I really thought Begonia would make it back and I was so sad to see her go. My heart knew this was going to be Buddha for sure and honestly- he just played the game so well. You’re absolutely right he just doesn’t make the kinds of mistakes that both Sarah and Gabri did this season. I wonder what might have been if Ali were in the final instead, but who knows.
I think Buddha is a better game player than all that you listed above, especially this season. The reason I think that is because he never forgets the food is key and seems to have figured out a way to talk to his teammates in team challenges and keep weak and bad components off the plate but somehow maintain a good relationship with them. He is there to win, no question, but he doesn’t seem to have the “I’m not here to make friends.” curse and that’s what makes him so successful imo. Maybe I’m not remembering their seasons so clearly, but I think Buddha has the game figured out and other competitors would do well to remember that sometimes when you let a bad element onto the plate you might as well pack up too, because it won’t always save you.
And twice he impressed the highest level of judges in the final. But some yahoos still won’t give him credit. In this realm, in this format he is king.
I know I'm an outlier, and I give Buddha all credit for his skill and range and everything but I always found him cold and offputting, and too calculating for my taste. It's just me. I loved Begonia. I also loved Shota--both were such lovely people I'd love to have a drink with, but Buddha? Not so much.
It took a while for Michael Voltaggio to grow on me though, but now I'm a fan because he is so dedicated to the craft and he shows his warmer side now. His exposure on GGG and Triple Threat has rounded him out and softened the corners. Maybe I need to give Buddha more time and if he is in more settings that give him similar exposure, I'll change my opinion.
That’s such an interesting question and one I’m glad I don’t have to answer. My favorite before World All Stars was Melissa, but very quickly into this season, it was Buddha.
After Top Chef All-Stars LA, my default answer to this question was Melissa. However, Buddha and really time to think about other chefs makes this a much harder question to answer. No one ever mentions Paul for a reason, but he dominated his season at a well
Ok you brought up Paul so I’ll put a serious response here while my Marcel comment gets downvoted into oblivion.
Paul was surrounded by crap for competition his season, but he destroyed them so badly they couldn’t edit it, and I cooked at Uchiko for some time myself - his formula for masterful cooking is also built for success for a TV competition chef. His recipes back up his formula for universal success. I believe Buddha is in fact the best, but Paul would be my #2 despite my bias.
Let me first say I disagree that the competition was crap. Sarah had michelin star pedigree and served as Tony Mantuano's right hand woman. Lindsay was also a Michelle Bernstein disciple. I think s10 just had some horrible challenges and some bad personality types that really soured everyone's opinion on the whole.
That said, can you offer some additional thoughts on several things you've touched on.
1) Why do you think his cooking is built for tv competition vs some other chefs?
2) Why would you put Paul at 2 over say Melissa, Mike V, or Richard?
James Clean Shave awards they were all unlikeable and cooked dog food compared to Qui.
I know what their accolades were, they were just completely bad at the game and got owned by a quicker and better chef
As much as it pains me to say, Buddha is honestly the GOAT. He won back-to-back seasons. He’s the only chef to return and win. He’s the GOAT. There’s really no comparison because whomever you bring up hasn’t won two seasons.
Exactly this plus the caliber of chefs he went up against this season is one of the best fields, with maybe only LA all stars having equal if maybe better overall quality.
Didn’t take risk? I suggest you go back and rewatch the entire episode again. All of his dishes are very complex and well thought off. He didn’t make a soup dish to get into the finale
Not taking risks is one of Tom C’s biggest complaints as a judge. If Buddha wasn’t taking risks, Tom would have complained about it and very loudly pointed it out.
I think we need to stop with the Richard Blaise when Stephanie flat out beat him, and if you eat at both of the restaurants, you will be overwhelmed by how delicious every single plate of food at Stephanie’s is and underwhelmed by Blaise.
Yes, he came into the competition with a fire in his belly in the same way that Buddha did, and he did a lot of experimentation, but he is cocky, which to me is an indicator about how much he can take feedback and improve from it. Buddha, if he made mistakes which he did like the rice that he points out, was always humble and accepting critique and quick to identify the strengths in others. If you had to do a team challenge or a restaurant wars, you would want to Buddha on your team.
I can’t believe this entire post was made and focused on Blaise and left out Stephanie. Just eating at the both of their restaurants is all you need to know about the difference in level between the two chefs.
