[xcanuck]

We've been at RTC twice now and have two more reservations already made for the near future. I love this place. It's SO nice that there's an affordable place in SS where I can get a reasonably priced, high quality meal.

So far, the NY Strip has been my favorite (though mine was undercooked a tad...I had read elsewhere that others have had this experience - anyone here??). The bone marrow/mushroom is absolutely to die for!! Michael came by our table the first time we were there and I told him how much we both loved it. I could eat that as an appetizer.

The key lime pie is killer - too bad it's so good because we haven't gotten around to trying anything else. But other people's descriptions of the Peach Charlotte have my mouth watering so maybe we'll give that a try this weekend.

I see this whenever I work out from the window at the Gold's Gym. I think RTC could force me to double the length of my time on the treadmill, least my waistline should expand accordingly.

Thanks to Michael for opening up a badly needed quality restaurant in the Silver Spring area.

[Barbara]

xcanuck, on Aug 30 2006, 06:41 PM, said:

We've been at RTC twice now and have two more reservations already made for the near future. I love this place. It's SO nice that there's an affordable place in SS where I can get a reasonably priced, high quality meal.

So far, the NY Strip has been my favorite (though mine was undercooked a tad...I had read elsewhere that others have had this experience - anyone here??).

Welcome xcanuck, nice first post. (Are you, bychance, CANADIAN? )

Yes, we have discovered from eating at RTS that if you want your steak cooked at what some of us considered "medium rare" it is best to ask for it "medium." It has to do with the temperature guide that Michael follows. I haven't tried this yet, but asking for the steak to be pink, not red, in the middle may get you what you want. At least he is consistent in both his restaurants, so one can figure out how to adjust. The steaks are so very good, not to mention such a bargain, that understanding his "scale" (for want of a better term) will put you in good stead.

[treznor]

Barbara, on Aug 30 2006, 07:33 PM, said:

Welcome xcanuck, nice first post. (Are you, bychance, CANADIAN? )

Yes, we have discovered from eating at RTS that if you want your steak cooked at what some of us considered "medium rare" it is best to ask for it "medium." It has to do with the temperature guide that Michael follows. I haven't tried this yet, but asking for the steak to be pink, not red, in the middle may get you what you want. At least he is consistent in both his restaurants, so one can figure out how to adjust. The steaks are so very good, not to mention such a bargain, that understanding his "scale" (for want of a better term) will put you in good stead.

I had heard the same thing prior to my first time eating at RTS and thus ordered my first steak there medium rare (instead of my normal rare). A mistake. Everytime I've ordered a rare steak at RTS (had pork and crab when we went to RTC so don't have a direct comparison there yet) I've gotten exactly what I consider to be a rare steak. Of course I also think that almost every other restaurant that I've ordered steak at overcooks their rare steak...

[DanielK]

Maybe I'm confused, but if you want pink in the middle, that's medium, not medium rare.

Here was the guide I always understood:

Rare: Red, cool center
Medium-rare: Red, warm center
Medium: Pink, warm center
Medium-well: Very slightly pink, hot center
Well done: why bother?

When I order medium-rare at RTC or RTS, I get a red, warm center - exactly what I expect.

[Barbara]

DanielK, on Aug 30 2006, 11:20 PM, said:

Maybe I'm confused, but if you want pink in the middle, that's medium, not medium rare.

Here was the guide I always understood:

Rare: Red, cool center
Medium-rare: Red, warm center
Medium: Pink, warm center
Medium-well: Very slightly pink, hot center
Well done: why bother?

When I order medium-rare at RTC or RTS, I get a red, warm center - exactly what I expect.

Yes, exactly. That's what we get when we order "medium." The center is always what I consider "red" and not "pink." I prefer "pink+warm", but have never gotten that at either RTS or RTC. His "Medium Rare" is too undercooked for me,but his "medium" isn't much more cooked. I wouldn't be surprised if Michael weighed in here and talked about "temperature" once again. Maybe he'll tell us if a given percentage of his customers send the meat back to be cooked some more.

(I bear in mind that the quality of the steaks he dishes up are top-notch, and overcooking them would be a crime against not humanity but gustatorial pleasure.)

[Mark Slater]

Most people who order steaks above medium-rare do so because they don't want to see blood on the plate. Steaks that have been dry aged for 28 days don't have any blood to ooze and are more tender and flavorful. This is why Ray's steaks are best enjoyed rare or meduium rare at most.

[jparrott]

Indeed. And even then, isn't most of the dark pink liquid exuded from a steak not blood, but juices colored by proteins?

Paging Dr. McGee!

