I don't think we did this week. It seemed to be very close on the scores and I do actually believe that this one could have gone either way.
I agree, and I wouldn't have been too surprised if Richard's main had tipped the balance in his favour.
As I also mentioned in an earlier post, I could see some of the previous weeks' judges putting Will through instead of Richard as he only lost out because Marcus penalised him for having a humour-failure.
This has been a constant problem hasn't it? The same way we lost the cowboy pie. Maybe they should consider restructuring GBM so that it is dish orientated rather than menu.
It's been discussed and argued over for years about the format. It's two competitions in one.
The Great British Menu at the final banquet is made up from the menus that made it to the final.
The standout problem here is that there are many excellent dishes that are dismissed at the heat stages.
A possibility could be to judge the dishes individually and have the top three go through.
You could have four categories to judge the dish awarding a maximum of 5 points in each.
Taste
Execution
Presentation
Brief
So a dish could have a maximum score of 20 points. The top three from each course go through to the final. The final menu is chosen from the winning dishes.
good idea. Maybe they feel that people would lose interest if there wasn't clear winner each week though. I don't think so myself. People who watch this just want to see great dishes go through. If it was structured the way you suggest, the final menu would be the best possible menu, rather than the best possible menu that could be created by the chefs that got through the heats.
Im dissapointed that given the comedy brief,we have yet to see Pru munching on a chocolate penis or Matthew biting a cherry nipple off a giant pair of sugar breasts when the desserts come out
Im dissapointed that given the comedy brief,we have yet to see Pru munching on a chocolate penis or Matthew biting a cherry nipple off a giant pair of sugar breasts when the desserts come out
Not very likely in an early evening show though is it?
You could have four categories to judge the dish awarding a maximum of 5 points in each.
Taste
Execution
Presentation
Brief
So a dish could have a maximum score of 20 points. The top three from each course go through to the final. The final menu is chosen from the winning dishes.
I like this idea too, degsyhufc. We've lost too many good dishes and had put through too many dodgy ones, or those which haven't met the brief, at the expense of putting through a chef's entire menu all at once.
I
A possibility could be to judge the dishes individually and have the top three go through.
You could have four categories to judge the dish awarding a maximum of 5 points in each.
Taste
Execution
Presentation
Brief
So a dish could have a maximum score of 20 points. The top three from each course go through to the final. The final menu is chosen from the winning dishes.
I do think that would be a better format than the current one, as the emphasis would be on making sure the best dishes went through to the banquet. To judge on a chef's menu, when it isn't one chef's menu going to the banquet, really doesn't make much sense!
However, I'm going to nitpick!
My concern is that judges would get confused if the had four criteria for each dish! Let's face it, they struggle with two! Taste and execution could be confused, and are certainly very closely linked, so if someone overcooked (for example) scallops, the execution and taste would suffer. On the other hand, perhaps that would be a good thing!
The other concern (if I understand your format correctly) is that the judges would be scoring from memory; not just comparing dishes on the same day, which I think would be a bit unfair. They'd have to decide if a dish they tasted one week was slightly better or slightly worse than one they tasted weeks earlier (when they had a bit of a sniffle and were in a bad mood!). There would also be a temptation to award "middling" marks early in the competition to "reserve" high scores in case something stunning came along.
Obviously, it wouldn't be fair to have a fourth guest judge either as they wouldn't have tasted the previous submissions ... although I have to say that as the comedy judges don't seem to be judging on comedy, I don't see the point of having them on the panel!
However, I do agree it's time for a revamp. My initial thought is that for each dish, the top two should be put through to Friday's judging.
The judges would still have two examples of each dish (and they'd be the best two), and they'd be comparing them side by side. What happened in previous weeks, or what they'd get to see in the following weeks, wouldn't matter. They could, if they wanted, still have "guest" judges.
Each week, the winning "menu" would be made up of that week's best dishes ... not that it would make any difference in truth, as each week's "winning menu" is meaningless anyway!!
