Pittsburgh Foodies Thread (ranking, limits, residents)

[doo dah]

Italian Beef is delicious!

[Der Schwabe]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

No, they aren't all at a better price. Places like Chicago/NYC/SF have multiple times more food options of any price point than Pittsburgh does. You can find cheap but high quality food in NYC, SF and Chicago, and more of it than you can find in Pittsburgh. Same on the high end front. There are places in those 3 cities that have food that is more expensive than anything you'll find in Pittsburgh, but they also have plenty of stuff on the other end of the spectrum. Doesn't that make them better food cities? More options on both price-point ends, higher number of quality restaurants, etc. They have more of every type of restaurant, and greater variety.

Why does it matter what the population of the city is? How does the fact that 9x more people live in Chicago compared to Pittsburgh make Pittsburgh a better food town? Why does the population of Chicago prevent me from going to whatever new Stephanie Izzard, Rick Bayless, Paul Kahan, or Grant Achatz restaurant that is opening up. Or my corner Mexican store that has amazing $2 tacos? The results of this particular "analysis" essentially show that it is HIGHLY flawed. I would beg any person serious about food to explain to me why Pittsburgh is a better food town than NYC, why ANCHORAGE is a better food town than NYC, why Milwaukee is better than Chicago, etc... I don't think the James Beard Awards were held in Chicago this year because Heinz Hall was booked that weekend, or because Pabst Theatre in Milwaukee was askin' too much.

I'm the first to tell everyone here in Chicago that Pittsburgh is a great food town, and that they should check it out. But there is something to be said about patting yourself on the back too much.

You seem a tad bit defensive. You can relax, Chicago is cool, too...it's just just clickbait from NerdWallet.com.

That said, seems like Chicago took the biggest hit compared with Pittsburgh on the number of breweries (3.6 vs. 1.3) rather than the number of restaurants per 100,000 (on which they are close and seems like a fairly reasonable method to roughly gauge restaurant saturation). The other numbers were relatively close. And though I agree with you about NYC and SF, I would hesitate to lump Chicago in with that group. Good restaurants for sure, but certainly much more expensive (in my subjective experience). The implication regarding Pittsburgh by listing two or three of the trendiest and most expensive places here isn't exactly helpful either. There are plenty of other cities, including some of those listed, that could easily and credibly be in the top handful.

[gortonator]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

[.. good stuff deleted ...]

I'm the first to tell everyone here in Chicago that Pittsburgh is a great food town, and that they should check it out. But there is something to be said about patting yourself on the back too much with every arbitrary list you can find.

I think we're all kinda agreeing. In summary, the list is produced based on a series of factors, but it creates results which don't really make sense in foodie reality. For example, of course NYC is a better foodie town than Pgh. In fact it's a better foodie town than most places on the planet.

Based on a huge 4 weeks of living in Seattle, I'd say food quality of equivalent M&P standards is about 20% more expensive here. Some of that is sales tax, and there's no state income tax here. So it all quickly gets very complicated very quickly .... but food quality wise, M&P beats our local gastropub here (Quinns) hands down.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by Der Schwabe

You seem a tad bit defensive. You can relax, Chicago is cool, too...it's just just clickbait from NerdWallet.com.

That said, seems like Chicago took the biggest hit compared with Pittsburgh on the number of breweries (3.6 vs. 1.3) rather than the number of restaurants per 100,000 (on which they are close and seems like a fairly reasonable method to roughly gauge restaurant saturation). The other numbers were relatively close. And though I agree with you about NYC and SF, I would hesitate to lump Chicago in with that group. Good restaurants for sure, but certainly much more expensive (in my subjective experience). The implication regarding Pittsburgh by listing two or three of the trendiest and most expensive places here isn't exactly helpful either. There are plenty of other cities, including some of those listed, that could easily and credibly be in the top handful.

Not defensive, just trying to be realistic, when this article is everything but. Again, I don't see how per capita measurements are an effective way to judge a food scene. We aren't talking about the murder rate here. The article doesn't do a whole lot of looking into the quality of restaurants, either (and neither does the whole per capita thing). I also don't get your remarks regarding prices of Chicago restaurants compared to NYC/SF restaurants..how can you say Chicago restaurants are more expensive than SF/NYC restaurants? I'm pretty sure that is generally not the consensus. What is the consensus, however, is that NYC/SF/Chicago are the 3 best food towns in the US. Most reliable foodies in the nation will tell you that. If per capita number of restaurants or breweries is what you want to use as evidence, thats fine. You won't be convincing many people who actually know what they are talking about, though.

Hey! There is a Time article out there that I read that says Cleveland is #7 when it comes to food in the USA...uh oh!!!!

