4 ms·

> This guy ate at 330 different burger restaurants. He has a finely-tuned metric for what a good burger is (his #3 is also a neighborhood place he grew up with)

> This guy ate at 330 different burger restaurants. He has a finely-tuned metric for what a good burger is (his #3 is also a neighborhood place he grew up with). He's set up to appreciate what Stanich is actually accomplishing with his burger. The average foodie tourist is unlikely to arrive armed with that context; they'll pay $30 for the burger, expect a revelation, and leave unhappy. Rubbish. Here's 2006 list of burgers that you must have before you die from GQ: https://www.gq.com/story/hamburger-death-eat https://www.gq.com/story/hamburger-death-eat By Alan Richman who "traveled 23,750 miles and consumed more than 150,000 calories while taking the measure of 162 burgers across the country—with one goal: To find you the best damned assemblage of ground beef and buns this country serves up" -- the boss of a Thrillist writer probably did not even know about that infamous GQ list. * Number 1 in NYC : Peter Luger. Still there. Accolades did not kill it. * Number 1 in Philadelphia : Rouge. Rouge burger - still there. Restaurant is going downhill but it has changed owners multiple times -- Neil, who opened it, died a couple of weeks ago. * Number 1 in Philadelphia (small sliders) : Barclay's Prime - of course it is also still there. Oh, and yes Rouge raised its prices to handle the load that article generated - the place maybe sat 50, including the bar. And now since it is not as popular as it once was, the prices are lower. > This guy ate at 330 different burger restaurants. He has a finely-tuned metric for what a good burger is (his #3 is also a neighborhood place he grew up with). He was just not very good as the closure of his favorite burger places demonstrated.

tptacek 8y ago
The Rouge burger was a custom meat blend on challah with gruyere. It's a chef burger. What we're talking about is a ground chuck diner burger on a sesame bun. If this was the Raoul burger, 12 served a day, ground short rib and brisket, I'd be right there with you.
- notyourday 8y ago
  Rouge burger was not a custom meat blend. It was a rouge steak ground from steak into ground meat for the burger as the burger was ordered because there was no space in the kitchen - it was that small. But that's not the point - the list was of burgers: roll, meat patty, cheese, maybe some other stuff. The one that he raved about had gooish cheese etc. Were there also caramelized onions? It was the "we too can make a burger like those fancy places and not a greasy spoon diner next door". Burger is a burger. The better the burger the higher its price could be if there are people willing to wait for it. Chef's burger or no chef's burger - i mean hell, NY Burger Co's burgers beat some of the chef's burgers.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    That's simply not true. Chef burgers and diner burgers are not the same product, which you can verify for yourself by reading Yelp reviews of the restaurant we're talking about and seeing the shocked comments from people who expected a transcendent chef burger experience from this place which only ever served diner burgers. I'd rather have a good diner burger than a chef burger, but the whole point of the story is that the author of this ranking had one intention, his readers took away another, and the result was problematic for the restaurant.
    - notyourday 8y ago
      Of course they are the same product. The product is a burger. Which is why the burger from Le Bec Fin was a flop while NY Burger Company's burgers are success. On the other hand Peter Luger burger or Rouge Burger or Parc Burger are successes. It is unquestionable that the reviewer had no clue about a good burger - he picked OK burgers in OK places that were barely hanging on which is why his review targets did poorly. Compare that to burgers ( or restaurants ) picked by the Guy on DDD - in Philly that would be Good Dog, with its Good Dog burger - nothing special except that the cheese is injected into the patty, while it was cooked well enough by people who aren't that skilled at cooking. The wait went from 10-20 minutes to 1.5-2 hours. The place continued to sling the burgers ( and other stuff ) and continued to be popular year after year because unlike the clueless reviewer at Thrillist Guy ( who has a boatload of other problems ) at least can identify a good burger in a place that won't go out of business if its business increases by 400% ( not to mention 10% that his review did -- all of those numbers are well known - Food Network has all the numbers because they do hundreds of shows based on that. The so called magnificent changes in the fortunes of restaurants after Ramsay/Mission Impossible/etc mean 15-30% of receipt increases ) Good Dog was an anomaly in that because they did 3x in business based on the show airing for nearly a year ( DDD shows do ~30%-45% boost on average boost)
kbenson 8y ago
> He was just not very good as the closure of his favorite burger places demonstrated. Is that supposed to imply that as long as the food is good the restaurant will succeed? I've always viewed the food as being good as an almost essential, but by no means sufficient component to a restaurant's success. I've seen plenty of places with good food close.

tptacek 8y ago

The Rouge burger was a custom meat blend on challah with gruyere. It's a chef burger. What we're talking about is a ground chuck diner burger on a sesame bun. If this was the Raoul burger, 12 served a day, ground short rib and brisket, I'd be right there with you.

notyourday 8y ago
Rouge burger was not a custom meat blend. It was a rouge steak ground from steak into ground meat for the burger as the burger was ordered because there was no space in the kitchen - it was that small. But that's not the point - the list was of burgers: roll, meat patty, cheese, maybe some other stuff. The one that he raved about had gooish cheese etc. Were there also caramelized onions? It was the "we too can make a burger like those fancy places and not a greasy spoon diner next door". Burger is a burger. The better the burger the higher its price could be if there are people willing to wait for it. Chef's burger or no chef's burger - i mean hell, NY Burger Co's burgers beat some of the chef's burgers.
- tptacek 8y ago
  That's simply not true. Chef burgers and diner burgers are not the same product, which you can verify for yourself by reading Yelp reviews of the restaurant we're talking about and seeing the shocked comments from people who expected a transcendent chef burger experience from this place which only ever served diner burgers. I'd rather have a good diner burger than a chef burger, but the whole point of the story is that the author of this ranking had one intention, his readers took away another, and the result was problematic for the restaurant.
  - notyourday 8y ago
    Of course they are the same product. The product is a burger. Which is why the burger from Le Bec Fin was a flop while NY Burger Company's burgers are success. On the other hand Peter Luger burger or Rouge Burger or Parc Burger are successes. It is unquestionable that the reviewer had no clue about a good burger - he picked OK burgers in OK places that were barely hanging on which is why his review targets did poorly. Compare that to burgers ( or restaurants ) picked by the Guy on DDD - in Philly that would be Good Dog, with its Good Dog burger - nothing special except that the cheese is injected into the patty, while it was cooked well enough by people who aren't that skilled at cooking. The wait went from 10-20 minutes to 1.5-2 hours. The place continued to sling the burgers ( and other stuff ) and continued to be popular year after year because unlike the clueless reviewer at Thrillist Guy ( who has a boatload of other problems ) at least can identify a good burger in a place that won't go out of business if its business increases by 400% ( not to mention 10% that his review did -- all of those numbers are well known - Food Network has all the numbers because they do hundreds of shows based on that. The so called magnificent changes in the fortunes of restaurants after Ramsay/Mission Impossible/etc mean 15-30% of receipt increases ) Good Dog was an anomaly in that because they did 3x in business based on the show airing for nearly a year ( DDD shows do ~30%-45% boost on average boost)

kbenson 8y ago

> He was just not very good as the closure of his favorite burger places demonstrated. Is that supposed to imply that as long as the food is good the restaurant will succeed? I've always viewed the food as being good as an almost essential, but by no means sufficient component to a restaurant's success. I've seen plenty of places with good food close.