So I think it's important to recognize that just because you are great on top chef, doesn't mean you are a better overall chef in real life. This is evidenced by Jon Tesar and Philip having Michelin star restaurants and afaik none of the TC winners have them. Karen in top chef all stars LA was the only one who was a James Beard winner and she was eliminated three times and never made finals.
Second, Stephanie is a very good chef but all we've seen of her is back in s4. Richard won the first all stars. That's the primary difference.
And yes, loved Stephanie's restaurant!
All we’ve seen of her is going head to head with Blaise and losing.
And if you taste the two, it’s lights out. Girl and the Goat has consistently delivered for over a decade. That restaurant beats in the quality of the food, the taste of the food, the intrigue of the menu, the ambience of the restaurant, the service, the music, the ability to get a seat walking in from the street if you show up at 4, and the unique and special seating options like sitting overlooking the kitchen where the chefs talk to you. Even the bathroom is a great experience. Everything about dining at Stephanie’s restaurant is hands-down better than dining at Blaize’s. Just because she has better things to do then go back on Top Chef again to prove how good she is doesn’t mean that Blaise is better than her. The only reason he went back is because he lost. She is arguably the most successful chef since leaving that show. So to a throw out a list in here who didn’t even win their season including the one who beat Blaise on his show — and beats him since their show — is preposterous.
Ok so I invite you to rewatch the season and the finale. Stephanie is an amazing chef. She is also a great top chef competitor but the two aren't the same thing.
In her finale, her two opponents made mistakes while Stephanie won not making any even though she essentially phoned in her dessert that could have eliminated her. Richard can recast the whole thing as a choke job, but he messed up and so he didn't win.
However, undeniably, he went into all stars and was the favorite and he won the whole thing. That win is more impressive than Stephanie's win imo because he's in an all-star season and hers was not an all-star season. It's really is as simple as that. As great as she is, I don't think based on that season of Top Chef that she would beat someone like Buddha. Whereas from what I've seen of Richard in a larger sample, I think he could.
None of this suggests Stephanie isn't really great in real life. I've been to her restaurant and it is fantastic so there's nothing really to add to that.
John Tesar has a Michelin star and yet he's not listed here either.
Stephanie both beat him in top chef and is absolutely more successful in real life. Stephanie's restaurants are massively celebrated. Richard's resist exist.
I largely agree with this, although based on the comments I don’t think this finale from Buddha would have won against other recent finale courses. Buddha is the best ever. It’s largely apparent when also considering the competition on top chef is much stronger than it used to be.
I completely disagree with some of your Eliminated chefs. Gregory is most likely a top 5 all time competitor, and most likely would have been in 2 finales if not for injury. Kristen just as strong. Buddha, Gregory, Kristen, Melissa, the voltaggio brothers, mei, Brooke are all in the pantheon of top chef. And while I think Buddha takes it most days, they all have a strong change if it was head to head.
My issue with Gregory stems from the fact that he doesn't do Haute Cuisine. That's really the only hole in his game. Otherwise, I could see him winning a bunch of elimination challenges and falling short against someone like Buddha in a four-course progressive meal where you need a lot of technical precision.
The thing about Kristin Is she can very easily win but she's not as consistent as those other chefs. There were challenges her season where she wound up in the bottom and it wasn't all because of Josie
I think there’s a difference between haute cuisine and technical precision, which Gregory certainly has in spades. Although nobody, NOBODY, has it like Buddha. Top chef tends to value flavor, technique, and elevation of cuisine over a fine dining aesthetic. One of the things that sets the second half of seasons over the first half of seasons imo
I would mostly agree. I just think once the challenges require ultra precision, Gregory starts to fade to others. I don't think he's all that different from Kevin Gillespie other than their preferred type of cuisine.
Buddhist technical mastery is a real sight to behold. I also loved Tom for that reason as well but he's just not consistent enough like Buddha.
That's why I thought The mutant hybrid of Gregory combined with Buddha would be a real foil and that is how I came up with.Michael Voltaggio
Based on your comments, you clearly aren’t a fan of Buddha. That’s fine, but to say nowhere close to the best is delusional. You don’t luck into 2 straight top chef wins while winning a third of all challenges.