[xcanuck]

Barbara, on Aug 30 2006, 07:33 PM, said:

Welcome xcanuck, nice first post. (Are you, bychance, CANADIAN? )

Yes, we have discovered from eating at RTS that if you want your steak cooked at what some of us considered "medium rare" it is best to ask for it "medium." It has to do with the temperature guide that Michael follows. I haven't tried this yet, but asking for the steak to be pink, not red, in the middle may get you what you want. At least he is consistent in both his restaurants, so one can figure out how to adjust. The steaks are so very good, not to mention such a bargain, that understanding his "scale" (for want of a better term) will put you in good stead.

Definitely Canadian That would explain why I played two back-to-back hockey games last night!!

On the subject of Michael's scale...I'm not sure what to do. The last time I went, I ordered the filet medium rare and got it to be exactly what I consider to be medium rare. I guess I'll just HAVE to go back and order a third steak (and fourth, and fifth...) to reach a definitive conclusion.

One option - instead of asking for rare, med rare, etc - is to just ask them to cook it to a specific internal temperature range. I tried this once at a downtown DC steakhouse and the look of derision from the server made me reluctant to try this again. I guess I could also use the old cook's trick of pointing to the part of my palm to indicate how I want it done but I think that would also be received poorly.

On a tangential note about RTC - today's Post has an article about how the plans to open a second Birchmere very close to RTC. Frankly, I'md excited about the possibilty. Have a great dinner before catching a good show. If only the 9:30 Club would move up to SS!

http://www.washingto...6083003162.html

[treznor]

jparrott, on Aug 31 2006, 09:02 AM, said:

Indeed. And even then, isn't most of the dark pink liquid exuded from a steak not blood, but juices colored by proteins?

Paging Dr. McGee!

That's correct. Even in non-dry aged beef, such as the run of the mill beef you'd pick up in a grocery store, there is very little actual blood in the beef. Since very little blood is actually absorbed into the muscle (compared to overall blood volume), most of the blood of an animal drains very quickly during slaughter. A couple hours after slaughter there very likely is little blood left in the muscle of an animal. The liquid that is found in steaks is the water and other juices that are slowly released by the muscle over time, colored by protein. Which is also why dry-aged beef has less juice to give out as most of the water that's going to be easily given up by the beef has already drained out (which is why weight/volume of a steak decreases a decent bit as it dry ages, and why dry aged beef may have a "beefier" flavor as it's being diluted by less liquid.

All that having been said, the liquid looks enough like blood to make some people squimish :-)

[brr]

xcanuck, on Aug 31 2006, 10:40 AM, said:

On a tangential note about RTC - today's Post has an article about how the plans to open a second Birchmere very close to RTC. Frankly, I'md excited about the possibilty. Have a great dinner before catching a good show. If only the 9:30 Club would move up to SS!

http://www.washingto...6083003162.html

I wonder if theres a correlation between liking good food and liking good music.....I'm seeing more and more familiar looking screen names from the 9.30 club board on here in recent weeks.

and thats great news about a second Birchmere.....my aching bones find it harder and harder to stand for hours at gigs

[ICD]

Barbara, on Aug 31 2006, 01:12 AM, said:

I prefer "pink+warm"

Me too. I keep trying steak medium rare and just not liking it. It has nothing to do with blood or squeamishness. I'll eat steak tartare or carpaccio any day. Same thing with tuna, raw or mostly cooked through is great. I think it's the texture that bothers me. To keep this on topic, what's the situation with regards to children? Are high chairs or booster seats available? How busy is the restaurant when it just opens?

Many thanks,

Ignacio

[crackers]

crackers, on Aug 16 2006, 08:17 PM, said:

And oh yes, there are high chairs for the little ones. Peanut has already tried them out and declared them quite satisfactory.

ICD, on Aug 31 2006, 12:47 PM, said:

Are high chairs or booster seats available?

High chairs yes, but not sure about boosters.

[ferment everything]

brr, on Aug 31 2006, 10:56 AM, said:

I wonder if theres a correlation between liking good food and liking good music.....I'm seeing more and more familiar looking screen names from the 9.30 club board on here in recent weeks.

and thats great news about a second Birchmere.....my aching bones find it harder and harder to stand for hours at gigs

I find that after I drink a couple North Coast Old Rasputin Imperial Stouts at the 9:30 club, my bones ache less (or maybe they're still complaining but I don't care enough to listen).

In my experience, people that like good food tend to be much more exploratory about things in all other areas of life, music included. Of course it doesn't always go the other way...plenty of my music nerd/snob friends are not at all interested in coming with me to good restaurants. Could be the budget thing too, though...they spend too much money on new albums to really eat out that much

[Escoffier]

Rather than just come here and write about how good the food is (which would be redundant by any account) which has already been done to death, I thought a few pictures might be more enlightening. From the dinner that the four of us had last night a short trip through a lot of really good food is here.

