French Laundry Dinner (Lots of Pics)
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,571
Portion size is definitely not an issue given the volume of food. I was so full by the end of the meal that I felt sick to my stomach. And I did not clean my plate for each course.
#33
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,449
Agree
Agree. Lots of food. Don't make the mistake of eating too much bread in the beginning, thinking that there will not be enough food. U won't be able to finish the good stuff if you eat too much bread.
#34
Join Date: Jan 2007
Programs: UA Silv, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold,
Posts: 154
My wife keeps telling me that and I keep proving her wrong. Of course the bathroom scale gets the last laugh...
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,224
But the 3 star restaurants were mainly based upon the experience, not really the food. The luxurious chairs, decadent settings, luxurious table cloths, fancy tables, fancy room, after dinner drinks and petit fours in the 'sitting room' instead of at the table, fresh flowers that probably cost a fortune, etc. These were the things that made it a 3 star vs 2. I think the food of a Michelin 3 star, however, really was not that much better than a 2 star. Personally, I think FL would be a 2.5 star (not possible, I know) if it were in France. FL's food is 3-star, but the experience is not luxurious enough to be a full 3 star. But I certainly do not think that French Michelin stars are 'far greater' than FL, in my opinion; FL easily is on par with many of these places (whether it's worth the money or not is a whole other issue).
Luxury in Michelin restaurant ratings is denoted by crossed knives and forks, with the most luxurious restaurants receiving 5 - although, there is a cross-over in that the top restaurants must have a minimum degree of luxury. So, for example, Ubuntu could probably never achieve 2* with its current set-up. But the FL could...
#39
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,449
3 vs 2
As I understand the Michelin ratings, one of the primary differences between 3* and 2* is reliability, rather than luxury. A 2* restaurant with food every bit as good as that at a 3* restaurant might receive the lower accolade because there is the occasional less-than-excellent dish, or even less-than-excellent day. Such is not acceptable in a 3* restaurant.
Luxury in Michelin restaurant ratings is denoted by crossed knives and forks, with the most luxurious restaurants receiving 5 - although, there is a cross-over in that the top restaurants must have a minimum degree of luxury. So, for example, Ubuntu could probably never achieve 2* with its current set-up. But the FL could...
Luxury in Michelin restaurant ratings is denoted by crossed knives and forks, with the most luxurious restaurants receiving 5 - although, there is a cross-over in that the top restaurants must have a minimum degree of luxury. So, for example, Ubuntu could probably never achieve 2* with its current set-up. But the FL could...
Based upon my limited experience, I would say that FL is not the "most luxurious" experience. I think Fleur de Lys, Dining Room at Ritz Carlton SF, and even Masa's have a much more "luxurious" and opulent feel than FL.
I agree about the crossed knives & forks. I have seen some with 5 of these symbols and no Michelin stars at all.
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,571
As I understand the Michelin ratings, one of the primary differences between 3* and 2* is reliability, rather than luxury. A 2* restaurant with food every bit as good as that at a 3* restaurant might receive the lower accolade because there is the occasional less-than-excellent dish, or even less-than-excellent day. Such is not acceptable in a 3* restaurant.
#42
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,075
I'm glad you enjoyed it, OP, but had I been there, I'd have been thinking to myself at these prices, I could have about 10 dinners at my favorite Thai, Vietnamese and Mexican restaurants, and I'd enjoy each such dinner more than this one. Looks like the French Laundry can do without my patronage, though.
#43
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,449
What if you don't want ethnic food, t hough?
I'm glad you enjoyed it, OP, but had I been there, I'd have been thinking to myself at these prices, I could have about 10 dinners at my favorite Thai, Vietnamese and Mexican restaurants, and I'd enjoy each such dinner more than this one. Looks like the French Laundry can do without my patronage, though.
However, I agree with you that even if you wanted non-ethnic food, you could eat very well for much less. Just going to a relatively simple place such as Cafe des Amis, Chez papa, or Chapeau would get you a very nice french meal at 1/5 the price of FL.
#44
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,075
In places like New York City, Chicago and here in the S.F. Bay Area, there is an abundance of insanely great restaurants. I get how someone would want to experience first-hand a famous restaurant like French Laundry, Chez Panisse, etc., but if your first choice is booked up, just look around and you'll easily find an outstanding alternative.
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,571
In places like New York City, Chicago and here in the S.F. Bay Area, there is an abundance of insanely great restaurants. I get how someone would want to experience first-hand a famous restaurant like French Laundry, Chez Panisse, etc., but if your first choice is booked up, just look around and you'll easily find an outstanding alternative.