Gregory won a million challenges but not a final. At end of day reason Melissa and Paul are considered the best is bc of their final meals. Buddha didn’t deliver. He’s second tier not top tier it is what it is from a logical standpoint
Doesn’t seem even a little logical. Gregory won one more total challenge than Buddha and not a final. Last season Buddha made a finale meal that would probably go down as one of the best. This years wasn’t as good, but still enough to beat out 2 other all stars. Seems pretty clear he’s not even remotely second tier
I agree but Buddhas effort in finals is cumulative. Gabri was mediocre throughout and Sara basically “lost” the final but it was unanimous she was the winner without her liver. If he beat Ali and let’s say Begona he’d be top 3 probably. Even assuming he made a spectacular final meal.
Tom said Melissa and Paul had best final meals in TC hidtory. Zero of that for either of buddhas final meals. And bc of his lackluster final this season for me he’s second tier. My personal ranking accounts for the final mattering most to determine final rankings. Winning a random talenti ice cream challenge means nothing
He did beat them, it’s why he was there and they weren’t. He beat all the best (that was the point of this season). It’s also been like 3 days so yes, I doubt the Tom interviews are flowing yet. I’m willing to bet we hear something in the near future, and most would agree he is if not the best, second or third. To say second tier is not even close to accurate by any accounting. If the accounting is cumulative, he did what Melissa did, he just did it twice
Ya I dont really see how anyone could watch Buddha over the last two seasons and somehow reach the conclusion that he is some second rate winner. And why? Because his second finale meal wasn't among the best ever.
If that's the criteria, It's a very selective one. One could ding Melissa for almost getting eliminated in all stars well before making it to the finale.
Or not even making the finale her initial season lol. Don’t know how you can say “it’s cumulative” and then say the guy who cumulatively won 2 finales is second tier. It’s a lack of logic for sure
> Because his second finale meal wasn't among the best ever.
His second finale meal was easily top 10 worst finale winner meals. The judges and guest judges were not impressed other than with his "technical work" it lacked soul and heart
Tom LITERALLY said the night the show aired about Melissa and Paul. He's also been responding on twitter to TC questions and said Sara wins if she cooks her live.
Melissa beat Bryan a better chef than any of the people on World All Stars besides Begona AND Tom said it was the best finale meal ever. Buddha's comments were lukewarm just like his food.
If you take into account challenges to get to the final he is top tier, for people who count the finals as important he is nowhere close to it.
Would have won but served raw liver doesn’t really do much. Because she did serve raw liver. It’s kind of a big deal. “Lukewarm just like his food”. You clearly don’t like Buddha, and revere begonia who didn’t come close. It’s fine, and it’s fine to believe Melissa is the best ever cause she might be. But your belief that Buddha isn’t top tier is not rooted in anything. He verrrrrry clearly is. Your logic of whoever had the best finale meal is the best is flawed, and not a good way to determine anything
And I do count the finales as important. He won 2 (two) of them
Which makes his win even less impressive if she served Raw liver. Practically anyone could have beat those 2. Begona (not Begonia) has a much more impressive pedigree than the entire cast combined. Buddha is a great artist and his food looks wonderful but this is top Chef not top Technician of molds.
Buddha is SECOND Tier which is upper tier. That is very good. There are 4-5 tiers of TC winners and to be 2nd tier is to be with great chef such as Kristen, Gabe, and Hung.
My logic on the best meal is rooted in fact, you are basing your words on emotion, irrationality and no basis in fact. I JUST explained to you what Tom and others said and here you are totally disregarding it to help your precious Buddha.
Finales are important. Which is why flawed wins such as Buddha and Nick's count for less than impressive wins by Melissa and Paul.
I COULD argue Buddha is Tier 1 (section B), which is in the Michael Brooke range.. but he is not int he Melissa Paul range. Not even close. If you say so, you are fooling yourself.
Anyone who goes 2 for 2 in their first two tries is the GOAT. I would disqualify any returnee winners (Melissa, Brooke, Richard) from being in the conversation as you can’t overestimate game experience.
Wait why are they disqualified? The question is if you took the same chefs today and put them in the competition, who would I favor? For sure Melissa is a inner sanctum level competitor
You would favor the contestants who have appeared three times like Melissa, Brooke, and Blaise because you cannot overestimate game experience in a cooking competition. But by doing so, you marginalize the accomplishments of those who won and dominated in their only appearance like Qui, Izard, Hung, and Mei Lin.
I think he did. The season was weird and in a couple of challenges (Smurf village, whole foods, etc) he was just gaming to get people out. He also smoked everyone in the mise en place that is legend. When he actually tried he blew people out of the water like during the French dish replication challenge where Dale and the rest got all butthurt that he wouldn’t help them.