[Rocket88]

I did not post this to gloat "Look at us, Pittsburgh is a better foodie town than NYC or Chicago. Na na na na na. No. I'm that naive. I posted it more to show how far Pittsburgh has come. Ten years ago, Pittsburgh may have been right down there near the bottom with Phoenix. It is about where the city has come even though much of the list leaves room for skepticism.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by Rocket88

I did not post this to gloat "Look at us, Pittsburgh is a better foodie town than NYC or Chicago. Na na na na na. No. I'm that naive. I posted it more to show how far Pittsburgh has come. Ten years ago, Pittsburgh may have been right down there near the bottom with Phoenix. It is about where the city has come even though much of the list leaves room for skepticism.

Didn't think that was your intention. And again, I agree that Pittsburgh has come a long way. It used to be awful when it came to food. Now it is above average for a city of its size. Trying to validate that with stupid inaccurate lists that claim it is better than NYC, Chicago, LA, etc., however, looks pathetic (not that YOU are doing that). I can't wait for all the local Facebookin suburbanites to post the article and immediately think Pittsburgh is a better food town than NYC. Maybe I'm too involved with research at school..that's why obnoxious articles like this (with their "analyses", lol) make me nauseous.

[sskink]

But I can authoritatively declare that Mt Lebanon is a better foodie suburb than Mamamorneck or Carol Spring :-)

[Der Schwabe]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

Not defensive, just trying to be realistic, when this article is everything but. Again, I don't see how per capita measurements are an effective way to judge a food scene. We aren't talking about the murder rate here. The article doesn't do a whole lot of looking into the quality of restaurants, either (and neither does the whole per capita thing). I also don't get your remarks regarding prices of Chicago restaurants compared to NYC/SF restaurants..how can you say Chicago restaurants are more expensive than SF/NYC restaurants? I'm pretty sure that is generally not the consensus. What is the consensus, however, is that NYC/SF/Chicago are the 3 best food towns in the US. Most reliable foodies in the nation will tell you that. If per capita number of restaurants or breweries is what you want to use as evidence, thats fine. You won't be convincing many people who actually know what they are talking about, though.

Hey! There is a Time article out there that I read that says Cleveland is #7 when it comes to food in the USA...uh oh!!!!

Sorry, reference was to your comment about Pittsburgh's relative cost rather than to NYC/SF. Naturally NYC and SF are on a similar cost level to Chicago, which is a fair bit higher than here on the whole.

As for the rest of it, foodie is a bankrupt term and has been for several years. I don't think anyone would argue that New York City and San Francisco aren't among, if not the top two food towns, but I don't really think of Chicago is inseparable from those two. Perhaps it is your subjective experience as a transplant there? I read your comments as "Most of my Foodie friends here in Chicago think that we're just as good as NYC and San Francisco."

Nothing wrong with that, but I would separate your subjective experience from a supposed hard and fast ranking of food towns in the eyes of the Nation's Most Prominent Foodies (lol). Many of the destinations often written about are spread out throughout the south and west (Seattle, Portland, NoLa, Austin, Charleston, and even Atlanta come to mind just off the top of my head). Anyway, this is all veering woefully off topic...

[PghYinzer]

No horn blowing, no back patting, but when presented with their methodology, as flawed as it may be, I can see how they arrived at their list.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by Der Schwabe

I don't think anyone would argue that New York City and San Francisco aren't among, if not the top two food towns, but I don't really think of Chicago is inseparable from those two. Perhaps it is your subjective experience as a transplant there? I read your comments as "Most of my Foodie friends here in Chicago think that we're just as good as NYC and San Francisco."

Nothing wrong with that, but I would separate your subjective experience from a supposed hard and fast ranking of food towns in the eyes of the Nation's Most Prominent Foodies (lol). Many of the destinations often written about are spread out throughout the south and west (Seattle, Portland, NoLa, Austin, Charleston, and even Atlanta come to mind just off the top of my head). Anyway, this is all veering woefully off topic...

Lol, Chicago is time and again ranked among the top 3 food cities in America, generally in the 2 or 3 spot interchanging with San Francisco (NYC as #1). Don't believe me? Look at Michelin, James Beard, Zagat, etc. You don't have a pulse on the food scene in America if you think my opinion on Chicago's food scene is just my "transplant personal opinion".

Chicago has more James Beard Awarded chefs than any city in the US besides NYC. Chicago 3rd of only three cities in the USA that have a Michelin Guide (NYC and SF being the other 2). If that isn't "in the realm" of NYC and SF, I don't know what is. Here are some more lists (since you like them so much) that show that it's not just "my subjective opinion" that Chicago is generally regarded as a top 3 food city.

The Top 10 Food Cities in the World (or Foodie Cities? or Restaurant Cities?) | Epicurious.com

The search for America's best food cities: Chicago | The Washington Post

What Are the Beard Awards

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...#United_States

^Here you go, a list of all the 3 Michelin Star restaurants in the United States. There are plenty more 1 and 2 Michelin Starred restaurants as well.