Is any rating system in the Twin Cities worse than the Restaurant Rater on Msp Magazine?
According to the editors at Msp mag, the 5-8 club merits an 87, and the rating for Alma is 87.4.
How the F@CK do they figure that? They base the 5-8 rating on two scores. The first from Mpls.St.Paul Magazine “Heritage Score” score of 90. What the f@ck is a heritage score? Seemingly nothing more than some random assessment by who knows. The second is based on a review by James Norton in 2008. As far as James Norton, love his blog, but if you put a big ass plate of messy food in front of the guy you’ll have a friend for life. Based on his writing, his palate doesn’t exactly tilt toward complexity, subtlety, or sophistication. When you need something on a stick, he’s your man, but Piccolo has a 2.5 star rating by his blogs’ standards. Having said that, what Msp does is read reviews and determine what they think the reviewer would have awarded as a score. Say what?
Alma is rated at 87.4, of course no “Heritage Score”, the reviews also include a low score from random and silly blog that has very little if any credibility in reviewing, that award Alma a 70. What The F@ck?
Why do some reviews get included with some restos and not others? One can only assume that the editors feel that 5-8 is essentially on par with Alma, and so they weigh the scores to reflect that. It’s an affront to intelligent thought, heck it’s even an affront to stupid thinkin’. But worse it is a veiled way for editors to say what they think without having the balls to say it.
I expect more from Stephanie Marsh, the current food editor. She didn’t start it, but she continues it. I suppose you can argue that fewer and fewer read Msp to get real food info, there are far more credible sources these days. But in a recent article Andrew Zimmern writes about how hard the resto business is, it certainly isn’t made any easier with the sort of ridiculous shit that Msp hangs out there with the “Restaurant Rater“.