Thoughts on Ramsay? Anyone gone to eat at one of his restaurants?

He was signed as a sub for a team, and never played

Well to be fair it was most likely not prepared by Ramsay himself

> most likely

None of his restaurant's food is prepared by him anymore. It's all done by head chefs he appoints.

He's aged horribly

I ate at his pub in Vegas. I only had dessert though. I ordered sticky toffee pudding. It was wonderful.

he actually did play, he retired becase of "footballers knee"
and the guy he refers to is marco pierre white, the only one to make gordon ramsay cry.

I ate at steak in Vegas. Ordered the hells kitchen tasting menu. Was worth it. They did everything wonderfully.

>wonderful.
> wonderfully.

samefag

I won't eat anything made by him. imagine all the bacteria, saliva and second hand jizz that comes from his mouth when he screams at food.

telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/4903118/Gordon-Ramsay-admits-claims-about-his-Rangers-career-may-be-inaccurate.html

You should know by now that Gordon Ramsay has no problem lying.

>he seems like a nice guy

You must be joking.

theguardian.com/uk/2007/mar/26/foodanddrink.travelnews

Dude is great as a TV personality. Obviously driven as fuck and very successful. I would never eat at one of his restaurants because he's too big of a brand, which means you're paying for the privilege of that brand. Anyone willing to research can find restaurants just as good or better for the same or less dollars that are not part of a brand like that. Those are the places I'd rather go. Once the chef becomes a celebrity chef the only reason to eat there is bragging rights. I only give a fuck about the food, and couldn't care less about bragging rights.

PAN

His shows are very entertaining, he is a bit less of a dick in the British version.

I've never eaten his food, so I don't know if he's actually good.

British Kitchen Nightmares is fookin' great.

As bad as overwhelming most of us will. He's almost 50 after all.

I refuse to eat anywhere that has a "service charge"

OLIVE OIL

That's Jamie Oliver.

>ROBUST

>US kitchen nightmares
>at it's best

This is my problem with celebrity chefs. Yes they might be some of the best chefs in the world, but if you go into one of their restaurants, the odds that they had any involvement in the preparation of your meal are practically zero.

If I go to 'Gordon Ramsay's restaurant' I expect Gordon Ramsay to have at least overseen my dinner's preparation. But you can't have that in a celebrity chef's case. It's the same with all of them.

I loved that New Orleans episode.

That's inevitable, though. When you become a celebrity chef being a chef is no longer the job. The job becomes TV personality, maybe writer and managing your business empire. And while the restaurants in that empire may be quite good they become their own category of thing: a celebrity chef restaurant. These are places where people pay for the assurance that this famous chef would not allow something that wasn't good to tarnish his brand. People willing to pay for that assurance are generally not savvy diners - they're people with money to blow looking for a meal they can brag about later. Savvy diners know where to get great meals out without paying a premium for celebrity endorsements.

>the odds that they had any involvement in the preparation of your meal are practically zero.

But that's true for just about any chef. The "chef" isn't the guy who does the literal cooking of your food. That's done by the line cooks. He doesn't supervise either--that's the job of the Sous chef and/or the Expo.

The "Chef"--celebrity or otherwise--makes menu decisions, deals with suppliers and purveyors, designs the dishes, creates the recipes, etc. He/she rarely has any hands-on with the actual preparation--that's all delegated to lower ranking members of the kitchen crew.

The only exceptions I can think of are things like a Sushi chef at high end sushi bars, or private chefs that might be employed by rich people. At a typical restaurant the chef himself has never touched your food.