idea. Frank may have made the Pizza, but Betty thought of it and suggested it over Marcel's asparagus. Betty was a lady and never took credit or tried to show Frank up. Betty may have been wrong in changing indgredients, but 2 tablespoons of sugar are 90 calories, minus the egg whites she removed (the nutrionist said 1 egg white was 20 calories) should have brought the team's caloric meal to about 496 calories which was still under the 500. Being Top Chef is about adjusting and making something work within the guidelines. I think the other teams complaints were just sour grapes becasue they did not win. In addition, Josie's team clearly poured olive oil without measuring. Look back at the tapes. I commend (all judges) your decision not eliminate any chef for the week. Betty fessed up to her mistake, what about the others?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:05 AM
anne wrote:
WHAT! I like Betty but if was CLEAR that the same recipe should be used the second day. No WAY I believe anyone did not understand that except maybe the kids at the fat camp. Sorry. She should have been sent home. She cheated. I am no longer in her corner, because she cheated but did not have the GOOD CHARACTER that Otto had to send herself home when she got CAUGHT>\\That said, I agree, don't wait to mention things when you are on the chopping block, bring it up on the spot.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:07 AM
Amanda wrote:
I agree that all these issues should be brought up at the time that the incdence happend. All I see is them saying if something happends to my dish and it messes up then I can cover my butt by pointing fingers at them.....Marcel proved that by saying Betty's dish is not working...but they are working as a team... it should not have been Betty's dish it should have been our dish.
P.S. I also had Betty's dish and I have to say delish!!!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:08 AM
randy wrote:
Well, I completely disagree with you, since you didnt have any video proof of the "stolen lychees", but you went to investigate the information right away, and although they werent used, and surely the whole matter affected execution, that other guy Otto had enough honor to bow out, while today you let the winning team pass with a "probation". So the White Team won the challenge and no one could be sent home? Does that mean you can get away with your olympic gold medal even if you doped? I dont think so, maybe you do. You were totally out of line tonight, should have sent, Betty? I think it was her name, packing her knives on right away.
No else admitted anything? You said last week if Otto didnt admit anything you would choose a loser based on the usual criteria. Rules are rules, and if you didnt follow it you get disqualified, or so I thought!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:10 AM
Rathipon wrote:
Tom,
That was a huge cop out. I am sure that you don't believe Betty was simply mistaken. Clearly, all of the other contestants understood the rules. And whats the use of having nutritionist facists watching your every move the day before, if you can can just change it up the next day? Lycheegate and now this. You should have taken the opportunity to nip this cheating in the bud. Which would mean, unfortunately, eliminating Betty. I think you made the wrong decision.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:14 AM
Catherine wrote:
I completely agree with you about speaking up at the time of the offense. If you see or hear someone cheating or going outside the bounds of the rules, it is your responsibility to speak up; otherwise, you are just as wrong as the one who cheated.
Going back to the episode where Otto went home, I thought that since Marissa heard Otto say they got the lychees free, she should have stepped up then. However, she did not. Instead, she caused discord in the kitchen by talking about it behind Otto's back. She was at fault just as much as Otto was. I was further disappointed that this was not mentioned to her or that she was not confronted as to why she did not mention it earlier.
I have been very disappointed this season in the caliber of Chefs brought to the show. It is like we, as the audience, are watching Top Teen Chef. All I can say is they all need to grow up.
One final note: Someone needs to mention to these Chefs that this show is about being TOP CHEF. This should mean that you are to bring your very best to the kitchen, no matter if you are cooking a simple grill cheese or if you are cooking a 5 star restaurant quality meal. The objective is to be Top Chef. You should know how to cook everything.
C~
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:22 AM
Suzanne Mc wrote:
an addendum to my last post: Betty said she added things proportionately. If she truly only added 2 tablespoons of sugar total and took out only 2 egg whites total, the difference in calories added and subtracted was a total of 56 calories. Divide this by "X" amount of cookies made (let's say 20) which is then negligible because each total meal was only increased by 2-3 calories. Cheating? Maybe, but it seems she took into account an exhange of one item for another to make it better, which is far different than just adding to the meal, which it seemed others clearly felt was cheating.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:30 AM
Al wrote:
Judge Tom,
Betty admitted to adding extra sugar.
Weither it was intentional or not she did not play by the rules.
She should have been sent home.
The proof is her admitting it.
CASE CLOSE
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:39 AM
David wrote:
Tom, are you aware that your blog becomes public BEFORE the show airs for the first time in Hawaii?
I happened to read it this afternoon. It is not even 8pm yet and I already know who is going to win!
The show doesn't start for another 15 minutes.
I'll be sure not to read the Bravo web site on Wednesday from now on. It sort of ruined the show for me, since I already know how it is going to go.
David
posted on November 9, 2006 at 12:42 AM
Nickle wrote:
Having watched the episode several times I can see how Betty thought she was within the rules. When the elimination challege was first explained to the chefs they were to create three dishes per team and the only stipulation, at that time, was that the entire meal not contain more than 500 cal.. The nutritionist component came at a later time.
I am not condoneing Betty's actions. However do to her coming forward when approached It seems clear that she thought she was acting within the guidlines "an honest misunderstanding". She showed integrity under fire unlike some of the other competitors. I have more respect for Betty than for any of the other chefs and would welcome her into my home anytime to break bread with my family.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:00 AM
ceejay wrote:
Chef Tom, would you please explain to the viewers what Betty SHOULD have done when the cookies with Splenda did not work. You judges always tell contestants at the judges' table, like Emily, that if they taste their food and it isn't acceptable, they should find a way to fix it. Betty did that. She may have added 2 Tbsp of sugar, but she eliminated some egg whites, and cut down the size of the cookies, plus was aware of the 60 calorie "buffer". What SHOULD she have done? Is it possible to consult the judges in mid-challenge? Should she have discussed it with the other chefs? Also, have you instructed the other contestants that they need to address problems ON THE SPOT? It is a shame to see this season deteriorate to ugliness this early on!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:09 AM
Andrew wrote:
Betty should have disqualified herself or been tossed out on her ear. She's a business woman and clearly knew she was breaking the rules - who's kidding who. That little girl flirty-flirt charm is disqusting. It's obivious what she is made of by her attacks on the other chefs that have her figured out. In Mikes defense, what you see it what you get, he seems honest at least. Tom, I would think you'd be a better judge of people. Hopefully this will not ruin the rest of the competetion for me. Further, Mia and anyone else who cheated should have been gone. Rules are rules and there should be no excuse accepted for breaking them!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:14 AM
alice wrote:
I am bothered by the lack of ethics displayed by some of the contestants on BRAVO "Top Chef" and "Project Runway." It seems that this behavior is even rewarded in some cases. "Top Chef" is a taped program. The judges could have looked at the tapes and seen, as the tv audience did, that rules were broken. I used to love these programs and thought they would be great viewing for all ages but increasingly I am seeing more poor character and hearing all the bleeps and other objectionable language that I care to hear. Move toward classy not trashy.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:16 AM
Anita wrote:
Tom,
I honestly am torn about Betty's understanding of the challenge and the parameters around it. On the one hand she seems too bright not to understand that the recipe had to remain the same. On the other hand, she also seemed very surprised that she was suspected of cheating. I guess it all boils down to personal integrity. Betty has been a favorite up to now, this makes me wonder what lengths she's willing to go to for a win. I'll be watching her and as always....watching you because Chef, you ROCK!!! Love the show
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:21 AM
Phillip wrote:
Shalom Tom
It is a Pleasure and a real joy to watch you and the other staff members make your adjudications on what must be a very challenging ordeal, with so many pre-adolescence, adlibbing for what is served and dressed as cuisine. What ever the monetary value that is given for your labors, it is very inappreciable and inarticulate to express your real worth to the work you and your co-host must Perform and endure. It is a real shame, and is very distressing that the very integrity and concept of the show is constantly being put to test by the cast and members, with their lack of self worth and childish egos at battle with one and other. Rather than showing their true worth as top professional or culinary artisans, they choose in poor taste and efforts, to place themselves above one and other, they seek to cause harm to each others by any low and no account means. Does not anyone see that the Show's integrity and what the Title of the show stand for and represent. Without this perception going into the show, the show might as well be called "Top Dog" "No holds Barred". The Show's concept and direction must be above the pettiness and the call for "only the best" in the land must be protected. This will in the end make for a better "Show" and a more desired watching because the participants will have a great goal to achieve, to not only display greatness but to produce it convincingly before millions.
