Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I get it now! I really disliked the first episode! I didn't understand why we'd be getting the back story of so many people who won't be on the show! But I just realized this incredibly tedious process was to show us they really are judging solely on that one bite. Some of these contestants would have been picked had the judges met them before deciding. They could have gotten that point across better; the entire episode felt like a waste of time.
I like the idea of judging by the food only, I've often wondered how the judging would go on other shows if that was the case. As much as they say they're going by the food, they are only human and can be swayed by looks, personality, and a good story. I'll be glad when they're in the kitchens, and hope ABC isn't keeping Anthony Bourdain on too short a leash. He's one of the main reasons I'm watching.
From the way they showed, they did the taste and met the person and then picked. So how is that going with taste only? Its quite different eating something when you don't know what it is too. I'd like to see Iron Chef done with the judges not watching and not knowing which chef prepared what, since the challenger wins so seldom.
From the way they showed, they did the taste and met the person and then picked. So how is that going with taste only? Its quite different eating something when you don't know what it is too. I'd like to see Iron Chef done with the judges not watching and not knowing which chef prepared what, since the challenger wins so seldom.
No they vote before they meet the contestant, that's the whole point. After the elevator is opened and they hit the button on the table all it does is reveal their previous vote.
We watched it yesterday OnDemand and are a little torn by the whole thing. One thing I found that seems to kill the suspense of the show is the under the table cam. Dont show me ahead of time who voted how. Also someone else in the thread mentioned how everyone said no all the time and then spent each segment regretting it. There was entirely too much of that. I'll give it a couple more episodes and we'll see where it goes.
I think too many people are confused on how it works, which is mostly in line with how The Voice works.
The "mentors" have a blind taste test, meaning they have no idea who prepared it compared to the "coaches" on The Voice hearing someone sing and have no idea who is singing.
They have to decide on the spot whether they want them on their team. The Mentors hit a yes or no button versus the coaches turning their chairs. If one or more hit yes or turn their chairs the the contestant gets to choose which team they want to be on.
On The Voice when a coach turned their chair and saw someone who has great appeal or learned of their singing background they often had regret not choosing them, especially if no one else chose the singer and they thought someone should have. Similarly on The Taste when they meet the chef contestant and find out more about who they are and what it was they ate, they often regret not going ahead and choosing them. They simply don't trust their initial instinct and probably are waiting on the 'perfect' dish and instantly wish they hadn't.
Once they get their 4 team members the actual competition will begin. This sounds like it will differ from The Voice in that the challenges will also be blind taste tests and as a group they will eliminate someone based on the taste. They still won't know who made it, what it is or how they made it. So, yes, they could be voting off their own team member.
In the end whoever has a contestant still standing is the winner.
Why are they pushing the yes /no button under the table when they taste the food, but then acting like they made a mistake after they meet the contestant? Maybe I'm missing something.
If they had met the contestant before voting, they probably would have picked them, based on factors other than that one bite of food. Or, if they found out no one picked the contestant, they're saying they wish someone had.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophialee
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightbird47
From the way they showed, they did the taste and met the person and then picked. So how is that going with taste only?
No they vote before they meet the contestant, that's the whole point. After the elevator is opened and they hit the button on the table all it does is reveal their previous vote.
Exactly. That took me a few votes to figure out!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightbird47
I'd like to see Iron Chef done with the judges not watching and not knowing which chef prepared what, since the challenger wins so seldom.
That would be interesting! Top Chef, too, would probably have different results.
I'd like to see Iron Chef done with the judges not watching and not
knowing which chef prepared what, since the challenger wins so seldom.
I agree, those taste tests should be blind though as you said in Iron Chef they watch the chefs preparing the food so they already have an idea about the dishes. However on other shows e.g. Top Chef they don't.
That's one reason I was at first intrigued by The Taste b/c I'd love to see dishes judged purely on the basis of taste (and presentation). In fact, I still don't get why some of the chefs on The Taste regret pushing "No". I think it's all playing to the TV. Stupid drama. It either tastes good or it doesn't. Sheesh. Who the hell cares if they later find out it's a professional or "home cook" or what they look like or how much money they have or don't have in the bank!
I was going to bail but maybe I'll give the show another chance once they actually start cooking.
From the way they showed, they did the taste and met the person and then picked. So how is that going with taste only? Its quite different eating something when you don't know what it is too. I'd like to see Iron Chef done with the judges not watching and not knowing which chef prepared what, since the challenger wins so seldom.
If anything, I think it should be the opposite. The chefs shouldn't know who the judges are. I'm fairly certain that Jeffrey Z. knows Donna Arpai's preferences.
The challenger wins less because the Iron Chef has a huge advantage. The IC is familar with Kitchen Stadium, cooking under pressure, what judges are looking for, etc.
If anything, I think it should be the opposite. The chefs shouldn't know who the judges are. I'm fairly certain that Jeffrey Z. knows Donna Arpai's preferences.
The challenger wins less because the Iron Chef has a huge advantage. The IC is familar with Kitchen Stadium, cooking under pressure, what judges are looking for, etc.
Bourdain is a sell out for participating on such a garbage show.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