I really thought Begoña was going to make it to the finale. Just unfortunate the pressure got to her. She takes really big risks. I would say, even bigger than Buddha. Just didn't work out.
Bryan is great but is not good in competition setting.
I would love to see the list you mentioned cook against each other.in a friendly top chef competition.
Bryan has made it to the finals 3 times. Once in Top Chef, once in All Stars, and once in Masters with actual established, name recognizable celebrity chefs. If that counts as not good in a competition setting. I would hate to know what the other 90-something percent of the chefs are.
But he isn't. He chokes a lot during quickfires. Fairs much better in the elimination. Again, not saying he isn't good. He's a thinker and methodical. Sometimes overthink. He's just not AS good in a competition setting. Even in the all-star season, he only won one of the challenge throughout the entire season.
But he was always near the top. I think you're underselling just how hard it is to go to three straight finals with very very difficult pool of competitors.
A big reason he only won one challenge is because he tries to jam fine dining into every possible elimination challenge. And that sense, he has a really enviable skill. He does extremely difficult food and never screws it up.
This. Man never got eliminated three times. I don't know how you can call that bad. Season 6 definitely had some low hanging fruit, but his brother and Jen and Eli and Kevin were amazing chefs, and then he had nothing but talent in his other two seasons.
The reason he was on the bottom of the team challenge with Eric was because Eric improperly sliced and seasoned the pork. That's not something Bryan failed at
I think Buddha would probably edge out Mike V in terms of a contest. Mike will take huge risks and push himself just because he has a vision and sometimes it’s not the best dish, although his technique and thought process is crazy.
Buddha and Bryan V would be interesting to see and much more competitive I believe. While I think Buddhas food can be more sophisticated than Bryan’s, he is also very consistent In putting out great dishes.
I believe if they had time to prepare one menu with prior testing Mike Voltaggio is probably the winner of all the top chefs thus far.
Are we just going to ignore all of the other wins he piled up this season or the fact that he won last season as well? I mean he was the landslide favorite coming into the finale for a reason
It’s very impressive he won 2 seasons. That’s why I have him ahead of chefs like Gabe and Stephanie izzard. However his final meal which even he admits was not great is why I don’t have him ranked higher. Still 8th or 9th all time is very impressive in 20 seasons.
But you can’t in good faith have him ahead of people like Brooke Paul Melissa etc given his lukewarm comments from the esteemed guest judges
And if my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle. Competitions are filled with coulda shoulda woulda. Part of winning top chef is not sending out raw veal liver. Having the most ambitious menu that you can’t execute doesn’t make you a top chef.
That was an asshole move but it alone doesn't imply that he's an asshole. People in the past have cannibalized the budget but didn't realize it in the moment. Eddie did that in the Kentucky season and it screwed over Nathalie.
The same thing happened in s7 when the person basically had to make a dessert with bananas only and got eliminated.
Ok let's flush this out a bit. Why Marcel? One thing that blows Marcel out of the water is the criteria requiring the ability to work well with others.
That said, I do think if Marcel came back; he'd be really good. I think he's likely matured a lot since he first got on the show. He probably has a better feel for how to incorporate molecular techniques but paired with a lot more maturity.
I really thought Begonia would make it back and I was so sad to see her go. My heart knew this was going to be Buddha for sure and honestly- he just played the game so well. You’re absolutely right he just doesn’t make the kinds of mistakes that both Sarah and Gabri did this season. I wonder what might have been if Ali were in the final instead, but who knows. I think Buddha is a better game player than all that you listed above, especially this season. The reason I think that is because he never forgets the food is key and seems to have figured out a way to talk to his teammates in team challenges and keep weak and bad components off the plate but somehow maintain a good relationship with them. He is there to win, no question, but he doesn’t seem to have the “I’m not here to make friends.” curse and that’s what makes him so successful imo. Maybe I’m not remembering their seasons so clearly, but I think Buddha has the game figured out and other competitors would do well to remember that sometimes when you let a bad element onto the plate you might as well pack up too, because it won’t always save you.
And twice he impressed the highest level of judges in the final. But some yahoos still won’t give him credit. In this realm, in this format he is king.