Which in the end serve the premise that the sponsers have place their trust, monies and product in. KCB Tom, Bless and Love. HisSouljour
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:27 AM
Fi Fi wrote:
I so agree with you. Although i want Betty to win cus she is my gurl. Ethiclly she shouldn'y have adjusted the recipe, or atleast asked her team and one of the producers before she did it. She put not only herself but her team in jepardy by bending the rules. But since no one went home guess that evens the playing field.
~Fi Fi
P.s.
I do recall a previous cheif going home b/c he made an unethical decison, you would think the other cheifs would lean from his mistake and be on the up and up the rest of the showl......guess not
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:49 AM
Ari Burgess wrote:
So, if I didn't know I was speeding, then I shouldn't get ticketed? Or, if I thought the speed sign said 65 instead of 35 I shouldn't get a ticket?
You just lost a viewer. You could have reviewed the tape, but you took the passive way out and didn't get rid of someone who did not obey the rules.
She went from I didn't know the rules to, cry cry cry cry, I misunderstood the rules.
So, cry, say you didn't know or you misunderstood and you pass. Nice. Don't even bother to mention that the kids she was cooking for, all 15 of them received sugar in a recipe that formerly had none. What if one of those kids was a diabetic? What if they went into shock? Cry cry cry, I didn't know that sugar is bad for diabetics.
Disgusting. Yeah sure, there are a lot of things going on that are much more important, but while you operate in your little universe you have to do so with integrity. This show has shown that it has no integrity. Cry cry cry, but we want the mom from California who makes comfort food to go along way to give hope to all those other comfort food making moms.. cry cry cry , we didn't know she would break the rules.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:57 AM
Brad wrote:
Wow that was an interesting show and your comments were even more so. I find your concern for the late notice of "cheating" interesting. I am not there in the room but you can tell the chefs are busy and under a great deal of stress. Give them a break. More importantly, the cheaters got off without anything. I for one have a gluten problem. Lets see them try to make something without gluten and have it taste great. But if they cheated I would get sick. So, Michael may have a "bad" attutide but he did not cheat.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 1:58 AM
Ari Burgess wrote:
So, if I didn't know I was speeding, then I shouldn't get ticketed? Or, if I thought the speed sign said 65 instead of 35 I shouldn't get a ticket?
You just lost a viewer. You could have reviewed the tape, but you took the passive way out and didn't get rid of someone who did not obey the rules.
She went from I didn't know the rules to, cry cry cry cry, I misunderstood the rules.
So, cry, say you didn't know or you misunderstood and you pass. Nice. Don't even bother to mention that the kids she was cooking for, all 15 of them received sugar in a recipe that formerly had none. What if one of those kids was a diabetic? What if they went into shock? Cry cry cry, I didn't know that sugar is bad for diabetics.
Disgusting. Yeah sure, there are a lot of things going on that are much more important, but while you operate in your little universe you have to do so with integrity. This show has shown that it has no integrity. Cry cry cry, but we want the mom from California who makes comfort food to go along way to give hope to all those other comfort food making moms.. cry cry cry , we didn't know she would break the rules.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:02 AM
Tony wrote:
I believe Betty should've consulted first. But I don't think she did it maliciously. Sam is a sore loser. Mia is at the bottom of the pool, she should shut up and get out of the kitchen if it's too hot for her. Michael should be thankful of this incident, because I believe he was next to leave Top Chef.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:02 AM
Lisa wrote:
It would have been interesting to see exactly what went on during the filming. It seems that no one should throw stones if they didn't follow the rules either. Was any team completely innocent? Sometimes the more defensive someone is the more guilty they are.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:03 AM
mike wrote:
I've been really disappointed with the last few episodes. Don't get me wrong. I love the show, but all the mud slinging, throwing people under the bus. If these contestants have the integrity they claim to have, then why are they bringing alledged cheating to your attention after the competetion? At least in the earlier episode with the leches, it was immediately addressed to Tom, and quickly resolved. For someone to open a can of worms like on tonights episode, but he would'nt give the team, or names is ridiculous! To me he is just as guilty as the offender. Where was his integrity. He should have gone home just for that.
I realize that contraversy can increase television ratings, but it can also have a reverse effect, resulting in the competetion, or whoever wins the competetion looking like the decisions were 'fixed.'
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:04 AM
BT wrote:
Tom! Come on, man! You get crap like this, you say "we can't treat your accusations as proof." End of story. Whether oil or sugar were added doesn't change a poorly spiced dish or leaden turkey balls. You got sucked into it and lost your cool - even your scolding won't bring that back - you looked weak and they'll take advantage of that. The whole show is getting embarrassing.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:04 AM
george m wrote:
Just finished watching TC, and thought that the decision the Judges made was very fair...they could not really confirm any type of cheating because nobody would come forward with any information.... I thought it was very weak of Sam not to state his position... and I also thought it very strange that Mia did not tell Betty that she was the one who brought up the cheating issue with the cookies....it looks like this is becomming a battle of the egos...I was very disappointed to see the chefs act this way.... they are becomming very sneaky and out for themselves.... Hope they calm down and get to the main point of the show...cooking good food. Love Tom and all the Judges....Keep up the good work. George, Glendale
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:05 AM
Brett wrote:
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!!! When it comes to rules on Top Chef or Project Runway the message from BRAVO is clear--they can be bent.
Sorry, judges and producers but you can blah, blah all you want about how it's creative and 'experimenting' to bend the rules but COMPETITIONS are built on a clearly defined, articulated, and aggreed upon set of RULES. And RULES give the competition CREDIBILITY. So, if you are a contestant and you break the rules you don't get a pass. Even if you cry a little or plead 'ignorance' because that's how it goes. Life is tough. Learn your lesson and bow out with integrity.
SHAME ON BRAVO this season. Top Chef and PR are just more examples of how this country promotes lying and rule bending over honesty and integrity.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:08 AM
Marny wrote:
Tom, I find that you are a fair judge, and have a keen sense of style ... with humor, to boot! Kudos!!
The "500 Calories" challenge was great -- and how you and the other judges treated the children admirable.
Gentle as you go,
Marny
in southern California
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:10 AM
Liz wrote:
I do wonder if there is anyway that the judges could have gone back over the tape of what was happening in the kitchen. If there was, wouldn't there be a way to find out if something was happening?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:18 AM
Adrian Emmanuel wrote:
Dear Top Chef,
I find it outrageous that no one was booted off tonight. I am very disappointed with this episode to the point where i might not continue watching. This is a competition. The status of the show just dropped in my mind. With a episode that deals with calories and getting your receipt checked off means you must follow the rules. Boo to you.
Adrian
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:18 AM
Ari Burgess wrote:
So, if I didn't know I was speeding, then I shouldn't get ticketed? Or, if I thought the speed sign said 65 instead of 35 I shouldn't get a ticket?
You just lost a couple of viewers. You could have reviewed the tape, but you took the passive way out and didn't get rid of someone who did not obey the rules.
She went from I didn't know the rules to, cry cry cry cry, I misunderstood the rules.
So, cry, say you didn't know or you misunderstood and you pass. Nice. Don't even bother to mention that the kids she was cooking for, all 15 of them received sugar in a recipe that formerly had none. What if one of those kids was a diabetic? What if they went into shock? Cry cry cry, I didn't know that sugar is bad for diabetics.
