HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >


Top 50 restaurants in the world.


Time and money, that's all I need....

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. I've been to 2 but plan to try more after I win Powerball.

    Oddly, I got to #86 frequently. Momofuku Ssam Bar. It doesn't strike me as one of the 100 best places on earth.

    1. I've been to none and not likely to visit any of them. It is a list - someone's opinion and a lot of PR behind the scenes I imagine.

      Pretty sure that there are plenty of restaurants that equal some of the best, but don't get a mention as they don't have the PR or the prices. Thankfully :)

      1. its an over hyped PR stunt for sure. I guess I'm a sucker for looking at it every year!

        seriously though, some of the 'judges' are chef's ranked on the list. Tourists boards from Scandinavia paid judges to travel their country and eat at the restaurants. they don't even make sure people are actually going to the restaurants they rank (ie attach the bill), because they are a "small operation" (who manage to publish a magazine, live stream on a elaborate website with major industry sponsors). This is of course on top of the inherent bias of the whole idea. Well at least it should be easier to get a reservation at NOMA now haha

        2 Replies
        1. re: tdiddy23

          Yep - just a big PR stunt. As a side, have a look at the link below which is from the top 50 website. At the top is a photo of a small selection of the 900 "industry experts" that contribute to the scores.

          I really hope the guy 4th from the right has a better taste in food than he does in clothes.


          1. re: PhilipS

            I've eaten twice at one restaurant on the list. I'm not impressed. I actually know some of the people in that photo, but not (fortunately) the "symphony in brown."

        2. I ate at #45 last year when it was #49 (Geranium, Copenhagen). It was one of the most incredible meals I've ever experienced. It was also the most I've ever spent on a meal by a very large margin.

          1. I find it interesting that The Fat Duck is number 33 on the list. A side of norovirus with each entree.

            2 Replies
            1. re: John E.

              The nature of the voting rules means that places are unlikely to stay high on the list for any length of time. Why would international judges travel to the UK to eat at the Fat Duck when they've probably eaten there a few years ago. If they're coming to the country, they are likely to want to eat somewhere new.

              My meal there was two years ago, when it was No. 2 or 3. I've no need to be rushing back - and I've less than 200 miles to travel

              1. re: John E.

                Noma had a bad episode of norovirus earlier this year. I guess that might account for the number two slot (pun intended) given this time.

              2. Still there are some pretty great places on that list...

                1. I have only Been to one of the places... and it wasnt as good as Uchiko in Austin

                  1. Another viewpoint (translated into English from the original French):

                    "The fact that members of the jury of zany rankings with dubious acquaintances do not visit the restaurants they score was an open secret. And now, Frederick-Ernestine Grasser-Hermé, foodista-in-chief, seems to confirm this from the inside. She even states this as the cause of her resignation. It is true that the methodology of the World's 50 Best Restaurants is somewhat obscure, carefully kept away from any ethical principle. Still, in journalism, this kind of practice, talking about meals you did not have and talking about things you did not experience has a name: fraud."


                    3 Replies
                        1. re: Harters

                          True in some ways. Most of us knew it was a PR ruse come fix, but for someone to openly admit it in print, that is a bombshell.