[StephenB]

Ray's the Classics is functioning on all cylinders now. We ordered from all corners of the menu (except the steak -- we know another place where we can get that) and everyone was thrilled with the tastiness and, if I may say so, the juiciness of the offerings. And since we ate "family style," I am prepared to answer questions about everything. My pièce de résistance, the scallops, were plump and bursting with flavor. I have never had better. And Michael solved the dessert conundrum by sending over one of everything. An extraordinary evening, a meal to savor.

The quality of the place, and the seriousness of the investment, are manifest even before the food arrives, in the stemware and the cutlery.

We enquired if Michael Hartzer were in the kitchen. And Landum said, "If we're open, he's there."

[Biscuit Girl]

Escoffier, on Sep 1 2006, 08:27 AM, said:

Rather than just come here and write about how good the food is (which would be redundant by any account) which has already been done to death, I thought a few pictures might be more enlightening. From the dinner that the four of us had last night a short trip through a lot of really good food is here.

Great pictures. Now I REALLY want to get up there for dinner.

[brr]

I will briefly add to the massed chorus of praise for RTC - we ate there with my parents Thursday night - the sausage biscuits really are all that - they have to be tasted to be believed - I went for a NY strip which was excellent, several had the crab royale which also received the thumbs up - my wife did not care for the chicken so much but the staff were very good about taking it back

desserts are very good, in particular the chocolate trifle which I had to arm wrestle my daughter for and an amazing peach tart of some type which a very crisp sweet crust

space is beautiful....very classy....service top notch

Thanks to Michael for creating such a great dining option so close to our house!

[JLK]

What a great spot. So elegant, yet comfortable (oh yeah, and the food's great too!). I started by buying my date and I drinks. Just pulled the receipt from my purse and laughed. Why? Because a round of drinks - one Apple Manhattan and a glass of Chardonnay - was $12.25 pre-tip. I was awfully excited to see a list of wines by the glass where the prices started at a beyond-reasonable $5 per glass.

Foodwise, we second much of what has been posted already. I loved the prosciutto-wrapped figs, he really enjoyed the mixed cress salad (I liked my taste of it too, particularly the bright citrus dressing). My salad of dandelion greens seemed bitter after a few bites, but I suspect other people will like it that way; I'm really not a salad eater.

Our potatoes au gratin weren't as creamy as we expected, but the flavor was great and when asked if we wanted the remaining bites wrapped up for home, we said simultaneously "yes!" A bite of my date's veal (medium, juicy, fabulous) made me think "I'll be back for this alone). He also loved the sauteed spinach with mushrooms. My hangar steak was perfectly cooked and delicious, but I had no doubt about that, having enjoyed the cut at RTS.

For dessert, we shared the milk and cookies which were both cute and tasty, as well as just the right size. Still, when I saw the trifle come out of the kitchen I kind of wished we'd ordered one of those too.

Michael, looking very dapper in his suit and and ever-present smile, has a winner on his hands. The staff, even when dealing with quite a crowd, is pleasant and professional. Prices are remarkably reasonable. I'm a big fan.

[CrescentFresh]

JLK, on Sep 3 2006, 04:13 PM, said:

Apple Manhattan

[smokey]

Went on Sat night with the +1. The food was great, the location is good-looking (like many, I liked the art deco feel of it), our waitress was mediocre.

We received a lovely dish of pickled vegetables as an amuse bouches with the handing over of menus and the wine list (the pickled vegetables were good, particularly the beets). Neither the +1 nor I are drinking right now, which I simply decided to tell our waitress at that point. I didn't tell her the reasons, because I don't think I need to justify a decision not to buy alcohol (but, I think they're pretty good reasons and they have nothing to do with how much money we had to spend).

But from that point onwards, we pretty well went into the deep freeze. We never received the bread and spreads. As we saw other tables around us receive them (from our waitress), we decided to inquire whether we too might get some bread. Our waitress, somehow, never seemed to catch our eye. Luckly, we were able to tackle a bus boy and asked him to bring them. When I explained to the waitress that we weren't drinking, we each ordered a cranberry juice and tonic water. When the waitress cleared the glasses, she didn't offer to bring us another round. The waitress never checked in with us after the entrees were served (e.g. "How are you enjoying everything?"). After the entrees were cleared, we got the expected inquiry as to whether we were interested in dessert. We said that we were interested in at least looking at the menu. She went away and returned a few minutes later with menus for us to peruse (what waitress wouldn't come with dessert menus at the ready when asking if we were interested?). I know they serve coffee with dessert, because I saw others drinking it. Our waitress didn't mention this option to us. Yes, I'm well aware that I could have asked for coffee. That's not the point.

