On Oct 15, 3:43*pm, "Default User" > wrote:
> Dan Abel wrote:
> > In article >,
> > *"Default User" > wrote:
>
> > > Dan Abel wrote:
>
> > > > But thanks for telling me about the show. *I'll be sure not to
> > > > watch it.
>
> > > In spite of a few things like that, it's a good show. If you like
> > > cooking competition shows, that is.
>
> > Thanks to Nancy and Brian. *Maybe I'll give it a try. *Watching
> > professional chefs cook with junk food didn't sound too exciting, but
> > it sounds like that's a small part of it.
>
> It was a "quickfire" competition. Those are preliminary bouts where the
> competitors make something in a short period of time (like 30 minutes)
> to get a prize or advantage. The main competition last night was to
> draw to get parts of the pig assigned, then create a dish centered on
> that, cooked for a mass of people.
>
> The show's really heating up now, as they're almost done sorting out
> the pretenders from those that have a real shot at winning. Next week,
> the always fun "Restaurant War".
>
> On a related note, "Hell's Kitchen" finished up this week with strong
> ratings for Fox.
>
> [SPOILER SPACE]
>
> Poor Kevin probably killed himself through his personnel selection
> problems. Still amazing Dave was able to win having competed for many
> episodes with a broken wrist that was killing him.
>

To me, even the 6th best competitor on Top Chef is better than Dave
and Kevin. But if I were hiring for my restaurant and had to choose
between these two, I would choose Kevin. Dave is talented but he is
really not very intelligent. And it is hard to imagine a successful
executive chef like that.

Plus Top Chef is much less fake and less contrived and less
condescending towards the viewers than Hell's Kitchen is.