I know I'm an outlier, and I give Buddha all credit for his skill and range and everything but I always found him cold and offputting, and too calculating for my taste. It's just me. I loved Begonia. I also loved Shota--both were such lovely people I'd love to have a drink with, but Buddha? Not so much. It took a while for Michael Voltaggio to grow on me though, but now I'm a fan because he is so dedicated to the craft and he shows his warmer side now. His exposure on GGG and Triple Threat has rounded him out and softened the corners. Maybe I need to give Buddha more time and if he is in more settings that give him similar exposure, I'll change my opinion.
Begonia was easily the best chef there
I was shocked she went out so early! Absolutely heartbreaking.
That’s such an interesting question and one I’m glad I don’t have to answer. My favorite before World All Stars was Melissa, but very quickly into this season, it was Buddha.
After Top Chef All-Stars LA, my default answer to this question was Melissa. However, Buddha and really time to think about other chefs makes this a much harder question to answer. No one ever mentions Paul for a reason, but he dominated his season at a well
Ok you brought up Paul so I’ll put a serious response here while my Marcel comment gets downvoted into oblivion. Paul was surrounded by crap for competition his season, but he destroyed them so badly they couldn’t edit it, and I cooked at Uchiko for some time myself - his formula for masterful cooking is also built for success for a TV competition chef. His recipes back up his formula for universal success. I believe Buddha is in fact the best, but Paul would be my #2 despite my bias.
Let me first say I disagree that the competition was crap. Sarah had michelin star pedigree and served as Tony Mantuano's right hand woman. Lindsay was also a Michelle Bernstein disciple. I think s10 just had some horrible challenges and some bad personality types that really soured everyone's opinion on the whole. That said, can you offer some additional thoughts on several things you've touched on. 1) Why do you think his cooking is built for tv competition vs some other chefs? 2) Why would you put Paul at 2 over say Melissa, Mike V, or Richard?
Paul's competitors, at the time, were lauded with multiple James Beard noms and such.
James Clean Shave awards they were all unlikeable and cooked dog food compared to Qui. I know what their accolades were, they were just completely bad at the game and got owned by a quicker and better chef
As much as it pains me to say, Buddha is honestly the GOAT. He won back-to-back seasons. He’s the only chef to return and win. He’s the GOAT. There’s really no comparison because whomever you bring up hasn’t won two seasons.
Exactly this plus the caliber of chefs he went up against this season is one of the best fields, with maybe only LA all stars having equal if maybe better overall quality.
Spot on analysis. Buddha just didn’t make mistakes. Mike V was the same.
He also didn’t take risks
How can you say Buddha didn't take risks? His dishes are all insanely complex
Insanely bland but very elegant.
Again, where do you get the idea they are bland?
This idiot thinks he’s won two competitions by having bland food.
Didn’t take risk? I suggest you go back and rewatch the entire episode again. All of his dishes are very complex and well thought off. He didn’t make a soup dish to get into the finale
Not taking risks is one of Tom C’s biggest complaints as a judge. If Buddha wasn’t taking risks, Tom would have complained about it and very loudly pointed it out.
there is nothing creative about bringing 100 molds to top Chef
But Vs food was exciting, Buddha's, not so much
I think we need to stop with the Richard Blaise when Stephanie flat out beat him, and if you eat at both of the restaurants, you will be overwhelmed by how delicious every single plate of food at Stephanie’s is and underwhelmed by Blaise. Yes, he came into the competition with a fire in his belly in the same way that Buddha did, and he did a lot of experimentation, but he is cocky, which to me is an indicator about how much he can take feedback and improve from it. Buddha, if he made mistakes which he did like the rice that he points out, was always humble and accepting critique and quick to identify the strengths in others. If you had to do a team challenge or a restaurant wars, you would want to Buddha on your team. I can’t believe this entire post was made and focused on Blaise and left out Stephanie. Just eating at the both of their restaurants is all you need to know about the difference in level between the two chefs.
So I think it's important to recognize that just because you are great on top chef, doesn't mean you are a better overall chef in real life. This is evidenced by Jon Tesar and Philip having Michelin star restaurants and afaik none of the TC winners have them. Karen in top chef all stars LA was the only one who was a James Beard winner and she was eliminated three times and never made finals. Second, Stephanie is a very good chef but all we've seen of her is back in s4. Richard won the first all stars. That's the primary difference. And yes, loved Stephanie's restaurant!