We felt as though, from the point at which we declared we weren't going to be drinking alcohol, our waitress pretty well wrote us off. Although we were there on a busy Saturday night, she didn't seem unusually slammed. And, I observed her providing good service to other tables (offering both pickled vegetables and bread! checking in with them after the entrees were served! you know, all those tricks of the trade for wait staff).

The restaurant is certainly very inexpensive for the quality of the food. I'm wondering how long Michael can offer such great food at such low prices. (BTW, nobody has mentioned the grilled asparagus side (maybe it wasn't on the menu before?)--it's wonderful, I highly recommend it.) To be honest, however, I won't be running back. No matter what the price, I hate feeling as though I'm receiving second class service from a waitress because she's decided I'm cheap or I won't be a large bill or I don't-know-what. Of course, in the end, it turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy--we tipped 15% (which is cheap for us) on a low bill (I would have taken a refill on my cranberry and tonic, I probably would have ordered some coffee if she had mentioned it, there are a lot of niceties she decided to skip that would have made the bill higher). Again, I'm well aware I could have asked for these things. The overall vibe I received from the waitress was that she was pretty well uninterested in our table, which made me less inclined to ask for them and make a larger bill to tip on.

[DanCole42]

smokey, on Sep 5 2006, 11:49 AM, said:

Neither the +1 nor I are drinking right now, which I simply decided to tell our waitress at that point.

We felt as though, from the point at which we declared we weren't going to be drinking alcohol, our waitress pretty well wrote us off.

There are few excuses for that kind of service (many involving lots of groping and catcalling). Although, it does seem like an odd thing to point out to a server: "We're not drinking right now." Usually I just go with "Water's fine for now, thanks."

How do they do the grilled asparagus?

[JPW]

DanCole42, on Sep 5 2006, 12:27 PM, said:

How do they do the grilled asparagus?

Ummm. They grill it.

[Malawry]

For what it's worth, I was the only one drinking at my table of 5 Saturday night (including a pregnant lady and a baby, who obviously weren't going to drink), and service at the table did not suffer for us. I don't know if we had the same server or not, but ours didn't "penalize" us for not drinking.

[DanCole42]

JPW, on Sep 5 2006, 12:41 PM, said:

Ummm. They grill it.

Clearly. I meant did it have a sauce or some exotic salt or something like that. I grill mine in EVOO and pepper, then finish on the plate with some pink salt.

[smokey]

Nope, no exotic sauce (that's probably why I liked it!). Just olive oil and a bit of salt and pepper. It was just perfectly done and tasted wonderfully of the vegetable. It doesn't sound like much, but it's a great preparation that I really like and they did it perfectly.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

smokey, on Sep 5 2006, 02:10 PM, said:

Nope, no exotic sauce (that's probably why I liked it!). Just olive oil and a bit of salt and pepper. It was just perfectly done and tasted wonderfully of the vegetable. It doesn't sound like much, but it's a great preparation that I really like and they did it perfectly.

I've had that at RTS before, and it is great.

[Michael Landrum]

smokey, on Sep 5 2006, 11:49 AM, said:

...Neither the +1 nor I are drinking right now, which I simply decided to tell our waitress at that point. I didn't tell her the reasons, because I don't think I need to justify a decision not to buy alcohol (but, I think they're pretty good reasons and they have nothing to do with how much money we had to spend).

But from that point onwards, we pretty well went into the deep freeze...

We felt as though, from the point at which we declared we weren't going to be drinking alcohol, our waitress pretty well wrote us off...I observed her providing good service to other tables (offering both pickled vegetables and bread! checking in with them after the entrees were served! you know, all those tricks of the trade for wait staff).

...To be honest, however, I won't be running back...I hate feeling as though I'm receiving second class service from a waitress because she's decided I'm cheap or I won't be a large bill or I don't-know-what.

If this is indeed true, and from your report I can't imagine any other factors being involved, than this intentionally discriminatory service is unacceptable and grounds for immediate dismissal.

We have two female servers, out of a waitstaff of four, one an African American the other a brunette. If you could let me know which was your server so that I can take the appropriate actions I would greatly appreciate it.

In any case, I will get to the bottom of this and see that this woman is sent on her way before this discrimination, unwarranted judgementalism and personal vindictiveness become the hallmark of service at Ray's The Classics.

Thank you for alerting me, and the public, to this problem before it is too late.