Disgusting. Yeah sure, there are a lot of things going on that are much more important, but while you operate in your little universe you have to do so with integrity. This show has shown that it has no integrity. Cry cry cry, but we want the mom from California who makes comfort food to go along way to give hope to all those other comfort food making moms.. cry cry cry , we didn't know she would break the rules.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:20 AM
Maureen Kennedy wrote:
The "sugar" thing really bothers me because some of those children are diabetic and could excess "sugar" have triggered an attack in those kids? It was confusing watching the program because while Betty said Sugar, next to her bowl was the Splenda box, and I couldn't quite tell what she put into the bowl, if that was a half a cup of sugar then no way did she stay within 500 calories. But I don't think she put real refined sugar in the bowl.
However, since Betty admitted her error and did not get sent home, then I think Otto should be brought back - he admitted to an error that was a team error in judgement and which the team was aware of but did nothing because of time constraints.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:21 AM
Mindy wrote:
Chef, do you think that the team that cooked the BBQ should have won the challenge instead since they did adhere to their menu that was submitted and also the fact that the judges did not call them back for possible elimination?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:22 AM
Mindy wrote:
Sorry, in my earlier post i wrote BBQ when I meant to mention Josie's team (the White Team)
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:23 AM
Janet wrote:
When the black team was being interviewed by the judges, I thought the question Tom had asked was whose idea was to serve pizza, I was shocked and surprised that Frank said it was him when it was clearly Betty. I even watched it again to be sure that it was Betty's idea. I understand Frank was responsible for the pizza and made it but the question was whose idea was it.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:28 AM
lavinia wrote:
First, I have to say I was shocked at how many of the chefs bemoaned having to make a low-calorie meal! With healthy eating being so forefront these days, I was surprised that many did not already know how to keep sugar and calories but not taste out of a dish. With that said, I absolutely agree with the decision not to send anyone home (I do wonder who would have been sent home if the allegations had not been raised). In Sam’s defense (although I know what we see is heavily edited), from what the viewers saw, he only brought up the fact that others had added things when asked why they had not added yogurt to their smoothie. I do think, though, that if it was that much of a problem for them, they should have something at that exact moment as you said (which is why it bothered me so much with Marisa and Otto. If she heard him say that as they were loading the car—why didn’t she say something then??? They could have returned the lychees immediately. It seems she mentioned them only after she realized her dessert was beginning to have problems). Anyway, I really enjoyed the Quick-Fire challenge—it really brought back memories of late college nights, snack food, and a hot plate.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:37 AM
SuzyQ wrote:
I completely agree with Tom - passive aggresives annoy the bejeezus out of me. Why did their concern only come out at the judges' table when their necks were on the line, rather than in the kitchen, when these kids' strict dietary limits were apparently in even more jeopardy?
BTW, am a huge fan of 'wichcraft in SF. I work in the mall, and sometimes take a 10-minute break in the afternoon & RUN over for that chick-pea salad: CRAVEABLE!!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:38 AM
Molly wrote:
I was stunned at this episode. I cannot believe that Betty got away with lying to win. Or would even do so on national television if front of children.
Any thoughts, by anyone, that there just might have been a child there that could have been a diabetic. The trust the camp put into Top Chef, but yet the children could have been put in danger, for someone not to have her cookies fail again, and she knew they would.
Bottom line, made clear and simple, you CANNOT change the recipe tomorrow. Did anyone but us also, catch the part where the nutrionist was clapping her hands together making it abundantly CLEAR, you cannot change your recipe tomorrow. What was misunderstood about that? We all here watched, about 10 of us and caught it immediately. Also caught it instantly when she put in the sugar.
And when my son said mom she lied, I replied, she is probally going to be eliminated. Then when nothing happened, he said well why do I get punished for lying? Because its wrong son, thats why.
We enjoy Top Chef and cannot wait for a new episode, but if Betty continues, we won't be watching it anymore. Or at least until she is packing her knives to go. Last week a good chef goes home because her food is salty.
Maybe had she cheated, lied, and made it to where no one got sent home, we would have been watching her great cooking tonight.
Very disappointed in the judges decision tonight, in fact HIGHLY. This was just wrong and she more than deserved to be sent home.
Thanks,
Fans in Louisiana
P.S. Betty thanks for showing our children its o.k. to cheat and lie.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:49 AM
Wulfbear wrote:
I just want to say first, Tom, that on the basis of your conduct, integrity and insight shown on Top Chef, I would happily eat at one of your restaurants whether you or it were well-known or not. This really was a mess at the end of the episode tonight, but I think the solution reached, being one that no one was really happy about, was probably a good one. (Isn't that they say about good compromises?)
I don't really understand people's problems with some of the challenges like the amuse-bouche made from vending machine ingredients. Putting people out of their comfort zone and forcing creativity seems right in the heart of the Top Chef show. Like Harold and some of the others in the first season proved, liking the challenge is not a prerequisite to bringing your 'best game' to it.
By the way, thank you guys for bringing Harold and Leanne into the mix on the production/blog side this season; they've been a real asset. And a special thanks to you, Gail, Padma, and all the guest judges for doing such great jobs with the judging, it looks like a highly interesting but extremely taxing process.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:49 AM
Marny wrote:
So much salt is used in restaurants that it's tough for me ... long ago, my son's health class in elementary school talked about salt -- and he drove me nuts to stop salting before eating!! I decided to go very low/no salt ... which is tough now.
Once on an airplane, I decided to order a Bloody Mary ... and had to give it back after one sip -- it was THAT salty!!
I fully understood the position of the judges re: Emily vs Michael. (But Michael's attitude has more to do with immaturity than anything else -- and/or he is a spectrum of ADD or ADHD!!) I would say he's VERY uncomfortable around authority figures. (It takes one to know one -- and that was me for a long time!)
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:55 AM
Michele wrote:
Tom,
I am not a chef, nor even a great cook. But I watch your show every week and I must say that I was appauled by what I saw tonight. I think that the chefs need to be made aware of the word "liability" and what exactly that means. With the camp allowing you to cook for these children with specific instructions to calories due to medical conditions, the chefs basically had the lives of these children in their hands. For any of the chefs to even think about changing recipes after going through rigorous measuring procedures to make sure that they met the requirements is absurd. It would have been terrible if one of the children had ended up in the hospital due to one chef deciding at the last minutes to use sugar or olive oil. And then for the chefs to point their fingers at each other instead of looking at the real issue is just too much. When you go out to eat, you put your life in the hands of the person who is preparing your food. And you trust that person. I think the chefs need to realize the position that they are in and adjust themselves accordingly because if they don't, no matter how good of a chef they are, I would not put my life in their hands for a plate of food. Good luck Tom!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 2:56 AM
Nich wrote:
First off. Go Jeff. You're 45. It's 2 in the friggin' morning. BED! Secondly. I agree with your post completely. Honestly. For those of you who DON'T know; I am a professional gamer. I make my millions ( Pfft. ) playing and testing games. I'm in competition constantly. NEVER! IN ANY SENSE OF THE MATTER! have I had the urge to cheat to work my way up. Honestly. Did this chick think for one moment about the severity of certain types of diabetis? Some of the 15 children who ate her "crispy killers" could have been severly diabetic! Not able to HAVE sugar! BUT! It's ok. Next week she can try to kill someone else, but it'll taste good, and have a fancy name. So she'll stay. Hollywood is really getting on my nerves. Oh, and judges.
Way to go! You really made an example of the cheater. Maybe we should give mass murders "probation". Way to drive off the viewers.
Jeff. Tell your kid to go to bed. Lying is wrong, and one day he might even become President if he keeps up.
