It's Winter Restaurant Week time again
It's Restaurant Week time again. They seem to come at us pretty quickly these days, don't they?
That's not necessarily a bad thing. But now there's a Restaurant Week in the summer, and a Restaurant Week in the winter, and in the past they both have been extended.
Some restaurants even extend the fixed-price menu on their own for weeks. ...
This time Winter Restaurant Week is set at two weeks from the get-go, Jan. 22 through Feb. 7. That gives restaurants three weekends to offer their fixed-price menus.
The prix-fixe will be $35.10, an increase of $5 from last time. If the restaurant isn't cutting corners, it will be worth it; but it seems like sort of an odd time to be raising the price by almost 20 percent. Lunch will stay the same at $20.10 for three courses.
More than 90 area restaurants are participating; you'll find them listed on the Web site.
Tomorrow my Top 10 will be on the best restaurants I reviewed in 2009, so that might give you some guidance if you aren't sure where you want to go. Wherever you choose, make your reservations early.
Meanwhile I've got to find a couple of worthy restaurants outside the city limits to review those two weeks.
(Barbara Haddock Taylor/Sun photographer)








Comments
EL, be careful, Howard County restaurant week is also at the end of January. Maybe try Venegas Prime which doesn't seem to be participating.
http://www.howardcountyrestaurantweek.com/
Agh. Thanks for the heads up. EL
Posted by: Trip Klaus | January 4, 2010 5:47 PM
Wow, there were only a handful of Baltimore restaurants that were worth it at $30.xx. At $35.10, it's just silly.
It would be nice to see a best/worst value blog entry so people wouldn't be fooled into thinking they're getting a deal. At Ryleigh's, even the most expensive options only add up to $33.00. At Frank and Nic's, the best you can do is $28.00.
Restaurant Week in Baltimore has become more a ploy for restaurants than a deal for diners. Add the crowds and service issues... no thanks.
Posted by: HWP | January 4, 2010 6:46 PM
I second HWP's comment. I was frankly shocked to see the $35 price, and then even more shocked when I saw the list of restaurants participating. There are still quite a few good ones on the list, but $35 is really approaching the range where you can order an appetizer, entree and split a full-size dessert and be perfectly happy... for less than the Restaurant Week price. All while getting the establishment's full menu. I think they're going to be disappointed with results at this price.
Posted by: Mitch | January 4, 2010 8:12 PM
I too find that the price increase makes this no longer a value deal. Might as well just order off of the regular menu.
I'm out.
Posted by: Corey | January 4, 2010 11:54 PM
Couldn't agree with everyone more... at most of these restaurants, $35 isn't what I'd call rape, but I certainly wouldn't say it's consensual.
Posted by: Sgt Grumbles | January 5, 2010 12:55 AM
On a different note, Can you please, EL, tell me why restaurateurs insist on using the term "to perfection" in their menus. After perusing the available menus for RW, I feel nauseated that so many have dishes done "to perfection". Since IMHO perfection is such an idealized and personal state, I think it is up to the dining public, or at the very least the sandbox, to help them come up with another phrase that isn't as overused as "to perfection". Trust me, after many years as a chef both here and abroad, there is no such thing as "perfection" to the masses. It sometimes becomes a reason to quibble over whether the dish is worth the price since "perfection" was not achieved by the diner.
Posted by: MDtopdad | January 5, 2010 8:20 AM
I agree that $35 a meal plum the extra tip that is asked for is approaching a normal meal value. One advantage though is the ease of reservations of non-participating restaurants that week. I got a large table at a prime time at a very hard to reserve restaurant with no problems at all for restaurant week.
Excellent point. EL
Posted by: Bill | January 5, 2010 8:45 AM
I, too, hate "to perfection" on menus. It implies there is some platonic perfect dish, which the chef has a direct line to. If it isn't right, who am I to argue with platonic perfection?
If I saw something like "steak fried a bit, with whatever sauce we've got lying around," I'd actually be very tempted to try it. Or "today's interpretation of scallops."
Posted by: Lissa | January 5, 2010 9:17 AM
Wow, people seem cranky. Maybe it's the cold. The key to RW is finding a place where you normally wouldn't be able to get 3 courses at dinnertime for $35. Granted, there are participating restaurants where that price point isn't a deal. But there are plenty of others where it is.