[The Hersch]

Michael Landrum, on Sep 6 2006, 02:13 PM, said:

In any case, I will get to the bottom of this and see that this woman is sent on her way

Geez, couldn't you just give her a bit of a talking-to? I don't think I've ever gotten anyone fired, but if I did I'd feel terrible. Well, in most cases anyway.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

Whew, he's only going to fire the person, once the identity is revealed after a thorough, internal investigation conducted by an outside lawfirm. I would have thought he would bring out the firing squad for a first offense such as this (thereby elmiinating the possiblity of a second offense).

[Michael Landrum]

The Hersch, on Sep 6 2006, 02:27 PM, said:

Geez, couldn't you just give her a bit of a talking-to? I don't think I've ever gotten anyone fired, but if I did I'd feel terrible. Well, in most cases anyway.

If it were merely a case of an overwhelmed server doing the best she can to serve and take care of guests on a crushingly busy Saturday night in a restaurant that was less than four weeks old that for a brief period had to wait for a freshly-baked batch of homemade bread to come out of the oven and maybe one table got innocently overlooked, than a talking-to would be enough.

Or if the service at Ray's The Classics simply sucks--a very real possibility.

But no, there was obviously something so much more, and something so much more sinister, going on here.

Discrimination in any form is an accusation that can not ever be overlooked or taken lightly and must always be confronted head on, and quickly.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

Michael Landrum, on Sep 6 2006, 02:42 PM, said:

Discrimination in any form is an accusation that can not be overlooked or taken lightly and must be confronted head on, and quickly.

I agree. Discrimination against teetotalers must be wiped out at the first sign.

[DLB]

Jacques Gastreaux, on Sep 6 2006, 02:56 PM, said:

I agree. Discrimination against teetotalers must be wiped out at the first sign.

LOL, what about the veggie eaters?

[Jacques Gastreaux]

DLB, on Sep 6 2006, 03:20 PM, said:

LOL, what about the veggie eaters?

No comment.

[smokey]

Michael Landrum, on Sep 6 2006, 02:42 PM, said:

But no, there was obviously something so much more, and something so much more sinister, going on here.

I'm so relieved I didn't take the time to speak with you on Saturday night, Michael. (I was out celebrating my birthday and after the exposure to such sinister goings-on, I felt the need to rush home and take a scalding shower.) I would have hated to have seen the blood running through the halls of RTC after you finished with my waitress. Needless to say, I think she deserved it and would have been happy to have known it was transpiring, just don't have the stomach to stick around for it. Since I'm afraid I don't really remember what she looks like, you probably ought to fire your entire female waitstaff to be sure this is thoroughly stamped out--and as a warning to other waitstaff who might be considering making the same mistake.

It's comforting to see that RTC hasn't yet achieved sacred cow status and I can post something less than glowing about your restaurant.

[Michael Landrum]

smokey, on Sep 6 2006, 03:33 PM, said:

I'm so relieved I didn't take the time to speak with you on Saturday night, Michael. (I was out celebrating my birthday and after the exposure to such sinister goings-on, I felt the need to rush home and take a scalding shower.) I would have hated to have seen the blood running through the halls of RTC after you finished with my waitress. Needless to say, I think she deserved it and would have been happy to have known it was transpiring, just don't have the stomach to stick around for it. Since I'm afraid I don't really remember what she looks like, you probably ought to fire your entire female waitstaff to be sure this is thoroughly stamped out--and as a warning to other waitstaff who might be considering making the same mistake.

It's comforting to see that RTC hasn't yet achieved sacred cow status and I can post something less than glowing about your restaurant.

If you had bad service, say you had bad service. If you think that service overall is not up to par, say that service overall is not up to par. These are all legitimate observations, critiques and criticisms.

But why impute prejudicial and discriminatory motives to service lapses that most likely (Occam's Razor) had other causes? Why take the time to impugn a server personally? Why deride a person who worked hard to serve you for what you judge to be her stupidity?

Were you really that injured by these lapses? Coming to your table to inquire about dessert without a dessert menu in hand? That's your criterium for publicly pronouncing someone stupid?

Why present opinions as facts without full knowledge of a situation when a person's livelihood is at stake? At some restaurants your comments would get a server fired without hesitation or fair review. Knowing my servers, knowing how hard they work, and not only standing behind them, but also standing up for them, I would sooner fire such a guest.

Say whatever you want about the restaurant and your experiences there, that is fair game. But making unfounded personal judgements in a public forum against a server is very poor form. Not without verifying the validity of your opinions first. You know, the usual tricks of the trade for a forum member trying to make a responsible, constructive post?