You could, of course, still lose excellent dishes, but even in an extreme case (where the best two [e.g.} starters in the whole competition appeared in the same week) you could only ever lose the second best overall.
No it's because the audience for Friday editions of pretty much every weekday show are always lower than Mon-Thu. Some folks have a life and venture out.
I know what you mean but I think most people have Sky+ or Freeview+ and series links these days.
I usually watch later if I go out (and skip all the boring bits.)
I used to look forward to the Friday but this year it's seems predictable. Also I don't like them knowing what chef cooked what beforehand.
Agreed with the opinion on Jim/Vic; and he came out with some good one liners. It's also been a better week as the chefs have been less of the 'handbags at dawn' types making snide remarks at each other.
One point about this series though; Peyton made a crack about Fort's 'medication wearing off' - I just want to know what he's on - he's been almost entirely positive and complimentary this series rather than the constant drone of displeasure he usually is.
I enjoyed this week, I really liked the way Marcus kept stressing the importance of the brief, I wish he had been marking the last few weeks.
I didn't think I was going to like Daniel as I thought he was a bit intense & desperate last year but I actually liked him this week & was glad he got through.
I can't say I like the idea of Richard's main course, guinea fowl cooked in chef's breath! Ewwwww nasty.
Also, I always thought Vic's real name was pronounced 'Moyer' as opposed to 'Mwaah' the way the voice over woman said it?
I'm still in love with Michael's goat dish & haven't seen anything to challenge it yet
I enjoyed this week, I really liked the way Marcus kept stressing the importance of the brief, I wish he had been marking the last few weeks.
I didn't think I was going to like Daniel as I thought he was a bit intense & desperate last year but I actually liked him this week & was glad he got through.
I can't say I like the idea of Richard's main course, guinea fowl cooked in chef's breath! Ewwwww nasty.
Also, I always thought Vic's real name was pronounced 'Moyer' as opposed to 'Mwaah' the way the voice over woman said it?
I'm still in love with Michael's main & haven't seen anything to challenge it yet
I had a discussion about this with my partner last night, I also thought Moir was pronounced Moyer but I would guess that the Mwaar pronunciation is similar to the french Noir = Nwaar (pointless trivia - there's a famous fertility grave/shrine in Paris of a journalist called Victor Noir). But I would never have pronounced it like that if I was reading it.
Definitely found Daniel less irritating this year too.
I missed it last night, just wondering who went through and when do we find out who is doing what dish for the banquet and when the banquet is on?
Sorry for all the questions, it's just that comic relief is tonight, so surely the banquet would be on this week?
I missed it last night, just wondering who went through and when do we find out who is doing what dish for the banquet and when the banquet is on?
Sorry for all the questions, it's just that comic relief is tonight, so surely the banquet would be on this week?
I think there is one more week of regionals (Wales with judging chef Jeremy Lee) and then perhaps the finals and the banquet are being shown the following week? Have a feeling I read somewhere that the series was on until the end of March
This week was my favourite to watch so far. it was a joy to see the chefs (and the Judge) to do away with the fake competitive angst, embrace the brief and actually focus on the food. There was genuine effort on only the food in the kitchen this week, and it was a pleasure to watch.
(Thought Marcus had clearly had some of that 60% proof "water" the Judges had when they were giggling over nan's china and the Titanic.... but it was great.) Got to see Marcus in a far more positive light (as opposed to last year when I thought the editing did him down slightly), someone who was there for the food and who seemed to actually apply the brief. It was a relief to see that someone, somewhere was thinking about the food and the brief. To be honest, I'd have ousted some of the other finalists and put both these chefs through.
I agree, that the goat main is still the front runner - but Daniel's attention to detail, clear brilliance and absolute dedication to any task is a joy to watch and inspiring to anyone.
As I said, this week, I was pleased to see a proper focus on the competition and people properly competing like it meant something. I just wish it had all been like this
I can tell I've enjoyed this week as I've felt far less inclined to invade this thread and make sarky comments.
