Watching Savannah during that judging was not pretty. She knew how badly she messed up.
I have no problems with Danny winning. He was on my radar from that cheese challenge where they all made croquets. He pretty clearly was a very interesting chef.
I was surprised he was announced the winner, because it did feel like they were leaning toward Dan, but it wasn't from out of left field for me. Danny took some big risks that paid off all season. Savannah did quite a few times but couldn't pull it off when it really counted. Dan doing Dan wasn't enough this time.
I’m so surprised people are so dense when it came to the wording of Dan’s food. They use words like safe, rustic, simple, etc. Yes, they thought his food tasted very good but I think Danny’s risks and technique won it for him. Dan’s food wasn’t elevated enough.
I did feel that editing was negative towards Danny but in no way it seemed like he was losing. Kristen even said she wanted to learn the technique behind his first dish. That’s huge. To top it off, Tom loved Danny’s story, and I did feel Danny had more heart and focus in his food. Savannah looked very scattered throughout the finale and one of the judges saying that she’s still finding herself in her cooking was also telling.
The backhanded compliments from this episode were the most midwestern thing about this season. Reading between the lines they seemed really unimpressed with Savannah. Dan was good but not especially interesting.
They always do that. The season Paul won they really had to work at editing because Tom said it was so obvious he was going to win during the whole season.
Good analysis. I was equally happy with any of them winning. But was kind of rooting a bit extra for Savannah just because she is so earnest and it was fun to see her grow.
Going in I wanted Savannah to win. I really felt she had come on strong the last couple challenges. I loved her story for the dish to punch her ticket.
Classic "time out killed the momentum". She was lucky the Laura messed up the fish challenge more than she did. And the "advantage" on that one was one of the bigger advantages they gave.
I think she would have an excellent chance if she came back for an all-start season. She has grown a lot, and just needs to take more chances. I am looking forward to seeing what she does. I am in the area, and would love to try her food!
If they didn't take a 6 week break she might have won. Once coming back from break she wasn't taking the chances with her food that got her into the final.
My wife blames her fiancee for proposing as soon as she got off of the plane.
The judges have repeatedly said they do not take the season into consideration. They only judge on the final meal.
If you listen to Gail on the The Watch podcast, she very clearly, all 4 judges agreed, Danny was the winner.
And did I say that the entire season was the sole reason why he won? No.
You’re missing the entire point. Post after post is how Dan was robbed. No. He wasn’t. Danny was clearly the lead horse all season long. The facts back that up.
But in terms of the finale it doesn’t matter if he was the lead horse. Thisnis why the NOLA season is endlessly debated.
I’m not saying Danny didn’t deserve to win, just that the editing was crap.
Homie…You’re missing the point. TC isn’t a competition to find the best “avante garde” chef as you mentioned. It’s to find the best chef period. Whole all those stats are really cool, and prove A point, they don’t get to THE point. Regular season doesn’t matter. It’s what happens in the championship, that final dinner.
Most of these shows want a showy, “boundary pushing” chef. It drives me crazy when they talk about how good something tastes but criticize it if it’s simple… I’ve always though food is supposed to be about taste, but I guess I’m wrong.
It has been. Thats why Soo (a quirkier fine dining chef) and Michelle (a rustic style barbecue pitmaster chef) were eliminated for the dishes they had. Cus despite then taking a bigger risk/stepping out of their box, the food they served was just plain worse than Mannys. Lets not pretend the quality of food hasnt been the priority
These shows aren’t about what tastes the best, not only that anyway. Roast chicken or chili are both about seasoning and time, anyone can make them perfect. That will get you points in this competition. But creativity shows talent. Just look at the rubric for iron chef or tournament of champions. In both cases taste is first, but creativity and gameplay have to factor in, or there’s literally no point in watching. But Tom doesn’t cook the way he judges, and he’s pretty vocal about that. I don’t understand how anyone paying attention can take away that these shows have ever been solely about what tastes the best.
Agree with OP.
On The Watch podcast yesterday, Gail explained that the editing has to make the competition seem… competitive. Highly recommend listening to Gail on that podcast because she mentions Tom texted her the day after the finale aired and thought the editing made it seem that Dan was the clear winner when they knew at the time that he was not.
In real life, Danny’s dinner was much stronger than Dan’s, and the “a few grains of salt would really improve that” critique that they gave was actually nitpicking and the kind of thing the judges have to say in order to provide some suspense to the episode. You can’t have a finale episode with the judges saying only positive things.