[DLB]

I was starting to wonder where this was going. I don't think anyone should ever try to get someone fired. This happend a few weeks ago during Tom's chat, when someone had issues with a server at Cafe Milano. The very next week one of the managers responded to say that the server had been fired....shameful

[brr]

smokey, on Sep 6 2006, 03:33 PM, said:

I'm so relieved I didn't take the time to speak with you on Saturday night, Michael. (I was out celebrating my birthday and after the exposure to such sinister goings-on, I felt the need to rush home and take a scalding shower.) I would have hated to have seen the blood running through the halls of RTC after you finished with my waitress. Needless to say, I think she deserved it and would have been happy to have known it was transpiring, just don't have the stomach to stick around for it. Since I'm afraid I don't really remember what she looks like, you probably ought to fire your entire female waitstaff to be sure this is thoroughly stamped out--and as a warning to other waitstaff who might be considering making the same mistake.

It's comforting to see that RTC hasn't yet achieved sacred cow status and I can post something less than glowing about your restaurant.

I would urge folks to read smokeys post again....unless I'm sorely mistaken, I **THINK** this is his tongue-in-cheek reply to Michaels tongue-in-cheek response....scalding showers, blood running in the halls, firing the entire female staff etc etc.....not sure he wants anyone fired......

[Barbara]

I believe this is a case where, if you didn't want to speak to Michael that night about the service, you should have sent him a PM about it. There is no doubt that he wants to be alerted to ANY problem at RTC and we know he reads this board and answers his emails. Is RTC on the "sacred cow" list? Not yet, but it's getting mightly close. Does Michael deserve the benefit of the doubt from DR.com members? Absolutely. He should have been notified about this privately and given a chance to correct what needed correcting. At the very least.

[smokey]

Michael Landrum, on Sep 6 2006, 04:42 PM, said:

But why impute prejudicial and discriminatory motives to service lapses that most likely (Occam's Razor) had other causes? Why take the time to impugn a server personally? Why deride a person who worked hard to serve you for what you judge to be her stupidity?

Were you really that injured by these lapses? Coming to your table to inquire about dessert without a dessert menu in hand? That's your criterium for publicly pronouncing someone stupid?

Why present opinions as facts without full knowledge of a situation when a person's livelihood is at stake? At some restaurants your comments would get a server fired without hesitation or fair review. Knowing my servers, knowing how hard they work, and not only standing behind them, but also standing up for them, I would sooner fire such a guest.

Say whatever you want about the restaurant and your experiences there, that is fair game. But making unfounded personal judgements in a public forum against a server is very poor form. Not without verifying the validity of your opinions first. You know, the usual tricks of the trade for a forum member trying to make a responsible, constructive post?

You're suggesting I "imputed prejudicial and discriminatory motives"? Where did I "impugn a server personally"? Where did I "deride her for her stupidity"?

I don't read what you're reading in my post. Obviously, it's a post-modern world and the reader is empowered. If that's what you read in my post, that's what you read. But I never used the word stupid to describe our waitress. I tried to stick to the facts of what I felt were her lapses in service (which you clearly don't think of as a big deal--fine, you're entitled to your opinion), and then to frame how they came across to us (that she "put us in the deep freeze" "wrote us off" "we received second class service"). The idea that it was because we weren't drinking, and hence her tip would be lower, isn't a novel one. I don't think suggesting that may have been the case was attributing "prejudicial and discriminatory motives" to our waitress.

If it will make you feel better, you're probably right, her service lapses probably had nothing to do with the fact that we weren't drinking alcohol. Maybe she's just not a very good waitress. Maybe she was swamped and is in fact an incredibly good waitress because she did a good job of not coming across that way. All I have is my one evening there to judge. I'm not a professional restaurant critic, so I'm not required to wait until the restaurant has been open for a while to judge them, nor am I required to return multiple times.

Everybody here can determine the difference in my post between fact (e.g. we weren't offered bread without asking for it--or, perhaps I'm lying, we'll never know) and opinion ("put us in the deep freeze"). I didn't describe my opinions as fact.

I think my post was exactly what you suggested. I thought I had bad service and I said I thought I had bad service. I'm not sure how I could have "verified the validity of my opinions" before posting here. My +1 also thought we were receiving mediocre service. Is there some external validator of opinions that I'm unaware of? Should I have asked you if your waitstaff routinely provided mediocre service only to people who don't drink alcohol or if that was a special feature of our waitress or was she just slammed that night?