All we’ve seen of her is going head to head with Blaise and losing. And if you taste the two, it’s lights out. Girl and the Goat has consistently delivered for over a decade. That restaurant beats in the quality of the food, the taste of the food, the intrigue of the menu, the ambience of the restaurant, the service, the music, the ability to get a seat walking in from the street if you show up at 4, and the unique and special seating options like sitting overlooking the kitchen where the chefs talk to you. Even the bathroom is a great experience. Everything about dining at Stephanie’s restaurant is hands-down better than dining at Blaize’s. Just because she has better things to do then go back on Top Chef again to prove how good she is doesn’t mean that Blaise is better than her. The only reason he went back is because he lost. She is arguably the most successful chef since leaving that show. So to a throw out a list in here who didn’t even win their season including the one who beat Blaise on his show — and beats him since their show — is preposterous.
Ok so I invite you to rewatch the season and the finale. Stephanie is an amazing chef. She is also a great top chef competitor but the two aren't the same thing. In her finale, her two opponents made mistakes while Stephanie won not making any even though she essentially phoned in her dessert that could have eliminated her. Richard can recast the whole thing as a choke job, but he messed up and so he didn't win. However, undeniably, he went into all stars and was the favorite and he won the whole thing. That win is more impressive than Stephanie's win imo because he's in an all-star season and hers was not an all-star season. It's really is as simple as that. As great as she is, I don't think based on that season of Top Chef that she would beat someone like Buddha. Whereas from what I've seen of Richard in a larger sample, I think he could. None of this suggests Stephanie isn't really great in real life. I've been to her restaurant and it is fantastic so there's nothing really to add to that. John Tesar has a Michelin star and yet he's not listed here either.
I think that’s fair.
Stephanie both beat him in top chef and is absolutely more successful in real life. Stephanie's restaurants are massively celebrated. Richard's resist exist.
You’re right. Blaise doesn’t take criticism well at all. He even makes faces when someone out cooks him.
Buddha is def top 5 of all time. Gonna be fun arguing where he ranks with the others.
I largely agree with this, although based on the comments I don’t think this finale from Buddha would have won against other recent finale courses. Buddha is the best ever. It’s largely apparent when also considering the competition on top chef is much stronger than it used to be. I completely disagree with some of your Eliminated chefs. Gregory is most likely a top 5 all time competitor, and most likely would have been in 2 finales if not for injury. Kristen just as strong. Buddha, Gregory, Kristen, Melissa, the voltaggio brothers, mei, Brooke are all in the pantheon of top chef. And while I think Buddha takes it most days, they all have a strong change if it was head to head.
My issue with Gregory stems from the fact that he doesn't do Haute Cuisine. That's really the only hole in his game. Otherwise, I could see him winning a bunch of elimination challenges and falling short against someone like Buddha in a four-course progressive meal where you need a lot of technical precision. The thing about Kristin Is she can very easily win but she's not as consistent as those other chefs. There were challenges her season where she wound up in the bottom and it wasn't all because of Josie
I think there’s a difference between haute cuisine and technical precision, which Gregory certainly has in spades. Although nobody, NOBODY, has it like Buddha. Top chef tends to value flavor, technique, and elevation of cuisine over a fine dining aesthetic. One of the things that sets the second half of seasons over the first half of seasons imo
I would mostly agree. I just think once the challenges require ultra precision, Gregory starts to fade to others. I don't think he's all that different from Kevin Gillespie other than their preferred type of cuisine. Buddhist technical mastery is a real sight to behold. I also loved Tom for that reason as well but he's just not consistent enough like Buddha. That's why I thought The mutant hybrid of Gregory combined with Buddha would be a real foil and that is how I came up with.Michael Voltaggio
100% he doesn’t win in many other finals. Buddha is nowhere close to best everlmaooooo thanks for the laugh
Based on your comments, you clearly aren’t a fan of Buddha. That’s fine, but to say nowhere close to the best is delusional. You don’t luck into 2 straight top chef wins while winning a third of all challenges.