A $5 increase in cost makes sense given the rise in food costs and other recessionary pressures on restaurants. I often spend $5 just on a cocktail or beer, so I don't see why that amount would cause people to swear off RW.
Thoughts?
Posted by: Mike | January 5, 2010 10:04 AM
Mike, I believe you are the first person to argue that "recessionary pressures" is a reason to raise prices, not cut them.
Posted by: Mitch | January 5, 2010 10:46 AM
Yes, Mitch. There is a reason I was an english major.
Posted by: Mike | January 5, 2010 10:52 AM
Does anyone know why several standards for RW are not participating this year? Corks, Salt, Abacrombie etc...
At least Dave and Busters is off the list. good lord
Posted by: Kim | January 5, 2010 12:22 PM
RW was a waste at $30, and it is even more of one at $35.
I have never and will never understand its popularity.
Posted by: Robert of Cross Keys | January 5, 2010 12:27 PM
Does anyone know why several standards for RW are not participating this year? Corks, Salt, Abacrombie etc...
Kim -- you may want to check the Restaurant Week site again. I clearly see Abercrombie, Corks, Salt, and other past participants on the list.
Posted by: jjk | January 5, 2010 12:41 PM
Whoever it was on another thread who had made reservations for Fugo de Chao, that makes sense. The Prime Rib had a very good RW week special last time. I highly recommend it.
But, yeah, you do have to be careful. When you can get the same items off the regular menu for less, something is wrong. Maybe if they let the restaurants set any price at or below the target price point?
Posted by: Lissa | January 5, 2010 12:46 PM
Also, be careful when making reservations at Prime Rib for RW if you want to go on either a Friday or Saturday night. This past summer, I got a reservation for 6 people for a Friday night through Open Table. I then called the restaurant for another reason and mentioned that we were coming for RW, it was only then that I was informed that they were only offering the RW menu Sun-Thurs.
Posted by: Dawn | January 5, 2010 1:21 PM
On the same vein as Dave and Buster's, who in their right mind would go to Cafe Hon for RW? That is so not a bargain.
Posted by: Dawn | January 5, 2010 1:25 PM
I was amused to see that Alizee and the Ambassador are right next to each other in the RW list. One describes itself as being in Tuscany-Canterbury and the other one in Roland Park. They are just around the corner from each other!
Posted by: Dahlink | January 5, 2010 2:21 PM
One describes itself as being in Tuscany-Canterbury and the other one in Roland Park
I bet less than 1% of the metro population could find Tuscany-Canterbury on a map.
Posted by: Robert of Cross Keys | January 5, 2010 2:38 PM
It all depends on where your front door is placed.
Honestly, I would have though the listing would have been the other way around for T-C v. RP
Posted by: Chw | January 5, 2010 4:10 PM
"Yes, Mitch. There is a reason I was an english major." Chuckle. Do you mean English major? :)
Many of the restaurants are unimpressive at $35, and the one's that seem like a good value, actually give you reduced portions or forgo Prime beef.
The only place that looks interesting Fogo de Chao, that is, if there isn't a bait and switch.
Posted by: Mr Food | January 5, 2010 6:19 PM
And Jet I thought the major was a lady suffragette
Posted by: Paul McCartney and Wings | January 5, 2010 7:38 PM
Even for $30.00 you were getting what you paid for - the portions size was smaller then on the regular weeks in the most of the restaurants.
Posted by: Mike Z | January 6, 2010 11:33 AM
RoCK is spot on. Waste at 30, even moreso at 35.
Posted by: tennisgal1206 | January 6, 2010 4:59 PM
The price increase isn't the main issue for me...I actually like the idea of making a little more, if of course the restaurants use that as a way of increasing the quality and quantity of what they offer this year(because normally the selections are a joke and you order the regular menu anyway).
The question will be who is willing to raise the bar along with the price. Also remember restaurants are hurting a little this year guys...
Posted by: Gm 100 | January 7, 2010 12:41 AM
Gm 100 makes an interesting point, We have avoided restaurant week for the most part the past couple of years because of the crowds, but maybe that won't be a problem in this economy. I hope people who do participate will comment on that as well as the food.
Posted by: Dahlink | January 7, 2010 6:49 AM
It was very interesting for me to read the blog. Thanks for it. I like such themes and anything connected to this matter. I definitely want to read more on that blog soon.
Julia Benedict
top escort girl milano
Posted by: Julia Benedict | February 22, 2011 4:17 PM