Nich.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 3:03 AM
Christine wrote:
This blog is a perfect example of why I love Tom. Clear, concise but never leaves you wanting more. But I would like to ask for a little clarification...Betty stated in her private statement that she used two less eggs and a bit more of the sugar. She never stated that she switched to sugar from Splenda. In the shot in the episode where she's making the cookies on the second day there is clearly Splenda on the counter next to her, not sugar. Did Betty actually admit at some point (that we did not see in the episode) that she switched from Splenda to sugar? And is that clip with her next to the Splenda from day 1 instead of day 2? Over all, Betty is the only contestant that I have yet to lose respect for. Sore losers who point fingers and others who distort facts to turn attention from their poor performance "cough" (Mia) "cough" (Marisa), really turn me off. However, cheaters turn my stomach too, so I really want to know if she made that huge change from sugar to Splenda or if Betty simply tweaked the recipe a bit.
Keep up the great blogging Tom, it always satisfies me when the episode hasn't shown quite enough of the story.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 3:10 AM
Corbett Lamm wrote:
I truly respect the decision not to send someone home on this episode. I have always felt since I was little it to be such an injustice to be punished for something that one does wrong unknowingly. However, given the rules that were plainly stated and understood by the majority, one in your position would unfortunatly be faced with the logical decision of sending home Betty, but you didn't. That must have been a very hard decision to make, both morally and professionally, and I respect you for that. Keep up the good work in keep these up and coming chefs on their toes and creative, regardless of how rediculous they may find it.
Sincerely,
Corbett
posted on November 9, 2006 at 3:32 AM
Dagger wrote:
I definitely think someone should have gone home. Why were the accusations not voiced until the Judge’s Table? Would you expect that if such flagrant violations were occurring that the concerned would not be bringing this to attention then and there?
One think is very clear with this second group; me, me, me, me… like a bunch of bratty kids. If I am out dining and there is a problem with my meal I prefer to have if remedied not to hear “it is not my fault” or “he/she is to blame or ‘cheated’”. What ever! Are there any competition challenges that test the Chef’s integrity? Now that would be a riot to watch especially when it came time for the Judge’s Table.
My wife and I watch every week and are hoping to see 2 people go home next episode.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 3:54 AM
Steve Rau wrote:
Sam's and Josie's comments were troubling, because they cast doubt over everything. How difficult for the judges! Josie's comments seemed a bit cowardly in that she made them only when emboldened by Sam's lead-in.
Well, once again, the drama behind the scenes is probably why most people watch the show. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I don't like it. Well, except when a villain is sent home.
BTW, did anyone else think that Michael's amuse bouche (ANNOY bouche would have been more appropriate) looked more like a symbolic "finger" than a phallus? Happy belated Halloween!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 4:09 AM
J. Junkie wrote:
Glad you brought up the not listening thing. It seems like several of the chefs aren't really paying attention, whether it's to the rules, or to what the point of the challenge is.
You said there was no video to watch...how can that be? There seem to be shots of the chefs from every possible angle.
By the way, Cliff made the curried banana dish...Carlos made the Vegetarian Loaf. :)
posted on November 9, 2006 at 4:11 AM
Paul wrote:
Tom, If you recall, Marisa DID in fact point out the issue of the lychees LONG before the judging. We know how you feel about her, but give her credit for acting the way you suggest, at least.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 4:52 AM
Caitlin wrote:
I thought it was questionable to show kids under 18 attending a fat camp on national TV...did you have signed releases from all of them and their parents? Is Camp Glucose a real place name or a pseudonym? I'm just concerned about issues of confidentiality and stigma...some of the kids just looked really uncomfortable.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 4:53 AM
mark wrote:
Chef, I always like your insight to the contestants, and the dishes. While sometimes i think you can be a bit harsh in your judgements, thats really what life and cooking are all about. I recently just left the food service industry, after about 12 years of cooking. Mixture of all sorts of stuff. Chain places, country clubs, small kitchens, banquets, so I love to see these guys go at it, week to week.
I think the rivalry is created partly by the show, since its always there in real life anyways. While a good kitchen works as a complete team, there are always those inside that want to prove others wrong, while keeping thier faults hidden, sometimes even when they are called out for them.
It does amaze me that every week though, someone will serve something to the judges that they KNOW shouldn't have left the kitchen. it would be interesting to see someone actually take responsability for thier dish, and not serve it. Serve one portion, and just say 'Hey, it was messed up, I didnt like the quality, and didnt feel I should serve it to you". With all the other MAJOR screw ups, I would venture, they would be OK, this early in the competition.
Anyways, great read, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 5:01 AM
Raechel wrote:
I think that while rules are important that I was more disappointed in the chefs that weren't able to accept that they made losing dishes. Honor is more important to me than winning or losing and it has definitely effected how I feel about the people on the show. I personally think that Betty, while maybe aware that she was fudging on the rules, didn't think it was any big deal. If she had included sugar from the beginning she still would have been under her calorie guideline! The other chefs would have tweaked their dishes if they had thought it would have helped. What is all this after the fact moral outrage. If I were in a situation where someone was cheating I would say to them "STOP CHEATING".
posted on November 9, 2006 at 5:05 AM
joe wrote:
Hey Tom,
posted on November 9, 2006 at 5:07 AM
joe wrote:
Hey Tom,
Personally i am not a believer in any type of cheating or in this case" bending of the rules". But after watching the show, and the dilemma going on at the judges table, maybe you should consider getting a replay camera to review what actually went on. I must say the extra squirts of olive oil were there henceforth what i saw on the tv. Despite the fact that Betty had indeed gone beyond what was thought to be crystal clear rules, i do believe she ment no harm in what she was doing nor did she think she was doing anything wrong, not to mention i have great respect for her because when put on the spot, she didn't try to b/s the situation she just came out and told the truth, unlike the rest of the gang. (At least as far as what is put on the tv after the production of it and what not.) But you also bring up a good point about how the thought, or notion, didn't enter any of the contestants minds about what if one of the kids was seriously injured? That is a lack of responsibility, not to mention from the looks of it most would not jump out and accept the responsibility, which is some more b/s. But none the less i think it is definately in the panels and your best intrest to watch the group very carefully, they don't seam like the majority of them is a trusting bunch, and will do anything to get to the ultimate goal, that they would not deserve.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 5:14 AM
Shea wrote:
This episode showed the true nature of people, including the judges. I have always respected Suzanne Goin and watching her interact with people solidifies my impression of her. She is a wealth of knowledge on the culinary scene and made a great addition to the judging panel and unfortunately I hope someday she replaces Gail. I could never quite gather my thoughts as to why I am not comfortable with Gail but seeing her with Suzanne made it absolutely clear that she is not professional in her approach.
I was pretty stunned when Padma offered the “dictionary” version of “amuse bouche” as definition to the contestants. Yes Padma, amuse=entertain and bouche=mouth, but in the culinary world that properly translates to a hors d'œuvre that serves as a teaser of what is yet to come.
It does not surprise me that the black team (Frank, Betty and Marcel) altered their recipe after the nutritionists were gone. Frank is full of speeches that could “subliminally” cause a weak person to think they are supposed to stick together no matter what the incident. Betty is a people person who can quickly sum a person up and feed back to them what they want to hear, that’s why she asked the question, if anyone felt that someone had changed something. Once she realized everyone knew she altered her recipe, she admitted to the change. Otherwise, she wasn’t forthcoming with the information. I wasn’t on the show but it was pretty clear to me that the recipe’s were locked in once the nutritionists gave their okay. Marcel admitted that their team was liberally applying olive oil, and this combined with the additional sugar for the macaroons Betty made could very well have resulted in them exceeding their caloric limit. The entire team should have been sent home.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 5:56 AM
Sandra Maryland wrote:
THIS IS DISGUSTING!
You were SO WRONG not to have sent BETTY home. And you might as well bring OTTO back, because if you allow BETTY to get away with what SHE did, he deserves another chance, too! I
Don't you see? It's the SAME PRINCIPLE!!!
