The Michelin guide is often confusing and when you hear about Chef Andre from Singapore leaving the Michelin you begin to realize it’s a hard act to follow. The genius behind the Michelin guide started with two brothers trying to promote a guide to sell more tires, and today it is one of the most powerful global food guides.

But what does all of this mean anyway? It tells us clients require roadmaps on where to go and on what to eat, but when a system uses stars, it risks offending capable, talented and dedicated chefs.

I totally understand why a chef leaves the red book, or why chefs are fed up with being told how to climb up the ladder by an anonymous inspector. Think about it, most critics aren’t chefs, and so a layperson judges a chef, so you’ll eat what critics enjoy to eat.

Chef Andre: https://mesubim.com/2013/03/11/andre/

After all most food critics tastes aren’t based on any well defined criteria spelled out clearly. They simply  “Exceptional cuisine, worth a special journey.”

But Michelin seems to focus more on their own antiquated standards and there isn’t enough emphasis on what is good taste. Consequently, the judgment of a restaurant gets skewed by decoration and white tablecloths and at the end of the day, most will argue what is good food worth a detour.

In Andre’s case, he defined it very well by saying his philosophy is an octa-philosophy drawing on eight elements; purity, salt, creation, freshness, texture, unique quality, the memory of the past and terroir.

I understand why a talented chef leaves the red book, but when will he leave Pellegrino’s list as he is Singapore’s highest ranked restaurant and is only second to Gaggan in Bangkok.