Los Angeles: Best City in the World for Food. (Long Beach: restaurant, vs.)

[J1ndo]

Originally Posted by gulfstreamliberal

I have NEVER seen Los Angeles ranked on any sort of "best food cities" from world-renowned "lists" such as San Pelligrino's prestigious annual list, Zagat, Food & Wine, let alone WINNING.

New York City is continually ranked #1 when it comes to food, at least in the United States. Internationally, it trades places with Tokyo, Paris, London.

In the United States, it's always New York, San Francisco, Chicago ....sometimes New Orleans and Las Vegas. Los Angeles is rarely even mentioned.

This "list" is absolute rubbish and whoever thinks Los Angeles is the best food city in the world has an absence of taste.

Forget about rankings and lists for the moment; what would be your criteria for a great food town?

[intelfan11315]

Do you guys really need to look at websites of rankings to decide what is the best food? Think for yourself and make a decision.

[gulfstreamliberal]

Originally Posted by J1ndo

Forget about rankings and lists for the moment; what would be your criteria for a great food town?

The best upscale. Having the most glorious and the most prestigious upscale restaurants usually indicates the city's superiority when it comes to food. In general, it trickles down from upscale.

Cheap greasy crappy ethnic food usually tastes the same everywhere (especially in very large and diverse cities like New York and LA.)

[CantWait2Leave]

Yes, there are a ton of great places to eat but so many of the restaurants are so expensive. My husband and I went out for a nice dinner and the bill was $98. We didn't even order alcohol!

[A.J._in_L.A.]

Originally Posted by nickdahammer

Obvious? Easy on the condescension, barkeep.

Food is pretty subjective, but Gold backs it up. We've been reading Gold for decades and, while I don't agree with everything he says, I think he makes a pretty good case, with specifics and whatnot.

Take it easy, don't worry about that clown. This guy has already been banned a hundred different times and he's not from here. For some reason or another I guess trolling the CvC forums isn't enough and he's decided to show up in the L.A. forum, unfortunately.

[gulfstreamliberal]

Originally Posted by A.J._in_L.A.

Take it easy, don't worry about that clown. This guy has already been banned a hundred different times and he's not from here. For some reason or another I guess trolling the CvC forums isn't enough and he's decided to show up in the L.A. forum, unfortunately.

Excuse me?

[dtran103]

Originally Posted by gulfstreamliberal

I have NEVER seen Los Angeles ranked on any sort of "best food cities" from world-renowned "lists" such as San Pelligrino's prestigious annual list, Zagat, Food & Wine, let alone WINNING.

New York City is continually ranked #1 when it comes to food, at least in the United States. Internationally, it trades places with Tokyo, Paris, London.

In the United States, it's always New York, San Francisco, Chicago ....sometimes New Orleans and Las Vegas. Los Angeles is rarely even mentioned.

This "list" is absolute rubbish and whoever thinks Los Angeles is the best food city in the world has an absence of taste.

Lists where someone "wins" usually aren't serious lists or even good ways to back up claims. Gourmet magazine, GQ, The Atlantic have called LA the best place to eat in the past, but that has as much weight as Food And Wine or Zagat. Anyway, I don't remember Zagat or Pelligrino ever having a food city rank. Are there links you could post? I know Pelligrino has a restaurant rank. Zagat is more readers votes, but I don't remember them ranking cities as well. I know Food and Wine magazine does a restaurant city rank and the criteria is almost exclusively high-end dining. You have to be able to discern between a food city and a dining city, which are really not the same thing.

I'd agree with that LA isn't comparable to NYC or Paris as a dining city. I disagree that upscale restaurants are a sign of a superior food city. It doesn't trickle down to the rest of the food scene.

A lot of ethnic food tends to be crappy in NYC. but what's true of NYC isn't true in LA. In LA ethnic food dominates and flourishes and retain the same character and authenticity as it was in the native country, only enhanced with California produce. NYC was once as thriving in ethnic cuisine like LA decades ago until gentrification of the last 2 decade. (In certain cuisines, even NJ surpasses NYC) The thing with LA is that the neighborhood are more segregated, so cuisine is rarely "dumbed down" for the general eater as it is in NY. Hence, the awful NYC chinese food. (Chinese food in LA is a transcendent experience)



In respect to people having no taste in thinking LA is the best food city, I think that claim is out of touch with the times we live in. As is the claim of crappy ethnic food being all the same everywhere and not worthy of defining a food city.

[A.J._in_L.A.]

Originally Posted by gulfstreamliberal

Excuse me?

I should know better than to acknowledge you, but once again... I'm going do to it anyway.

Originally Posted by gulfstreamliberal

The best upscale. Having the most glorious and the most prestigious upscale restaurants usually indicates the city's superiority when it comes to food. In general, it trickles down from upscale.

Cheap greasy crappy ethnic food usually tastes the same everywhere (especially in very large and diverse cities like New York and LA.)

Nice. The fact that NYC and all of those other cities have such incredibly high priced, ritzy restaurants that the average person can't afford to dine at on a daily basis is absolutely wonderful. While your post emanates pure, condescending elitism you fail to realize that you cannot use such restaurants as a basis for an "incredible food city", because they're out of reach to a lot of people just trying to pay the bills. People are just trying to survive. And if you think you can use those restaurants as a sole barometer to find out what a "food city" is then that is incredibly ignorant in itself. Yet, its funny at the same time to see people championing restaurants that they themselves cannot afford to eat at on a daily basis.

And that cheap greasy food line you spouted was just plain dumb, man. I thought it was supposed to trickle down from the top and make it better? But since NYC has "superiormondo upscale restaurants" I guess NYC's "cheap ethnic eats" is supposed to be better than L.A.'s despite your baseless claim that both cities have terrible ethnic eats, right? Do you see how dumb you sound here?

[gulfstreamliberal]

[mod cut: personal attack]

NYC wins, period.

That's all.

[sam222]

NYC of course is in better position here bacause of italian good especially in Little italy, LA does have some distinct eateries and even upscale restaraunts but i don't feel like being homecooked treatd over there it is like being in a big dining room of your college and eating some junk food. What I love most is Steakhouses in Glendale and Fish market diners in Malibu, the best