My thoughts on Mr Clifford:
First saw him a few years ago competing against Glynn and thought he was an arrogant knob.
My opinion remained steady until last year when I could see how much the competition meant and what he was prepared to do to win.
Final opinion? He's still arrogant. But he's good.
He's also learned from mistakes, listened to advice and nobody puts more thought and effort into all sides of the competition than he does.
He's not a bad guy. I wish him well.
I can tell I've enjoyed this week as I've felt far less inclined to invade this thread and make sarky comments.
My thoughts on Mr Clifford:
First saw him a few years ago competing against Glynn and thought he was an arrogant knob.
My opinion remained steady until last year when I could see how much the competition meant and what he was prepared to do to win.
Final opinion? He's still arrogant. But he's good.
He's also learned from mistakes, listened to advice and nobody puts more thought and effort into all sides of the competition than he does.
He's not a bad guy. I wish him well.
Totally agree - have started reading his twitter chat @midsummerchef (and some of the others) and he seems much nicer than the TV edit portrays. Good banter between a number of the competitors on this
Enjoyed Jim Moir/Vic Reeves on the panel last night as he actually did critique the food properly and question how each dish met the brief.
I completely disagree. Why did he think a gag about a hospice was funny ??...Where does he think the money goes ?? What could be more charitable than a hospice for heaven's sake !
Boorish, unpleasant and offensive . He was just about the worst..which is not saying much. The complete unfunniness of the comedians has been yet another flaw in this series. Well done to Pru, Matthew and Oliver for their genuine, unforced good humour.
The editing of the judges laughing is terrible. Maybe there is something wrong with the majority of people in this thread but we were more than surprised at the judges laughing and joking at what they were presented with.
Comments
I agree, and I wouldn't have been too surprised if Richard's main had tipped the balance in his favour.
As I also mentioned in an earlier post, I could see some of the previous weeks' judges putting Will through instead of Richard as he only lost out because Marcus penalised him for having a humour-failure.
good idea. Maybe they feel that people would lose interest if there wasn't clear winner each week though. I don't think so myself. People who watch this just want to see great dishes go through. If it was structured the way you suggest, the final menu would be the best possible menu, rather than the best possible menu that could be created by the chefs that got through the heats.
If it wasn't for this thread I would probably just watch the Friday episode.
I could actually see it being condensed into hour long episodes for each region. One per night or week, or Tuesday & Wed etc.
But just cut out all the bollocks and have an edit that describes the dishes and shows them being cook, prepared, presented and judged.
Taste
Execution
Presentation
Brief
So a dish could have a maximum score of 20 points. The top three from each course go through to the final. The final menu is chosen from the winning dishes.
I like this idea too, degsyhufc. We've lost too many good dishes and had put through too many dodgy ones, or those which haven't met the brief, at the expense of putting through a chef's entire menu all at once.
I do think that would be a better format than the current one, as the emphasis would be on making sure the best dishes went through to the banquet. To judge on a chef's menu, when it isn't one chef's menu going to the banquet, really doesn't make much sense!
However, I'm going to nitpick!
My concern is that judges would get confused if the had four criteria for each dish! Let's face it, they struggle with two! Taste and execution could be confused, and are certainly very closely linked, so if someone overcooked (for example) scallops, the execution and taste would suffer. On the other hand, perhaps that would be a good thing!
The other concern (if I understand your format correctly) is that the judges would be scoring from memory; not just comparing dishes on the same day, which I think would be a bit unfair. They'd have to decide if a dish they tasted one week was slightly better or slightly worse than one they tasted weeks earlier (when they had a bit of a sniffle and were in a bad mood!). There would also be a temptation to award "middling" marks early in the competition to "reserve" high scores in case something stunning came along.
Obviously, it wouldn't be fair to have a fourth guest judge either as they wouldn't have tasted the previous submissions ... although I have to say that as the comedy judges don't seem to be judging on comedy, I don't see the point of having them on the panel!
