Michelin, the oldest and best-known restaurant guide in the world, recently Announced That it will begin to break with tradition by exposing some of its selection in New York throughout the year, compared to annuals. The move is a clear sign that the Red Guide is looking for ways to stay relevant within a competitive food media landscape where new reviews appear almost every day of the week, instead of once a year.

The guide’s anonymous inspectors opened the new policy by unveiling six new choices: Les Trois Chevaux, chef Angie Mar’s expensive ode to elite French cuisine; Le Fanfare, an Italian restaurant in Greenpoint; Takeda, Umkaz Lounge on the Upper West Side; Torian, the excellent Yakitori place of Yoshitro Ikagawa; Yellow Rose, the acclaimed JDC Texas in the East Village; And 63 Clinton, a regular menu place for less than $ 100 from Samuel Clants and Raymond Trin.

But there’s a catch: Michelin doesn’t really tell us if the places in question get single stars, multiple stars or zero stars, nor does the guide reveal his Bib Gourmand list, his annual nod to more reasonable places. Michelin simply states that restaurants are included in its annual guide, adding that “some recommended restaurants” may get bibs or stars in the future. The inspectors also added some quick “reviews” on the culinary offerings everywhere in the Michelin smartphone app for download. These reviews are brief.

Gondol Polenk, the International Director of Michelin Guides, announced the changes in a press release: “As the restaurant industry continues to face unprecedented challenges and uncertainties, we hope the year-round discoveries and updates of the selection provide year-round opportunities ”.

What Michelin is doing here is a good thing. The move is, for now, at least, helping the guide eliminate the center of its twisted award process, which needs serious overhaul. Inspectors, after all, have a habit of ignoring places that are not European, American, Japanese or Korean in their starring choices.

The Red Guide, instead, is ostensibly trying to focus on the work and words of its inspectors, a policy that could theoretically help Michelin better adapt to what other publications offer more reliably, which are informed and non-arbitrary advice and arguments. Icons that prefer a select group of institutions. Dozens of restaurant critics have put their stars on a Temporary possession During the plague; Eater permanently humiliated his star system.

However, let me make four quick suggestions on how Michelin might implement this new policy more easily.

  1. Given Michelin’s clear preference for certain kitchens, it would be more productive if all six new restaurants were not included in the European-American-Japanese category – albeit accessories for a guide to adding a Texas restaurant like Yellow Rose. For the New York guide, in a somewhat unlikely way, there are no Indian, Vietnamese, Thai, regional Chinese or African restaurants in the stars.
  2. Since the inspectors reportedly eat a lot, and since they are probably involved in vigorous debates with their colleagues over star selection, it would be nice if their so-called reviews were actually reviews, rather than writing a 120-word capsule. A little more than describing the atmosphere and detailing some of the dishes.
  3. Maybe Michelin could find more than two places to emphasize that are not places for a tasting menu? This is not how most people eat on a regular basis.
  4. Although Michelin has stated she will unveil more elections during the year, could she not have found more than six halls in total, especially given that the election is biased to places that cost about $ 300 or more for two – Yellow Rose and Le Fanfare though?

Michelin is taking a small step in the right direction, though it seems for now that it is more interested in maintaining its classic hierarchies rather than committing to any significant change in terms of expanding the scope of restaurants it chooses to promote. Or as a restaurant critic might say: the idea is nice; Execution requires work.