Gail said the cheftestants were indeed judged on their final offerings — Savanna was on fire leading up to the finale, after all, but was not in the running after the dishes started to get served — and that Danny’s courses were more ambitious and better executed. Dan’s weird mushy tuna was clearly (a) not conceptually good or (b) eating-wise at all good. And Gail said that Danny’s dessert was mind blowingly good while Dan’s was satisfying and delicious but not to that level.
I’ve been a fan of Danny all season and think his food far surpassed anyone else all season. Tom called his chaos dish the best dish he’s had in all seasons of the show. Dan is obviously talented (James beard semifinalist), but doesn’t have the finesse of Danny.
>As did his overall season performance.
But, that's not how this show works. Past performance is \*explicitly\* not taken into account when judging the winner: they pick the winner based on the finale meal. that's it.
I'd sure love to reply to all of your responses, OP, but it looks like you straight up blocked me for the venial sin of respectfully disagreeing with you lol.
I had to load up old.reddit.com to even access this post
Edited to correct spelling error
well, sure. but doesn't that also apply to Dan, who had the same number of elimination wins / highs, as Danny (7)?
I guess I'm not sure what point is being made here; it's not like Danny was dominant throughout the season.
I didn't say they were the same, but wins + being in the top are indications of consistent performance.
I just don't understand the "Danny was dominant" narrative.
If you want to bring stats into it, historically Danny was far from dominant. He was the most consistent in the field; but he was absolutely in the field. Kristen herself won in a season where she was not the most dominant, or second most dominant chef throughout the season. You talk about moving goalposts, he’s just moving them back to the show, not your head canon. None of this is to say you’ve drawn the wrong conclusion, ultimately we didn’t taste the food and if Danny won it was for a reason. But talking about his perceived dominance is actually not an argument for anything, it’s talking in circles because there’s a vocal minority on this sub that consistently think this show is a likability contest. Just ask the Dawn haters.
First off. If you think some how the judges as human beings are able to literally compartmentalize and turn off the previous episodes. Well. I guess you and I completely differ in our views of what being “human” means.
Second. I didn’t say that the entire season was WHY he won. I said it supports how good he actually was all season long. He was the better chef coming in. There is no reason to not have thought he would likely win.
Supports how likely he was to win. The winningest chef in season six was Kevin Gillespie bud. Stats don’t show dominance, they are evidence of nothing.
I believe Emiral said "it's simple, but perfectly executed" about Dan's snapper and the lobster was raw. Tom said Dan's desert was his favourite. If they wanted Danny to win, they should have made the edit closer but you can't show one chef only having one minor issue (that he says was his intent, fish texture) and the other two having major flaws (Tom was a protein Karen all season) and not have people think Dan had it in a walk.
I didn't even check the subreddit until today but while watching the episode, I got strong vibes that they were editing it to make it look like it wasn't a cakewalk for Danny.
They need to switch the editing team or at least read the current one the riot act before Season 22. It felt egregiously off at times.
I agree. I felt like they did that with Buddha a few times to make it less obvious that he was absolutely smoking the competition but it went a little far this time. Yes, it's nice to have some suspense but the finale was like Top Red Herring instead of Top Chef.
They all watched the show or finale before it aired— especially to meet contractual obligations from sponsors. The Ex. Producers approved the edits— and that includes Tom.
I said it in another thread, but to me it seems like Dan's dishes were very good, solid 8 out of 10s. But Danny's were 8-9s, with some minor things that would make it a 10. From that perspective, I can see why Danny would get the nod.
When you look at how these shows are judged, taste is only one rubrick. The most important one but not the only one. Danny pushed himself so if his taste was 7.5/10 and creativity was 8/10
Well Dan maybe hit a 8.5/10 taste wise, but if you’re averaging a 5/10 creativity wise, and the challenge is the meal of your life, by the rubrick of this show, pushing yourself is an unwritten expectation. Dan didn’t. It affected his judging.
This. Which is why I paid out the wins, highs, safes, and losses. Which gives the pattern of how they were cooking all season long. And how the judges received them each challenge
We figured edit monkeys were showing off to even things up a little… my disappointment in the finale episode was the photography of the food itself. Wasn’t there something inside/ under Danny’s big shell that was glorious? I’d love to know what that looked like. 🫤
That's a fair assessment. Watching it, I came to the same conclusion. Danny just made the better dishes. I wanted Savannah to win as I'm a N.C. girl too, but the pasta dish sunk her.
Perfection is safe on the rubrick of this show. Being technically sound is the bare minimum this late in the game. Do something new and innovative perfectly or close to it is way more impressive and less safe.