BETTY DID NOT follow the rules. It matters NOT whether she did it intentionally (or ESPECIALLY), that she turned on the "baby doll tears" and you felt sorry for her!
Everyone else understood that the reason the nutritionists were there IN THE FIRST PLACE, was to "carefully" MEASURE and DOCUMENT all of the ingredients that the contestants were using in their recipes. And after all ingredients were "carefully" measured and recorded, they were SPECIFICALLY instructed NOT to deviate from the ingredients in ANY way! So if your cookies fall flat, then: "That's the way the cookie crumbles!" It simply means that you are NOT "TOP CHEF" material, anyway! (Which is ANOTHER reason BETTY should have been sent home packing !)
After all that CAREFUL MEASURING by the nutritionists, the INTEGRITY of the ENTIRE challenge was RUINED, when people (like BETTY), altered their recipes. AND BETTY EVEN ADMITTED THAT SHE CHANGED IT, BY ADDING SUGAR! And since she CANNOT FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS, then that's yet ANOTHER reason she does NOT deserve to be competing for "TOP CHEF"! She just doesn't "measure up..." (And you fell for "the oldest trick in the book": she CRIED because she got CAUGHT, and she thought she was going home! AT LEAST OTTO took himself out of the competition !
This was totally unfair to everybody else who DID follow the rules. What kind of competition are you gonna have if someone ELSE “accidentally” does the same thing? Then what? They are gonna cry “foul” if they aren’t extended the same “break” you just handed BETTY… You’ve set a precedence, and now you have to be CONSISTENT with ALL of your decisions from now on, and apply them equally across the board.
SOLUTION? You stated at the end of this week’s show, that no one would be going home this week. But there is NOTHING that says you can’t release BETTY at the BEGINNING of the show, NEXT week ! (Except for the fact that these shows are already taped in advance…)
I’m so terribly disappointed. It just leaves “a bad taste in my mouth…”
posted on November 9, 2006 at 6:02 AM
chuck wrote:
I'm confused.....the whole kitchen is being filmed constantly, so why not just go back, watch some tape, catch the cheaters and toss them out???? Everyone was so quick to crucify Otto in episode two for rules violations (which he tried to defend by saying he got caught up in the moment), and Betty admits to violating the rules and comes up with the brillant excuse of not understanding the challenge, and nothing is really said to her. Its a sad statement for the show when you have to put these "professionals" on probation for breaking rules that kindergarteners would know to follow.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 6:04 AM
PeachPie wrote:
Always enjoy reading your post, Tom. (Caught your pod cast over at Chow.com, too... very enlightening). Thank you for reminding everyone that the judges do not see the footage viewers see in making decisions. Good choice, since judging then becomes all about the food, not the personality.
This episode must have been difficult and disheartening to judge, as it was to view.
Couple things bug me. For one, didn't these contestants watch last season? If they did, there should be no shock, and no complaining, about the challenges. They should have come to the show expecting they'd feed common folk and kids. And know they'd probably have to create a dish with ingredients of unexpected origin.
To me, the whole idea of a top chef is love of food (all food), creating, and (hopefully and ultimately) being madly in love with making dishes that people love to eat.
I was sad to see the orange team fall so far below the mark. And I think it was Carlos's vision that killed it. These aren't just kids, they are kids having to diet. Are you kidding me? If you can make their favorite food and make it low cal and tasty, what would you choose? The last thing I'd lpick is something that even SOUNDS healthy. They've probably been cottage cheesed to death.
Again and again, the competition illustrates one very basic point. Cook for a target audience when you're back in your kitchen. On Top Chef, you have to do more than slice a truffle. You have to know how to make your customer happy, regardless of what the ingredients or who that customer is.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 6:17 AM
Julie wrote:
Tom,
As the director of Camp Glucose in California, I have to say I was shocked watching last night's episode. You are exactly right when you say we trusted the show to keep the meal under the 500 calorie intake and their were children with health problems participating in the program. I will say that working with these children was very hard this summer, but we had a wonderful staff that kept them motivated and really cared about their health.
I, like I'm sure so many other people, really like Betty, but was stunned to see that she added the sugar to her cookie's. For a diabetic, this could cause problems and when a child is diabetic, it's like pulling teeth to keep them eating healthy in the first place. I don't think Betty intentionally cheated, however, without the nutritionist's there to OK the change, she shouldn't have switched the ingredients.
I think the bottom line is and I hoped the episode showed that our children are obese and two million of them have type two diabetes as a result. As parents, we must set the example and eat right and get our kids more active. This generation of children have computers, video games, etc. unlike when I was growing up we had our bicycles and were always outside. I think it was great that the chef's played soccer with the kids during the show, as anyone could see, they had a blast.
We were honored that we were picked for the show and it was a nice change for the kids. It was a long day and very hot, but they were troopers and I think were so well behaved, it made me smile just watching the taping in progress.
You have a great show and are very kind (unlike some other chef shows). Keep up the great work.
Best regards,
Julie
Camp Glucose Director
posted on November 9, 2006 at 6:18 AM
Andrea Cooper wrote:
I found Otto and Betty's transgressions of the rules to be very similar: not intentional, caught up in the moment, not following the rules for whatever reason. Why did Otto go (other than the fact that he "Auf'd" himself,) but Betty gets to stay?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 6:54 AM
Duncan Moore wrote:
Over the past couple of seasons I have enjoyed watching Top Chef, but you have lost me as a regular viewer. Betty cheated. She admitted it and even though she feigned ignorance of the rules, I don't believe her. She should have been sent home immediately ... without question.
Betty as a contestant lacks integrity and unfortunately is a mirror of our society. I expect more from a TV show that I take time to watch.
Integrity is doing the right thing when no one is watching.
Too bad ... I actually liked the show and enjoyed discussing it with my daughter who loves to cook.
DW Moore
posted on November 9, 2006 at 6:59 AM
Vikki Henderson wrote:
When Betty changed the recipie for the merangue cookies she was trying to stay within the guidelines. If she had not done something about them you would have been telling her she should have. Every person that has produced an inedible product so far have been told they shoud have done something about it. That is all she did.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 7:07 AM
Kimberly wrote:
I think that you are so right on. That although we need rules,
sometimes certian rules become out dated. It was once unheard of for a gentleman to enter a building with his hat on.
I think that they still should but men seldom remove them now.
It's a personal statement. I love the idea of fine food being served family frendly.Why not?
This challange elimatation was a bit hairy. Did anyone really cheat? I believe Betty misunderstood, but I am a police officer and ignorance of the law is no excuse. She should have gone home. Don't get me wrong I really like her and I am glad she was spared.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 7:19 AM
Janeyek wrote:
Clarification please! I thought that the camera crew was shooting continously through out each segment of the show and I realize that much was edited out. We clearly saw Betty add the additional sugar which she did admit to on the show. Didn't the camera crew catch the olive oil culprets on film while they were preparing their dishes either that morning or at the camp? I did see that when the nutrionists were there that the oil was measured in a cup. Could Sam have missed that step of the process and just seen the oil in the squirt bottle, missing the measurement aspect? And the viewers totally missed Mia's little "extra" (or was I just dozing during that section). When the issue of changing the recipes was brought up, couldn't the judges call a "time out", give the producers and camera people the problem that they encountered, and review the footage with the judges (much like the NFL referees)? That way there would be proof of what happened.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 7:27 AM
Monalisa Donaldsondon wrote:
Love the show...
This time around the one who erks me is Marisa....
What a $#%^#^$&$&
sorry had to speek my mind...
posted on November 9, 2006 at 7:28 AM
Susan L wrote:
This group of so-called chefs gives off a smell of rancid swamp water. None of them are professional and their culinary skills seem to be lacking. I can't find one that I feel is worthy of being a "Top Chef". Michael is so dirty and unkempt that I would never eat anything he makes and the rest are such prima Donna’s that it is hard to like any of them. Hopefully the competition gets better in future episodes.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 7:45 AM
Lynda I wrote:
Hi Tom,
I looked forward to this particular challenge when it was described. I have had to monitor fat/cholesterol/ caloric intake for many years due to a heart condition. I had hoped to get some creative ideas from the chefs to expand my options. However, that didn't happen. The substitutions that I incorportate are more interesting and appealing than their choices.
