Not long after the Michelin guide (read more about the guide here) announced its awards for 2015, The Better Half (TBH) and I had a discussion about what differentiates a one star, two star and a three star restaurant from each other. Having eaten in a few one star and two star establishments before, to my untrained eye it is hard to make that distinction. I decided to do an internet search on what Michelin use as their criteria when awarding their stars and found nothing conclusive. All the Michelin guide says is:
One star: Very good cooking in its category
Two star: Excellent cooking, worth a detour
Three star: Exceptional cooking, worth a special journey
TBH and I decided to do our own research by dining at a one star, then a two star and finally a three Michelin star restaurant to see if we could spot the difference. We created our own rules to ensure that we were comparing apples with apples, as the saying goes.
1. All the restaurants have to serve the same type of cuisine. In this experiment, we chose French. Mainly because it seems that there is a wider range of this type of restaurant that holds 1,2 and 3 stars in London that we would be able to try. (Saying that though, finding a three star restaurant with availability at lunch time is proving a challenge!)
2. We have to have the set menu. This will keep the experience as consistent as possible. It also ensures we don’t completely break the bank!
So far we have had our 1 Michelin Star lunch at Alyn Williams at The Westbury. The 2 Michelin star lunch will be at Hélène Darroze at The Connaught and I am yet to choose the 3 Michelin Star experience.
Keep an eye out over the coming weeks for the full reviews of the restaurants we visited. Hopefully we’ll have a better idea of the criteria Michelin looks for when awarding their much sought after stars.
Until we eat again!