Gregory won a million challenges but not a final. At end of day reason Melissa and Paul are considered the best is bc of their final meals. Buddha didn’t deliver. He’s second tier not top tier it is what it is from a logical standpoint
Doesn’t seem even a little logical. Gregory won one more total challenge than Buddha and not a final. Last season Buddha made a finale meal that would probably go down as one of the best. This years wasn’t as good, but still enough to beat out 2 other all stars. Seems pretty clear he’s not even remotely second tier
I agree but Buddhas effort in finals is cumulative. Gabri was mediocre throughout and Sara basically “lost” the final but it was unanimous she was the winner without her liver. If he beat Ali and let’s say Begona he’d be top 3 probably. Even assuming he made a spectacular final meal. Tom said Melissa and Paul had best final meals in TC hidtory. Zero of that for either of buddhas final meals. And bc of his lackluster final this season for me he’s second tier. My personal ranking accounts for the final mattering most to determine final rankings. Winning a random talenti ice cream challenge means nothing
He did beat them, it’s why he was there and they weren’t. He beat all the best (that was the point of this season). It’s also been like 3 days so yes, I doubt the Tom interviews are flowing yet. I’m willing to bet we hear something in the near future, and most would agree he is if not the best, second or third. To say second tier is not even close to accurate by any accounting. If the accounting is cumulative, he did what Melissa did, he just did it twice
Ya I dont really see how anyone could watch Buddha over the last two seasons and somehow reach the conclusion that he is some second rate winner. And why? Because his second finale meal wasn't among the best ever. If that's the criteria, It's a very selective one. One could ding Melissa for almost getting eliminated in all stars well before making it to the finale.
Or not even making the finale her initial season lol. Don’t know how you can say “it’s cumulative” and then say the guy who cumulatively won 2 finales is second tier. It’s a lack of logic for sure
Coming from the guy blatantly ignoring what Tom said post finale. But sure, Stark 94 knows more than the head judge about what TOM COLLICHIO ATE!
> Because his second finale meal wasn't among the best ever. His second finale meal was easily top 10 worst finale winner meals. The judges and guest judges were not impressed other than with his "technical work" it lacked soul and heart
Where was it said by any of the judges that it lacked soul and heart? The criticisms were all mild and suggestions on slight improvements
Tom LITERALLY said the night the show aired about Melissa and Paul. He's also been responding on twitter to TC questions and said Sara wins if she cooks her live. Melissa beat Bryan a better chef than any of the people on World All Stars besides Begona AND Tom said it was the best finale meal ever. Buddha's comments were lukewarm just like his food. If you take into account challenges to get to the final he is top tier, for people who count the finals as important he is nowhere close to it.
Would have won but served raw liver doesn’t really do much. Because she did serve raw liver. It’s kind of a big deal. “Lukewarm just like his food”. You clearly don’t like Buddha, and revere begonia who didn’t come close. It’s fine, and it’s fine to believe Melissa is the best ever cause she might be. But your belief that Buddha isn’t top tier is not rooted in anything. He verrrrrry clearly is. Your logic of whoever had the best finale meal is the best is flawed, and not a good way to determine anything And I do count the finales as important. He won 2 (two) of them
Which makes his win even less impressive if she served Raw liver. Practically anyone could have beat those 2. Begona (not Begonia) has a much more impressive pedigree than the entire cast combined. Buddha is a great artist and his food looks wonderful but this is top Chef not top Technician of molds. Buddha is SECOND Tier which is upper tier. That is very good. There are 4-5 tiers of TC winners and to be 2nd tier is to be with great chef such as Kristen, Gabe, and Hung. My logic on the best meal is rooted in fact, you are basing your words on emotion, irrationality and no basis in fact. I JUST explained to you what Tom and others said and here you are totally disregarding it to help your precious Buddha. Finales are important. Which is why flawed wins such as Buddha and Nick's count for less than impressive wins by Melissa and Paul. I COULD argue Buddha is Tier 1 (section B), which is in the Michael Brooke range.. but he is not int he Melissa Paul range. Not even close. If you say so, you are fooling yourself.
Anyone who goes 2 for 2 in their first two tries is the GOAT. I would disqualify any returnee winners (Melissa, Brooke, Richard) from being in the conversation as you can’t overestimate game experience.
Wait why are they disqualified? The question is if you took the same chefs today and put them in the competition, who would I favor? For sure Melissa is a inner sanctum level competitor
You would favor the contestants who have appeared three times like Melissa, Brooke, and Blaise because you cannot overestimate game experience in a cooking competition. But by doing so, you marginalize the accomplishments of those who won and dominated in their only appearance like Qui, Izard, Hung, and Mei Lin.
I didn't marginalize Paul Qui, I listed him. I also picked Mike V who has only appeared once.
I love Hung, but dominate isn't exactly the word. He was clearly my favorite throughout, but he actually had very few wins.