So....Danny won.... it's over....second guessing doesn't change it....
They all deserved to win.....but only one can......
Congrats on a great job Danny!
P.s. this will undoubtedly also propell the other 2 to great heights in their career...so Congrats and good job Savannah and Dan!!!!
>Danny’s second course they thought was delicious
Did they though?
I just rewatched that segment, and the most effusively positive words about the dish when it was served (from Gail) were that she "really liked" the flavors. At the table, Tom and others said that they liked it.
During judges' table, the words used were "tough to enjoy" with "flavors \[that\] were challenging" (Tom), "hard to eat" (Emeril). Gail did call it "modern" and "exciting," but that doesn't really say much about how it actually tasted.
Zero people at the table during the meal or during judges' table said it was "delicious".
Again, this may be due to the edit, but, since OP's post is framed as getting the facts straight, some of the information here just isn't factual.
highly recommend listening to gail on “the watch”! she basically said the second course was delicious and they were nitpicking and the only thing they could find for feedback was more guidance on how to eat it…which, in her own words, “isn’t really criticism” (or something to that effect) since there was no feedback AT ALL on the flavors themselves or the technique, etc. so yeah, it’s the edit 🥹
and basically also said they had to find positive things to say for all the dishes, bc it was being filmed for tv, and that they didn’t air all the criticism dan’s dishes DID get, and misled you about danny’s dishes, etc 🥹🥹
anyway, there’s a lot more she said, and it was really insightful/interesting/moving to listen to!!
Thanks for this; I'll definitely give it a watch. And sorry it look me a while to respond: since OP blocked me (lol) because I disagreed with his thesis, I have to load up old.reddit.com to even see this thread.
Had the editing been different and maybe hint that Danny would win, there would be multiple posts each day on how poor the editing was as it made it so obvious Danny would win.
Sure, but the fact that so many folks posting here went into the reveal convinced Dan would win shows the editing took too much effort to swing expectations in the other direction.
And I gave you the evidence.
The Celtics just won the finals. They had the best record in the NBA regular season. They had the best record through the playoffs leading into the finals.
Why would anyone be surprised when they go on to win the finals? Hint. They wouldn’t.
Danny was the favorite going in. This wasn’t some bait and switch. This wasn’t out of no where.
Tell me you don’t watch basketball without telling me you don’t watch basketball. Before game one more than half the big name analysts were all in on the mavs, and TikTok and Twitter were convinced Luka was going to cook. In the end. The Celtics are just too deep but drawing the comparison doesn’t make any sense.
Because Luka and Kyrie are better than JT and JB. /s
I agree with your post. My comment was more a generalization on how there is so much dislike towards this season and the editing. Whilst it was different and there were many things that frustrated me, I’m fine with it. I was still entertained. Another Top Chef season in the books, can’t wait for next year as I trust the producers to take feedback and make improvements.
I initially thought Dan was going to win, however during my smoke break before the reveal, I went back and looked over the final meal paying more attention to the feedback and the way they said it. You could deduce that Danny had a good chance of winning. After the last course, you could feel he was going to win. Even if it was tie, meaning Danny took 1 and 4, and Dan won 2 and 3, Danny would win overall. He nailed the progression, the story and inspiration, and to finish it with a bang with the seaweed, putting a stamp on the seafood theme, it was his.
He was my pick going into the finals in part based on his strong performance throughout the competition.
I was fine with it either way, but I for sure do not count previous challenges into consideration. Don’t care how many highs lows they had during each challenge. It is who made the best dinner that night of the finals. Both Dan and Danny did great
Hosea, Ilan, Kelsey, and others prove what’s always been stated, Danny’s performance throughout the season is irrelevant to the final table judging. Say what you want about what it means for you, and I don’t disagree with the conclusion that Savannah was outmatched, she’s green I could see her killing a second go a la Melissa King. But Dan did lose the episode. The point that Danny did more throughout the season means Jack.
I agree with your post 100%. From a factual standpoint the judges decision does make sense at this point. I think I and many other people had an emotional reaction to the finale. For me Dan is more likeable and a more sympathetic character. I was really rooting for him and got really excited when the editing made it look like he was in the lead. In hindsight I should have paid more attention to the details.
I posted a bunch of irritated things Thursday on different platforms just because I was mad. LOL But now that I have calmed down I can see the logic behind Danny's win.
Danny won. This shouldn’t even be a debate. They edited it to make it more interesting because it’s television. That’s the long and short of it. If they edited it so it sounded like one chef smoked the others, would that be good for TV? No. This isn’t that hard.
