I found the inclusion of Bacar on the Chron's top 100 list odd. I know what a great big project it has been. I know about the anticipation. I know about the delays. How on earth can you rate a 3 month old restaraunt in your top 100?
100 wines by the glass? I love that idea. The stuff that I have read about the menus looks tasty. But to me one of the greatest factors in reviewing a restaraunt is consistancy. Theres no way Bacar can offer that with a resume that is 3 months long. I understand the bright stars that shine in its kitchen, but I don't buy pedigree ratings.
I didn't see Masa's mentioned, so obviously Ron Siegal didn't get credit for his past work at Charles Nob Hill, or his future (hopefully) sucess at Masa's.
How do you defend this selection if you are Michael Bauer? Any ideas? I just plain don't get it.