What is with these chefs? Do they not listen to instructions? Mia thought a twinkie was an appropriate hors d'oeuvre? A few others appeared to believe the amuse bouche was a dessert option (in spite of the the guest judge's description). Mike is just plain absurd. Since he is obviously homesick, send the guy home.
That said, it appears that favoritism won out.
When poor Otto admitted his mistake, he honorably bowed out. However, "Golden Girl" Betty opened the waterworks when she "realized" her error and was given a pass.
Remeber - "Ignorance is no excuse for the Law."
posted on November 9, 2006 at 7:50 AM
Gail wrote:
Tom -
I must completely agree with you on this 'code' or whatever the chefs seem to have about not sharing violations until the judges table. Why can't they bring things up as they're happening? Does one wait a couple hours before disciplining a child? Unless you yourself are involved as well, there's no earthly reason to wait. Children in a schoolyard tattle less than your chefs, and I'm very disappointed in their antics.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:03 AM
Oliver Kruszka wrote:
I feel like Betty got a pass and that is Mike had been the one altering the recipe, he would have been dismissed.
No evidence? Betty is shown on tape adding sugar, yet Mike is shown on tape saying he doesn't care about the quickfire challenge. How is it that is saw by the judges and not cheating by Betty.
I had much respect for this show and the judges till favoritism clearly reared its head. I will continue to watch this show and pull for the chief I prefer, but it it saddens me to see how this has become more about ratings and television rather than a competition to be the best chief.
O.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:09 AM
Katy D wrote:
Tom, when Otto put the Lychees into the van, knowing he had not paid for them, he was stealing. He then took the high road (after some weaseling) and left the show. It is no different for Betty. When she added the sugar
she knowingly broke the rules and cheated.
She should now take the high road and leave the show. If she truly didn't know it was against the rules it wouldn't have been a big secret. Also, where is Franks big "holier than thou" mouth now? Is he going to give back the
book he won based on his "TEAM" win? That disgusting tirade of his after the Otto issue
is coming back to haunt him.
Tom, you are a very classy man. One of few on the tube who seem to be the dictionary
definition of gentleman. It is a pleasure to watch you.
I need to tell you, there is not one contestant on this years show who has won our support.
(speaking for my neighbors and friends who watch faithfully and ask me to wie the blog) Not one we can say we are rooting for. The feeling is, send them all home and lets get to season 3!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:12 AM
Julie BR wrote:
I wish I could consult two people every time I have a question about something in life -- Judge Judy, and Chef Tom(!). Seriously. I really learn a lot from Tom when I read his blogs and cookbooks -- and I don't even cook. I sincerely wish he played a different sort of role on the tv show, although I can't really describe how I'd like to see that role to play out. I suppose I don't really understand the two hostesses Top Chef has employed -- though they're lovely, I don't see the point of them. Tom, Gail, and a guest judge are all we need on that side of the table, in my opinion.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:26 AM
rachell freshour wrote:
these bunch of so call chef are the most back stabing people out there.Last year tiffany was rude but she was who she was she pretend to be someone else.Marisa is the worst she is like cindy brady and telling on everyone. I still think she should have left instead of Otto she should have not left the store if she knew. I just hope she is not in the finale 3
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:31 AM
Kathie wrote:
If the chefs were not supposed to change their recipes at all, why were suggestions made to the Orange team that they should have fixed their smoothie? If I remember correctly they were asked whether they thought the smoothie was sour and when they said they did find it sour, why didn't they fix it. Was the implication that they should have fixed it when the nutritionists were still there? I am curious to know what the Black team should have done when they discovered that their cookies did not work out they way they expected. Should they have not made them at all? What is the best suggestion for that situation?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:39 AM
Mireille Miller wrote:
Good episode and good judgement on the part of you and the other judges. Things seem much more catty and backstabby this season... but maybe that is how it is edited... wish there were more techniques shown but still such a fun show to watch!
I do have to say I really wish that the cheesecake had won... I really really wanted that recipe...
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:44 AM
JavaJunkie wrote:
Is there some problem with the comments being made on this blog? Have been trying to leave a note for several hours, but nothing appears...
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:44 AM
Jeremy Mahler wrote:
Greetings, Tom -
Thanks for bringing an interesting cooking show to the airwaves that shows more than the efforts of interns supporting a celebrity, first off.
My thoughts on last night's show:
1: I HATE VOICEOVERS. :) See, there are times where the audio makes it very obvious (along with cuts away from the person talking) that audio portions were edited in - either to replace inaudible dialogue or to "fix" what might have been said in candid moments. Whatever the reason, it's annoying as all heck.
2: I watched (much to my embarrassment) Flavor of Love - both seasons. Whenever there was a conflict of "she said / she said", Flav would go straight to the tapes. I am disappointed that you guys weren't willing to do that, or have the producers do it in this case. Cheating is bad enough and should be grounds for immediate dismissal, but when kids are involved...
3: While I find the challenges to be interesting and pretty intense so far, I would love to see more "highbrow" challenges in the beginning. I know, the season's done and in the can - but if there's a third season, please consider that idea. I DO, absolutely, love the junk food and limiting challenges that have happened, but I would like to see them mixed in more, you know?
Thanks again for helping to bring us such a great show, and keeping the quality and entertainment intelligent!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:45 AM
lorraine wrote:
I thought it was a great challenge. It also should've been an eye-opener for Mike in considering his attitude about this competition. I think it proved to demonstrate what his willingness and motivation is in regards to this whole competition.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 8:57 AM
Elia wrote:
Although I can appreciate the difficult moment you had with this elimination challenge, clearly precedent had already been set with Dave's missing 3rd dish in Vegas last season.
With her admission, Betty should've been asked to go.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:08 AM
Diane wrote:
On page 5 Tom states the White team won, but it was the black team. This entire episode, and this season thus far, is solely lacking quality and maturity.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:17 AM
Bob wrote:
I whole heartedly agree with you here Tom, but I'm also left with some questions. When Betty's dish failed ( to crisp up) what were her options? She was on a team, so does she just go with the recipe she knows won't work and bring the team down or change it? As far as i could see there wasn't another option, unless she just didn't submit the dish. which, despite her already winning 2 challenges, may have disqualified her and got her booted off the show. And you're right, the subject of cheating was brought up, but all that was hearsay until Betty, much like Otto, owned up to it and no one ever admitted that they used extra olive oil. Which also brings me to the Otto thing, when i watch the show ( which I've done several times) the 2 women are always pushing the cart, and in the check out lane it looks like the women are there again and maybe Marcel...How come Otto was the only person to realize they may have not paid for the lychees?? Or was he? As far as i could see all he said to Marissa was that he thought that they may have gotten them for free, so i think at best he was a willing partner to whover engineered or misengineered the misappropriation of the lychees. And for some reason Marissa apparently didn't discuss this with anyone until they were back in the studio, and when she did she put it out like Otto had masterminded a theft, which made Elia assume that Otto just stole them or something. Very weird. Also I think that Elia and Marcel are backing each other up because they used to work together, rather than trying to exercise an unbiased judgment when it comes to rating food and group politicing.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:31 AM
Tom wrote:
Tom,
With all due respect... you're a joke! You brutalized Otto, who really wasn't responsible for the store's mistake, into bowing out (with much dignity I might add) but "Bada Bing" Betty flagrantly cheats, AND ADMITS TO IT, but... let me get this straight... everybody gets immunity?! Sorry but your harsh punishment of "Probation" isn't really a punishment at all. This show is like a train wreck, and we all know you can't keep your eyes off of a train wreck which is brilliant brodcasting I guess. I just wish that the judges, mainly YOU, could show a little more objective critiquing rather than favoritism.
