New York vs. San Francisco vs. Los Angeles Restaurant Showdown
Some of America's biggest food cities have been unwittingly sent into battle against each other.
First up, the New York versus San Francisco debate. In 2009, David Chang uttered his famous words about the San Francisco dining scene being pretty much "figs on a plate." Then, in 2010, there was a bicoastal battle that pitted chefs from both cities against each other. Now, food critic Alan Richman (not always known for his kind words) has declared San Francisco to be the better food city. "At each moment in history, there's a city or region that chefs have to visit to learn what's going on in American cooking... Right now it's San Francisco, where restaurants of ambition and imagination are opening," he writes in the July issue of GQ (not yet online). On New York, he says it "hasn't had much of a century once you get past David Chang."
Winner: San Francisco
In the next round, San Francisco goes up against Los Angeles in Sunset magazine's food fight. After an intense battle involving restaurant critics vouching for their respective cities and evaluating different aspects of the food scene in both cities, Los Angeles is declared the winner. San Francisco did put forth a valiant effort, however, with entries such as its great markets and "food too distinctive to be called trendsetting." Sunset justifies its choice of winner through the post "7 spots to convince you L.A. is king," which include restaurants Mozza and Animal.
Winner: Los Angeles
New York: 0
San Francisco: 1
Los Angeles: 1
Let's hope the winners don't rest on their laurels -- New York doesn't like being second best.