Washingtonian 100 Very Best out now...
I can't afford most places on this list and always hate reading about how great all these fancy DC spots are....but something else in the issue peaked my interest.
Four Sisters came in at number 30, more than 30 spots ahead of both Minhs and Present, which, IMHO, are better. And Huong Viet isnt even on the list. What's the deal here? This odd Vietnamese restaurant hierarchy ruins the credibility of the whole list. Or perhaps I'm just overthinking the whole thing.
I don't know, if Four Sisters is 30 spots in front of Present, it does kind of make you wonder if Washingtonian hasn't gone Yelp on us, and started shaking restaurant owners down. But I don't see how Washingtonian could possibly be faulted, it isn't like they take ads from restaurants or anything. Sarcasm
- The original comment has been removed
Does someone still have their copy? I threw mine out.
Somewhere in the middle of this list was a DC restaurant I had never heard of. Sorry to be so vague, but I think it was four letters starting wtih E___. I recall the location somewhere near Dupont Circle. Anyway, in the little "Inside Tips" section of the blurb for this place was something like "where adventurous eaters can go for a special meal at an yet unknown restaurant prepared by an exciting young chef for not too much money."
I know that sounds like an ad, but it wasn't. (At least I don't think. Hard to tell with the Washingtonian.)
Can anyone help recall the name of the place? And has anyone been?
Has anyone noticed that the Washingtonian's Top 100 bears only a slight resemblance to Tom Sietsema's Top 50? IMHO, Tom is more reliable than Todd.
Not worth the paper its printed on. To think you can numerically rank every restaurant of varying cuisines and price points is beyond even The Washingtonian's snobbery limits. Some of the judgments are beyond ludicrous by any standard and make one wonder about motives.