And please, don't even try to suggest that I posted a negative experience with a waitress to get her fired. If i wanted somebody fired (and I don't think in any way I suggested that should be the outcome of my experience. Of course, the reader is empowered--if you want to attribute that motive to me, go right ahead), I would have stood up that night, thrown a hissy fit at the waitress and then at you. I would have written letters to my elected representatives. Maybe taken this up with the better business bureau of montgomery county or silver spring. Written the dog catcher. God only knows what I would do. It would never occur to me that anybody (least of all somebody as rational as you) would consider firing somebody over a posting on the internet.

[bonaire]

I'm not a particularly regular poster, so I'll apologize in advance for butting into what looks like a big kids fight. However, I just wanted everyone to know that for the average reader, it didn't look like Smokey was trying to get anyone fired. It seemed like he had bad service. It probably was due to the pace of business that night and hey, stuff happens. But just b/c stuff happens doesn't mean it shouldn't get written about. People going to RTC might want to know that on a particularly busy night, service might be a little slow, etc. From all of the other rave reviews, I truly doubt that would bias them against going!

And just one more comment -- as for sending Michael a PM vs putting it on the board, I think (just from a fairness point of view) that that's a double standard of sorts. Those of us in the lay community shouldn't use the board to get special treatment -- and nor should restauranteurs...Just my .02...

[DonRocks]

[As moderator - emphasis on moderate - I see nothing wrong with the way this discussion has progressed. Carry on.]

[DanCole42]

bonaire, on Sep 6 2006, 05:54 PM, said:

I'm not a particularly regular poster, so I'll apologize in advance for butting into what looks like a big kids fight. However, I just wanted everyone to know that for the average reader, it didn't look like Smokey was trying to get anyone fired. It seemed like he had bad service. It probably was due to the pace of business that night and hey, stuff happens. But just b/c stuff happens doesn't mean it shouldn't get written about. People going to RTC might want to know that on a particularly busy night, service might be a little slow, etc. From all of the other rave reviews, I truly doubt that would bias them against going!

And just one more comment -- as for sending Michael a PM vs putting it on the board, I think (just from a fairness point of view) that that's a double standard of sorts. Those of us in the lay community shouldn't use the board to get special treatment -- and nor should restauranteurs...Just my .02...

EDITED for relevance by the MPAA
Hey Bonaire, glad to see you're posting.

Now, I've never had a bad experience at one of Michael's restaurants (except for that one time where I finished my entire NY strip steak and couldn't get up out of my chair). In fact, I've never had anything less than an amazing, praise-worthy meal where I couldn't say enough great things about the food, the service, and Michael himself. I am a devoted and loyal fan of his work, the sort who would still say how great it was even if he decided to open the "Phantom Menace" of restaurants.

Personally, I didn't find anything inflammatory or derisive about the original review. I thought the fact that Smokey pointed out he "doesn't drink alcohol" to be an unusual thing to say to a waitress, but I thought overall his review was pretty straightforward. He didn't talk in vague terms like "the food sucked" or make outrageous claims like "the waitress refused all of my best pickup lines."

I know Michael is a perfectionist, so I can understand that a bad review would be a sore spot. More than that, I also know how protective he is of his staff*, so he'll have a bone to pick with anyone who comes down on them.

So let's all respect Smokey's right to post a bad review, Michael's right to defend his staff, and help ourselves to a big helping of sausage biscuits to bury the hatchet. Mmmmmm... sausage biscuits... (drool)

*This is something I understand all too well. I frequently have wish-fulfillment dreams where I curse off or beat up clients who upset or deride my underlings.

NB: For my general thoughts on "bad" reviews, click here.

[Gus]

Michael Landrum, on Aug 10 2006, 02:48 PM, said:

You guys are like a whole stealth management/troubleshooting undercover team. Keep the feedback coming!

[squidsdc]

I did not read it as a bad review...when I read the post, I "heard" the OP drawing conclusions from what was observed. In my mind they were assumptions, and not necessarily fact. Had it happened to me, and it has in the past as for our own reasons rarely do I or Mr. Squids order alchohol, I would want to make the management aware to find out if there may have been other mitigating factors that could have been contributing to the situation. How the situation is handled from that point would determine whether a return visit and online posting would ensue. I believe that any proprietor, or improprietor for that matter, would want the same opportunity to investigate given to them, and (say it together class) at the time the incident takes place.

[Banco]

bonaire, on Sep 6 2006, 05:54 PM, said:

I'm not a particularly regular poster, so I'll apologize in advance for butting into what looks like a big kids fight. However, I just wanted everyone to know that for the average reader, it didn't look like Smokey was trying to get anyone fired. It seemed like he had bad service. It probably was due to the pace of business that night and hey, stuff happens. But just b/c stuff happens doesn't mean it shouldn't get written about. People going to RTC might want to know that on a particularly busy night, service might be a little slow, etc. From all of the other rave reviews, I truly doubt that would bias them against going!