Betty's a fake, by the way, and only proved it by cheating... with a smile!
T
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:36 AM
Lorrie wrote:
Tom, you are quite articulate and I agree with your assessments of rules and Wednesday's televised episode. While I believe rules most likely were broken, proving this would be futile. Perhaps sending all who would not out the perpetrators would have been the route to go with. However, you may not have had a 6th or 7th episode. I'll stay tuned, reluctantly. Except for a couple, this group of 'wanabe' chefs do not have what it takes I'm afraid. My 2 cents.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:38 AM
Mark Conley wrote:
I’m curious that now we are into the second season of Top Chef and yet some contestants are still finding the challenges are beneath them. I understood in season one why they might say these things, but is it possible that none of them have seen this show before? Kudos to those who rose to the challenge and made something from nothing. Mike – I’m not sure if I’ll miss you when you’re gone, but I’d like to find out.
It’s interesting how some contestants resemble contestants from season one. Miguel, sloppy and rude, though he was, performed better over all than Mike, who simply lacks passion for the art. His “I don’t care” attitude makes bad TV. Marcel reminds me of the arrogant trust-fund baby with the oversized necktie from season one. Marcel: you have way too much hair to be so pompous. Something’s got to give, be it the snagglepus hairdo or the greater than Thou attitude.
Chef Tom: great show! I don’t like reality shows much, but this is worth watching. You’re firm, sometimes harsh but you command the respect of your players. Last night’s show was a tough call, but you did the right thing. Keep up the good work and I’ll keep watching.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:41 AM
dennis wrote:
One of the problems is that it was a TEAM challenge. If everyone on a team pitches in and does an equal amount. How can you then pick one person out of that team and send them home?
Very poor episode. The producers should be embarrassed.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:43 AM
mary wrote:
the judges were correct in thier decision to not send anyone home. while watching the show, i really didn't feel that betty had done anything wrong in taking out one ingredient and adding another, as she seemed to honestly TRY to stay under the 500 calorie rule. if there was such a 'absolutely no changes are to be made' rule, it didn't show up on the episode. i thought they had to stay under 500 calories and that the nutrtionists were there to help the teams achieve that. it seemed to have been one of those 'you should have understood rules' and not 'here it is in writing' rules. maybe i am wrong and we just didn't see it on the televised episode. i give betty credit for fessing up and shame on those who used the squirt bottles but didn't have enough guts to say it - especially after betty had been honest enough to own up to her mistake.
i was disappointed in josie for stroking betty on the arm to comfort her in front of tom but flipping out when the group was back at the apartment.
and more kudos to otto for taking the high road and bowing out for his mistake...i can't wait to see the reunion episode when all of this comes up!!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:48 AM
THERESA wrote:
She needs to go.
Here is a pastry chef, that has failed not 1, but 2 dessert challanges. What does that say?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:54 AM
kathy k wrote:
I would just like to say..after seeing show 4 about the camp for kids.. I would of sent Mia Gaines Home ,what was she thinking? she has kids ..talk about a SORE LOOSE'ER ,that's the one that should of gone Home!! I was very disappointed in the show Last night.. that Red and Orange team some of those people should of gone Home too...talk about Back-stabbing.. It was awlfull to see that.. Please Send Mia,Micheal,Marcel,Josie,and Marisa Packing ,GO HOME!! they are going to Ruin the show..I have not been Inpress with these people at all.. they are all Back Stabbing.. they are Not Team Player's.. the show 4 was just awlfull last Night..Mia and Micheal Need to Go Home.. and I would of sent Marisa Home on show 3..she is just as bad.. good luck..
posted on November 9, 2006 at 9:58 AM
stephanie wrote:
hey tom--
wow! what an episode last night. although the quickfire was reminiscent of last year's convenience store challenge, my friend and I still enjoyed it. I loved the elimination challenge given. I try to watch my caloric intake and I am always trying to find new ways to make low calorie food taste better, so this challenge definitely gave me some new ideas. what surprised my friend and I is how off base a lot of the chefs were. I think the black team, albeit betty's sugar slip, were the clear winners of this challenge. they made kid-friendly food that was healthy and what the kids wanted. what kid wants to eat skewers?? I was surprised some didn't make hamburgers, mac and cheese, chicken fingers, even tacos-- all kid-friendly food that can be made in such a way that is healthy and low in calories.
one thing that has upset me about the show is that no one ever seems to say anything until they're at the judges' table! if they noticed squeeze bottles on the line, why didn't they say anything then?? they know that the judges won't be able to review the tapes. if they want the show to run fairly and as smoothly as possible, they need to speak up, even if it may hurt their chances of winning.
anyway, tom, this season has been awesome. keep it up!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:02 AM
Roman wrote:
Never know if my postings show up on this but I still participate to at least vent. It's one of those things that can be marked up to "if I didn't care I wouldn't say anything". Well I do care so hopefully this makes it. Chef Colicchio, always enjoy seeing your passion and genuine concern for the integrity of the show and for the trade in general. That being said, I was really not happy with the outcome of the show last night. Betty clearly switched from Splenda to sugar and added more of it to top it off. That is clearly a no no given the very clear directive of the challenge. You reaction to this news was interesting. Clearly, you were surprised and I'm guessing that you were not happy. Ultimately, Betty squirmed her way through a tearful "I didn't know any better" and ultimately did not display a high level of integrity.
Also felt as though Sam and Mia were being punished for bringing it up in the first place. Now...looking back to "Ottogate" or "lycheegate" one might expect the same process or handling of a similar matter. Mia clearly heard Otto say that he thought that they got the lychees for free while outside the store and didn't do anything about it at that time but clearly felt obligated to let God and country hear about it when back at the kitchen and in front of the judges. Does her lack of dealing with the situation at the grocery store mean that everyone should have received a general warning and have been told that their actions would be monitored more closely? Well, we all know that Otto was called out on the floor for it and clearly was the focus of the scrutiny. Like what he did or didn't do, he stepped up the the plate and said that he was wrong. Betty should have been treated with the same scrutiny and focus that Otto received. It feels as though she got a "get out of jail free" card and kind of sort of got a light slap on the wrist.
PLEASE TREAT EVERYONE EQUALLY!
Love watching the show every week and looking forward to the next one...
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:08 AM
Donna Knight wrote:
What I find amazing is that Betty owned her mistake, and she was blasted for it by her competitors. As Sam had pointed out, she wasn't the ONLY cheater, and yet the others were throwing knives (figuratively) at her, and missing the over all point of the cheating. I admire Betty for being the only one who took responsibility for her actions. Especially since, when Tom confronted the whole group, he mentioned the Olive Oil and NOT the sugar. She is a stand up person and I truly hope she does well in the challenge.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:13 AM
suzanne wrote:
I think it's very underhanded to wait until the judges table to point fingers. If they think something is wrong they owe common courtesy to the person to say something! Mia-I am very disappointed that you didn't bother to tell Betty that you named her specifically=bad form girl! Why can't everyone just act like professional adults. Betty-you are great & I hope you don't shed more tears for this. They don't have a backbone!