The judges would still have two examples of each dish (and they'd be the best two), and they'd be comparing them side by side. What happened in previous weeks, or what they'd get to see in the following weeks, wouldn't matter. They could, if they wanted, still have "guest" judges.
Each week, the winning "menu" would be made up of that week's best dishes ... not that it would make any difference in truth, as each week's "winning menu" is meaningless anyway!!
You could, of course, still lose excellent dishes, but even in an extreme case (where the best two [e.g.} starters in the whole competition appeared in the same week) you could only ever lose the second best overall.
I know what you mean but I think most people have Sky+ or Freeview+ and series links these days.
I usually watch later if I go out (and skip all the boring bits.)
I used to look forward to the Friday but this year it's seems predictable. Also I don't like them knowing what chef cooked what beforehand.
One point about this series though; Peyton made a crack about Fort's 'medication wearing off' - I just want to know what he's on - he's been almost entirely positive and complimentary this series rather than the constant drone of displeasure he usually is.
My comment was made very much with tongue in cheek.
Would that be beef or cod?
I enjoyed this week, I really liked the way Marcus kept stressing the importance of the brief, I wish he had been marking the last few weeks.
I didn't think I was going to like Daniel as I thought he was a bit intense & desperate last year but I actually liked him this week & was glad he got through.
I can't say I like the idea of Richard's main course, guinea fowl cooked in chef's breath! Ewwwww nasty.
Also, I always thought Vic's real name was pronounced 'Moyer' as opposed to 'Mwaah' the way the voice over woman said it?
I'm still in love with Michael's goat dish & haven't seen anything to challenge it yet
I had a discussion about this with my partner last night, I also thought Moir was pronounced Moyer but I would guess that the Mwaar pronunciation is similar to the french Noir = Nwaar (pointless trivia - there's a famous fertility grave/shrine in Paris of a journalist called Victor Noir). But I would never have pronounced it like that if I was reading it.
Definitely found Daniel less irritating this year too.
Sorry for all the questions, it's just that comic relief is tonight, so surely the banquet would be on this week?
I think there is one more week of regionals (Wales with judging chef Jeremy Lee) and then perhaps the finals and the banquet are being shown the following week? Have a feeling I read somewhere that the series was on until the end of March
(Thought Marcus had clearly had some of that 60% proof "water" the Judges had when they were giggling over nan's china and the Titanic.... but it was great.) Got to see Marcus in a far more positive light (as opposed to last year when I thought the editing did him down slightly), someone who was there for the food and who seemed to actually apply the brief. It was a relief to see that someone, somewhere was thinking about the food and the brief. To be honest, I'd have ousted some of the other finalists and put both these chefs through.
I agree, that the goat main is still the front runner - but Daniel's attention to detail, clear brilliance and absolute dedication to any task is a joy to watch and inspiring to anyone.
As I said, this week, I was pleased to see a proper focus on the competition and people properly competing like it meant something. I just wish it had all been like this
My thoughts on Mr Clifford:
First saw him a few years ago competing against Glynn and thought he was an arrogant knob.
My opinion remained steady until last year when I could see how much the competition meant and what he was prepared to do to win.
Final opinion? He's still arrogant. But he's good.
He's also learned from mistakes, listened to advice and nobody puts more thought and effort into all sides of the competition than he does.
He's not a bad guy. I wish him well.
Totally agree - have started reading his twitter chat @midsummerchef (and some of the others) and he seems much nicer than the TV edit portrays. Good banter between a number of the competitors on this
I completely disagree. Why did he think a gag about a hospice was funny ??...Where does he think the money goes ?? What could be more charitable than a hospice for heaven's sake !
Boorish, unpleasant and offensive . He was just about the worst..which is not saying much. The complete unfunniness of the comedians has been yet another flaw in this series. Well done to Pru, Matthew and Oliver for their genuine, unforced good humour.