And just one more comment -- as for sending Michael a PM vs putting it on the board, I think (just from a fairness point of view) that that's a double standard of sorts. Those of us in the lay community shouldn't use the board to get special treatment -- and nor should restauranteurs...Just my .02...

Bonaire's comments evoke his/her handle--a breath of fresh air. And smokey's comments (despite that handle!) were really entirely appropriate for this board, though I can understand how Michael might have bristled at them. Perhaps, in this case, the restaurateur should have PM'd rather than the patron.

[DanCole42]

squidsdc, on Sep 6 2006, 07:02 PM, said:

I did not read it as a bad review...when I read the post, I "heard" the OP drawing conclusions from what was observed. In my mind they were assumptions, and not necessarily fact. Had it happened to me, and it has in the past as for our own reasons rarely do I or Mr. Squids order alchohol, I would want to make the management aware to find out if there may have been other mitigating factors that could have been contributing to the situation. How the situation is handled from that point would determine whether a return visit and online posting would ensue. I believe that any proprietor, or improprietor for that matter, would want the same opportunity to investigate given to them, and (say it together class) at the time the incident takes place.

Great point, Squids. Smokey had no way of knowing whether the server was subpar in his view because of a bias against non-alcohol purchasers, or because the server was simply in the weeds or under some other pressure.

The motives my have been misjudged, but the facts stand that Smokey perceived less-than-perfect service.

In any case, Smokey, it sucks that you didn't have a good time. I can tell you, again, that I've never had a bad experience at any of the Ray's. You may want to give it a second shot. You may be pleasantly surprised, and at Michael's god-forbid-he-ever-went-public-and-people-saw-his-teensy-weensy-profit-margin-low prices, it won't hurt the bank too much.

[Halloween]

Blah. Blah. Blah. (the general subject, not any specific post).

[DonRocks]

Monique DC, on Sep 6 2006, 07:43 PM, said:

Blah. Blah. Blah. (the general subject, not any specific post).

[Blah blah blah is right. Discussions about whether something is appropriate for discussion, are not appropriate. Dan the entire first part of your post is inappropriate, and I'll be deleting it at some point:

Quote

Hey Bonaire, glad to see you're posting.

As I've said before, negative experiences should be posted about. This is a public and open forum, and I don't think anyone should have to keep their mouth shut.

Someone voicing a negative opinion should be an opportunity, not for defensiveness or derision, but for several things:

1) Giving a restauranteur specific feedback about his/her business.
2) Giving others in the biz a look at what may be a unique and/or unanticipated customer service issue.
3) Allowing readers the opportunity to form their own judgments about a restaurant. Many of the sacred cows on this site have been very good to us patrons, so we do have a certain responsibility to protect their images in return for the favors, food, and excellent service they've provided us, but a single positive review among forty negative ones probably won't change someone's opinion, so why should a single negative review among forty positive ones?
4) I've certainly had bad experiences at restaurants. Experiences that were so bad that I wouldn't have gone back HAD IT NOT BEEN for the voices of various acquiantances saying that I should give it another shot. Generally, I'm glad I listened to them.

To put it another way, I'm a big Star Wars fan. I think anyone who doesn't like the original trilogy is crazy, but I always come across people who DON'T like it. And I'm always interested in hearing their critiques because it gives me a benefit of an outlook so far beyond my normal mindset that I then appreciate the movies even MORE.

People shouldn't feel threatened or upset by a negative review of something they hold as dear to the hearts of so many as Ray's and Star Wars.

In short, there's nothing BAD about a GOOD bad review, in fact it can be a positive thing for many people concerned.

Let's keep this discussion focused on Ray's The Classics, please. Thanks, Rocks.]

[Heather]

Michael Landrum, on Sep 6 2006, 04:42 PM, said:

Why take the time to impugn a server personally? Why deride a person who worked hard to serve you for what you judge to be her stupidity?

I'm not trying to start an argument here, but it seems to me that he would single out his server because she was the one he was interacting with, the face of the establishment. That doesn't seem outlandish to me.

[DameEdna]

Not knowing the particular facts, I can only comment in general ... when I server gets overwhelmed,
either because of individual situations, a kitchen problem, whatever, the only solution is to go to each
table and let them kick your butt. Sometimes the learning experience is almost fun, and, at the end of
the night, the monetary compensations are not bad either (human psychology can be very peculiar
at times). People can learn,but if a restaurant manager thinks someone is in the wrong line of work,
better to get on with it.