The New Zagat’s Out…
…and wait till you see what it says.
Posted by: Kathryn Robinson on Jan 20, 2010 at 08:00AM
6 Comments
You know the Zagat guides? Those compilations of diner reviews of restaurants in cities across the globe? The new Seattle edition hits the streets this month, and here’s which restaurants the 3,165 contributors selected.
You may be surprised.
In the Top Food category, The Herbfarm logged in highest, earning 29 points out of 30 (and highest in the Top Service category to boot) with comments like “once-in-a-lifetime dining experience.” No disagreement here.
Second place in Top Food was a five-way tie: Rover’s, Cafe Juanita, Sitka and Spruce, Salumi, and Bakery Nouveau.
Yep, great food all. (Where are Cascina Spinasse? Corson Building? Poppy? All too new for this edition’s deadline, apparently.)
But Crush logging in after 21 other restaurants in a fourth-place berth? Tied with goofy breakfast joints like Glo’s and Maltby Cafe?
And what the heck are the stunning Boat Street Cafe and Tilth doing earning mere 25’s for food?
And only Dahlia Lounge of all the Tom Douglas restaurants listed in the upper echelons for service—Douglas’ most winning calling card—and only then at a 23-of-30 rating? (These contributors apparently preferred the fancy napkin-snapping routines of places like The Georgian and The Salish.)
As it reliably does, probably through overrepresentation of trend-happy foodies among its contributors, this edition of Zagats winds up vaulting perfectly fine places into a stratospheric region they haven’t yet earned. I’m thinking of Elemental @ Gasworks with its unmerited 26 for food, 23 for service.
What do you think of the new Zagat?
Tags: Restaurants, Restaurant News, Zagat
Zagat is a dying model. Crowdsourced reviews like Urbanspoon (and even Yelp, despite all the crazies) are far more accurate reflections of the actual quality of a restaurant because they are the aggregate of hundreds of customers’ experiences. Yes, there is the problem of self-selection in user reviews, but the Zagat reviewers are neither perfect nor fully-objective either.
Just as sites like Travelocity can give you a more accurate picture of a hotel experience based on thousands of user reviews, I think the “single expert” model of restaurant reviewing’s days are numbered.
But, SeattleFoodGeek, if crowdsourced reviews are the way of the future then why wouldn’t Zagat be sitting pretty with its over 3,000 contributors? Of course just like Yelp—-that’s 3,000 nameless faceless who-the-heck-are-they-anyway contributors. Call me a “single expert”—but I’d sooner trust a source I know.
Yelp=evil
Crowdsourced reviews are simply recollections of an experience, not a judgement of quality, or in any way a critique. While a handful of those contributing to sites like Yelp may have the experience and base of knowledge to make a quality based assessment (or believe they do), the vast majority do not. This is not a value statement against the general dining public. Each and every persons experience is valid to them because it is theirs, and ultimately the result to the entire complicated equation of the restaurant. But experiencing something, however frequent and varried the experiences are, does not an expert make.
Just as bloggers will not replace paid critics with equity, so crowdsourced reviews and popularity votes like Zagat will never truly reflect the quality of a restaurant.
Michelin, with its rigorous training for agents is on the right track, empowering those who make pass judgment with a knowlege base to rightfully make critical verdict.
While every system has drawbacks, and benefits, and, if I remember correctly from high school, popularity certainly does have a high value of it’s own, as a restaurant professional, I respect a system with a high level of accountability and a respect towards educating those sent to appraise the merit myself and my peers, and the quality of our work.
Dana: Your point is as great as your desserts.
I’m wondering where Paseo is on this list.