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.
Yes, but the entire region is widely recognized for its high quality restaurants, not just SF.
And foodies know that.
No doubt! Much of the region is known for great cuisine, especially the East Bay, Napa and Sonoma. I would never argue that. I would however, argue that other parts of the Bay Area have better restaurants pound for pound than the Bay Area. Just today, I had a great meal at the Chop Bar in Oakland. But I wouldn't say Oakland is a better food city than SF. Nor would I say Napa is because of some big names like The French Laundry. To myself and most, SF is still the crown jewel of the Bay Area restaurant scene.
Then what exactly was your point about tourist not flocking to the East Bay or Wine Country to eat?
For people into the restuarant/foodie scene, which clearly isn't you, areas outside of SF proper play a big part of that. I guess for the average person who really just goes out to eat wherever and doesn't pay attention to the food/dining scene in the Bay Area, which seems to be someone like you, then they might not realize how many of the region's best restaurants aren't in SF.
First off, repeating "which clearly isn't you" isn't making a point. The odds are very high that I have eaten at more fine restaurants world wide in my 26 years than you will in your entire life. My point is that SF is still seen as the crown jewel of the Bay Area dining scene. I never stated that other counties in the Bay Area do not have great restaurants. I mentioned that not many tourists who visit SF go out to Napa to eat in restaurants, or Oakland, or Berkeley. Of course some do, and those cities have fine restaurant scenes. I wouldn't argue that. I never uttered a word against restaurant scenes in Napa or Berkeley, I just said that they take a back seat to SF. I went out to eat in Oakland today. I had a great meal and a place "foodies" like- but I wouldn't say that Oakland's restaurant scene dominates SF's, or that the restaurant scenes are comparable. I wouldn't compare the restaurant scene in Napa to SF, simply because Napa has a few restaurants with more Michelin Stars.
First off, repeating "which clearly isn't you" isn't making a point. The odds are very high that I have eaten at more fine restaurants world wide in my 26 years than you will in your entire life. My point is that SF is still seen as the crown jewel of the Bay Area dining scene. I never stated that other counties in the Bay Area do not have great restaurants. I mentioned that not many tourists who visit SF go out to Napa to eat in restaurants, or Oakland, or Berkeley. Of course some do, and those cities have fine restaurant scenes. I wouldn't argue that. I never uttered a word against restaurant scenes in Napa or Berkeley, I just said that they take a back seat to SF. I went out to eat in Oakland today. I had a great meal and a place "foodies" like- but I wouldn't say that Oakland's restaurant scene dominates SF's, or that the restaurant scenes are comparable. I wouldn't compare the restaurant scene in Napa to SF, simply because Napa has a few restaurants with more Michelin Stars.
Internet snobbery? How SF of you LOL.
They really don't though, at least not to serious foodies. Sure SF's dining scene dominates but not as much as you make it sound as many of the top restaurants aren't even in SF.
Again, what is your point about tourists? Who cares if the majority don't flock to Napa to eat? A lot of them flock to eat at Applebee's, Bubba Gumps, etc..at Fisherman's Wharf so why are you using them as a measuring stick? Are you talking about regular people or foodies, make up your mind already.
You have basically contradicted yourself over the last few pages, especially if you're agreeing with what Radical Atheist said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFNative87
Yes, many great restaurants are outside of SF. But Radical is correct- most Bay Area residents view them as an afterthought after SF. I know there are great restaurants in Napa, Berkeley, etc, but they are nowhere the dining destination that SF is. A massive amount of people dining in restaurants in SF are actually from the East Bay. In fact I've been told by managers of House of Prime Rib and a few other popular SF restaurants that up to 40% of their costumers come from the East Bay.
SF is considered the centerpiece of the Bay Area dining scene. Every other area is considered a major afterthought.
I don't know about high class culinary because I don't go to foo-foo foodie places. In terms of local "fast food", it is Chicago. You got Italian sausage, hot dogs (no ketchup, although I break that rule occasionally, but never in public back in the Chicago area), Maxwell Street Polish, and my favorite...Italian beef sandwiches. Just the thought of one makes me hungry. They have them out here, but there is something about the Lake Michigan water that really brings out the flavor. I cannot wait to get back and bury my face in an Italian beef sandwich, dipped, with hot giardiniera.
Chicago comes to mind. Been there once and the food did impress me.
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.