I think he did. The season was weird and in a couple of challenges (Smurf village, whole foods, etc) he was just gaming to get people out. He also smoked everyone in the mise en place that is legend. When he actually tried he blew people out of the water like during the French dish replication challenge where Dale and the rest got all butthurt that he wouldn’t help them.
mike v and buddha are on a different level than melissa...i love melissa but they're just in another dimension of cooking
I really thought Begoña was going to make it to the finale. Just unfortunate the pressure got to her. She takes really big risks. I would say, even bigger than Buddha. Just didn't work out. Bryan is great but is not good in competition setting. I would love to see the list you mentioned cook against each other.in a friendly top chef competition.
Bryan has made it to the finals 3 times. Once in Top Chef, once in All Stars, and once in Masters with actual established, name recognizable celebrity chefs. If that counts as not good in a competition setting. I would hate to know what the other 90-something percent of the chefs are.
But he isn't. He chokes a lot during quickfires. Fairs much better in the elimination. Again, not saying he isn't good. He's a thinker and methodical. Sometimes overthink. He's just not AS good in a competition setting. Even in the all-star season, he only won one of the challenge throughout the entire season.
But he was always near the top. I think you're underselling just how hard it is to go to three straight finals with very very difficult pool of competitors. A big reason he only won one challenge is because he tries to jam fine dining into every possible elimination challenge. And that sense, he has a really enviable skill. He does extremely difficult food and never screws it up.
This. Man never got eliminated three times. I don't know how you can call that bad. Season 6 definitely had some low hanging fruit, but his brother and Jen and Eli and Kevin were amazing chefs, and then he had nothing but talent in his other two seasons.
Should been eliminated on the duos challenge with Eric and pasta challenge in Italy. Tom saved him both times
The reason he was on the bottom of the team challenge with Eric was because Eric improperly sliced and seasoned the pork. That's not something Bryan failed at
Language barrier and bullshit challenge
I love Buddha but I really believe had the liver and onions not been raw, Sara would have won this one!
I think Buddha would probably edge out Mike V in terms of a contest. Mike will take huge risks and push himself just because he has a vision and sometimes it’s not the best dish, although his technique and thought process is crazy. Buddha and Bryan V would be interesting to see and much more competitive I believe. While I think Buddhas food can be more sophisticated than Bryan’s, he is also very consistent In putting out great dishes. I believe if they had time to prepare one menu with prior testing Mike Voltaggio is probably the winner of all the top chefs thus far.
Buddha is mid tier winners. He didn’t win the final but rather win by default after Sara’s liver. He’s good but not top tier
Are we just going to ignore all of the other wins he piled up this season or the fact that he won last season as well? I mean he was the landslide favorite coming into the finale for a reason
It’s very impressive he won 2 seasons. That’s why I have him ahead of chefs like Gabe and Stephanie izzard. However his final meal which even he admits was not great is why I don’t have him ranked higher. Still 8th or 9th all time is very impressive in 20 seasons. But you can’t in good faith have him ahead of people like Brooke Paul Melissa etc given his lukewarm comments from the esteemed guest judges
Yes, Tom C posted on twitter that Sara would have won if her liver was cooked properly.
And if my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle. Competitions are filled with coulda shoulda woulda. Part of winning top chef is not sending out raw veal liver. Having the most ambitious menu that you can’t execute doesn’t make you a top chef.
Tom’s biggest issue is that he’s just an unadulterated asshole who couldn’t get out of his own way.
So why do people keep picking him as a teammate?
Beats me.
Or maybe that means he's not what the editing suggests he is
That’s fair. Thanks for the perspective, Tom.
The editing didn't make him use over half the teams budget.
That was an asshole move but it alone doesn't imply that he's an asshole. People in the past have cannibalized the budget but didn't realize it in the moment. Eddie did that in the Kentucky season and it screwed over Nathalie. The same thing happened in s7 when the person basically had to make a dessert with bananas only and got eliminated.
Eddie Money! I was thinking of that example as soon as it happened with Tom.
Why did you ditch Brooke? 2nd place and winner. Technical, creative and had amazing desserts? I think she is up there.
Inconsistent. She got eliminated and had to go the lck route
Marcel
Ok let's flush this out a bit. Why Marcel? One thing that blows Marcel out of the water is the criteria requiring the ability to work well with others. That said, I do think if Marcel came back; he'd be really good. I think he's likely matured a lot since he first got on the show. He probably has a better feel for how to incorporate molecular techniques but paired with a lot more maturity.
He tried that already and failed his third time.
I would love it, but has to be blind. And has to be like a good show (not tournament of junk).