I think this also applies to the lychees. Marissa heard him at the store but waited to tell Tom much later. Why not speak up then so it could be taken care of? I know-because she wanted to use it to her advantage. The childish 'under her breath' is silly! Otto should not have bowed out & Marissa should have gone home! I hope they realize how disappointed the judges were & LEARN from this! GROW UP!!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:17 AM
Ayanna Avant wrote:
I agree that something should be said when the action is occurring. It's soooooo easy to start pointing blame at others when you're standing on the chopping block. What's worst is when the team reconvenes, no one wants to own up to the fact that they snitched another chef out. If you have a problem with how another chef is behaving, address that issue right then and there. Don't wait until you're in front of the judges and your butt is on the line. I wonder if Mia or Sam would have said anything if their team won. Just because his team made the dumbest mistake by using ground turkey breast instead of extra lean ground turkey to make rock balls, I mean meatballs, shouldn't make you a sore looser. The same goes for Mia. Low cal doesn't mean flavorless...and she has kids. She should know better.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:22 AM
Ted wrote:
Tom,
Was pleasantly suprised and aghast by this episode! The fast fire challenge was a stroke of genius! Kudos. What really shocked me was the shows ending!. I can't belive you allowed Betty and her team to remain winners when clearly she cheated . One only needs to review the tape to see her original recipe was nothing like what she served. Given the whole OTTO situation I am suprised that you and the producers did'nt throw her off for her actions. I did not believe for one minute she was confused by the rules. Greed and a constant need for attention is what drove her to her actions, and given that her team members allowed her to alter the recipe with no challenge to her, speaks volumes as to how far we as humans will go to win.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:25 AM
Donny T. wrote:
Tom, I like your attitude and the way you try to look past things that really don't matter to get to the ones that do.Keep up the good work.
Thanks,
Donny
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:29 AM
Nan wrote:
I think Betty understood rules perfectly.She had to make cookies wk,she didn't care how,she had to win.
The chef this season do not have the seasoning or the talent of last seasons chef in my opinion.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:30 AM
Art wrote:
I agree with Tom. Why aren't the contestants speaking up at the time of an incendent. I think this makes them just as guilty as the cheater, or person making the mistake.
This group of candidates seems much more willing to turn on each other then first season. I am just disappointed with this group so far.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:33 AM
rn wrote:
It seems like you chose the fairest way to go given the overall circumstances, but how about letting them know if they suspect cheating, & don't mention it when you make your rounds earlier during the cooking, it's not fair game at the judges table? It doesn't seem right that they are willing to keep their mouths shut until their heads are on the chopping block. If they won't speak up while it's going on, then it shouldn't come into play at all.
Maybe they are all doing it & don't really want it noticed unless it is of some benefit for themselves? I'm not sure if I think that or not, but it sure could be percieved that way.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:34 AM
Lil wrote:
This challenge was poorly conceived by the producers and judges. Why not spring for the nutritionists on day 2? As Tom said, chef's are often tweaking recipes and after having their original recipes measured and tested they should have had the option to adjust or nudge closer to the 500 calorie limit if it helps the food. Was Betty wrong - yes, but given the entire situation I think the judges made the right decision to keep everyone this week.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:36 AM
R. Dower wrote:
This epsiode was a farce. Betty should have definitely been the one to go. She clearly broke the rules. Is it because the judges think she is so personable? I personal think she is a phony and now she showed her true colros with altering her cookie receipe and pretending to not know that it was against the rules. When Marcel "cheated" he at least had the decency to admit he was wrong and resigned.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:38 AM
Steve wrote:
Chef:
I think you are spot in regarding the cheating/seeking an edge being symptomatic of conditions in society at large. Equally saddening is the tendency to not want to point out cheating; only the spotlight of denouncement will end such practices.
The problem is not merely with blatant cheating: I doubt Betty knew what she was doing was a violation of the rules and conditions. The problem is inattentiveness to rules, not thinking about rules, and (consequently) not caring about whether a particular action is allowed. Betty's crime was apathy, not malice.
(I would mention, however, that the lychee incident was brought out before the contestants reached the judges' table, and not at the eleventh hour.)
I doubt the outcome would have been greatly affected: the kids wanted pizza, the pizza was good, and there was no indication the pizza was involved in foul play.
Your irritation and annoyance came through on the show, was entirely appropriate, and (in this corner of the world) completely appreciated.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:38 AM
Edward Odell wrote:
A fair decision, if ultimately unsatisfying for the purposes of TV.
I can honeslty say I was suprised. One tends to look for a villan. It seems inconsistent that Otto had to bow out over a supposedly purloined (but unused) ingredient whereas Betty has been given a pass over a fairly clear violation of the rules of the challenge.
Love the show. Keep it coming!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:45 AM
addicted wrote:
i don't understand why you cannot just go back to the tape and check who did what?
surely, there are countless hours of footage we don't see, and i'm sure that there was extensive coverage of what went on in the kitchen during the actual challenge (day2).
it seems like a cop-out to not send anyone home just because there were many guilty parties. you're right people did not speak up about indiscretions until it actually affected them. but this was exactly what happened with the lychees!!
and i'm sorry but i don't buy betty's teary-eyed explanation of "i didn't know". what was the point of the nutritionists if the chefs could just wing it and assume it was under 500?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:47 AM
MIke wrote:
I have been really enjoying this new season. It has taken a week or two to get to know the new players, and in some instances, my opinions have changed about them, but this is inevitable. I was suprised that noone was sent home, although I have to agree with your decision based on the circumstances. It was a fair move. I have my thoughts as to the top three, but I will wait to see how the story unfolds. Keep up the great work!
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:48 AM
Kelly Lynn wrote:
I am so amazed and entertained by the Top Chef show. I would love to participate in a competition of this nature, I am not a pro chef but I am creative in the kitchen! Some of the dishes are mindblowing! Tom, you're so hip! I look forward to every episode. Bravo TV has really brought some excellent interactive shows to the table. Respectfully, KLK
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:48 AM
kath k wrote:
Mr Tom C. and Gail S. Here's your Winner's , Please Keep them on..Betty,Frank,Carlos,Elia,cliff,Sam,Ilan. Oh Please send the Rest of the Back stabbing so call Chiefs HOME... Starting with show 5..Mia gaines,and Micheal Midgley, those two Really Need to be Sent HOME ..Josie smith next Marcel and Marisa, she should of gone Home on show 2.. it's a disappointment in these shows... the Back-stabbing and finger pointing efc... these people are NOT Chiefs.. they haven't got a clue... kathy k.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:49 AM
Jules wrote:
To be honest, I was disappointed in the "loosing "chef's reactions last night. As Chef Tom stated, why not deal with the problem head on, when the action is taking place, as opposed to when you are mad at being at the bottom. Bettty was taken to task for changing her recipe, but I think that Betty, although wrong, really did not understand the rules. (The changes she said she made would not have made the team total more than 500 cal.) She came clean, when others, stayed silent... And why, with all the cameras, can't the producers identify the olive oil bandit(s)?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:50 AM
deborah Wills wrote:
mac and cheese isn't a soul food dish, it's american
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:53 AM
Sharon wrote:
Tom,
Reading your comments this morning, I was surprised to learn that the Chefs are not taped while preparing the food for the challenges. Although I believe in the honor system, in some instances, it just does not work. For example, Mia happily reporting Betty for changing her cookie receipe, while not admitting to her own actions. Or Betty claiming to misunderstand the challenge. Betty is the first to attack someone else'e mistake and clearly thinks she is judge and jury!
It's horrible that Mia turned Betty in without admitting to her own actions. I guess this is the drama that makes the show!
I understand the wisdom of your decision to not send anyone home for the 500 calorie meal fiasco. That was the only fair way to handle the situation. The judges must feel so let down, I know I do. I was lQQking for more character in these people.
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:55 AM
TChef-Fan wrote:
I was so disappointed in this weeks show, it was clear that Betty did not follow the rules of the challenge yet she wasn't sent home when it was discovered? Intergrity seems to be the missing ingredient in season 2. In season 1 there were some personality confilicts yet as a whole it was all about talent and leadership. Betty not only lacks intergrity but also respect for her fellow competitors. Tearing someone to sheds because they "got on your nerves" was self centered and egotistical not to mention the lanuage she used was unacceptable. I feel no one was sent home on this episode because without a doubt it would have to be Betty. Leaving me to wonder, is this show about being "Top Chef" or a popularity contest?
posted on November 9, 2006 at 10:57 AM
Kim wrote:
I have crohn's disease