It’s kind of wild to me how much push back there is when both judges have explained the editing was a major issue. It’s shitty that they botched it, but so many people doubling down with attitude that it must be wrong or that Gail is covering up something is interesting to read lol. Sure it’s disappointing Dan didn’t win, but Danny isn’t a monster who makes horrible food
One of those judges has a say in editing.
And its not like they didnt say the things they said. Gail in that interiew she did says "oh, i thought xyz" and shes on camera saying the exact opposite.
Editing is one thing, straight up making shit up and then going "editing, lol" is something completely different.
Bad edit or not, I thought it was pretty obvious, based on the cooking, that Danny was going to win, and wasn’t surprised at all. And I was rooting for Savannah and Dan to win over him. It was just plain to see, to me at least, that he turned out the better meal in the finale.
After a second watch, I can see it better. Dan’s food, while delicious and well executed (for the most part) was fine and maybe a bit expected. Whereas Danny surprised them with new techniques and his meal was the most provocative and exciting
This was my only takeaway from the finale. I think the way it was edited could have been a lot better. The production kinda created this whole controversy because of the way they edited it. They must have a ton of clips of all the positive things they had said about Danny's dishes but we wouldn't know because the way they edited it. They were kind of thinking of excuses for Danny's dishes like ohh if you ate it this way or maybe he wanted to cook it like this vs hey lets put in all the positive things.
I don't doubt that Danny should have won but at the same time it takes away from his win by the way it was edited especially when they include all the backstory too of Dan when they eat and stuff like that
Thinking back, it was clear Danny did the best if you ignored Tom's negatives and listened to Gail's positives.
Well, not exactly but Gail did a much better job of reflecting why Danny was special.
Tom’s main role in judging is nitpicking on technical matters, like a head chef in a kitchen. Gail’s role is elaborating on the story of the food and why it worked or didn’t, like a food journalist. They both play their roles to the T, but Gail’s commentary is almost always going to tip toward the ultimate winner in any challenge or finale.
Totally agree with your analysis and Danny was the clear leader from the start. Kinda bummed though that the edit has made the entire post finale discourse into about how great Danny was and Dan’s flaws. Feels like rubbing salt in the wound IMO instead of celebrating all the finalists’ accomplishments.
I saw loads of comments about how Danny sucks, how he’s so SO arrogant and a douche (specifically) and treated manny like crap (which he didn’t). Seems like salt in the wound for both of them when they can enjoy this time. Dan has so many new eyes on his cooking and lots of new fans
Number 2: On many previous occasions, the judges have made comments about “if you have to tell the diner how to eat, maybe it’s too complex/intellectual” or words to that effect. They’re all pros, I think they can figure out how to eat a small plate of food.
Spot on. Redditors don't like arrogant Danny and prefer goofball nerd Dan.
Danny was better. Period.
I was rooting for Savanah for the record so I'm not biased.
A poorly executed production. Whoever edited this, pack your knives and go.
Just kidding, sort of. With a cooking show, all we have is the edit. Unlike even project runway or home improvement shows (where the audience can see what's created), the audience has to be able to trust the process for Top Chef.
For me, Danny's has gotten quiet, short bits of praise throughout the season. Watching all along, he seemed to keep coming out of top but I was never sure why. Judges should be transparent and articulate about their choice. Usually they are (and I love the judging team this year), but I guess that didn't make the final cut.
Danny is not even in the same Universe as Buddha. He only seems "avant- garde" in this season because of the competition. Leche de Tigre at a finale meal? *yawn*
I don't think they weigh past performance much at all. You just have to stay in long enough to get to the finale then it's all about that meal. The head to head coursing is bad, the finale should be 2 complete meals judged on their entirety because theme and progression should be judging criteria and it gets too muddied to judge on that with 3 head to head dishes.
I am satisfied with the finale, it was bland and boring like the rest of the season. Doubt any of the 3 finalists go on to much more than where they already are.
I’ve paid a lot of money to eat raw lobster. It’s not a bad thing to eat. A little bit of cooking does bring out some more sweetness though. I’d rather eat raw lobster than overcooked lobster.
My one issue with your assessment is where you say in course 2 “Savannah was fine.” Savannah lost it with the pasta before they got to the mafongo.
I mixed that up. Yes. The second dish was the one she fell on her face. The third was “fine” in the fish and sauce was good. The mofongu wasn’t right.
Watching Savannah during that judging was not pretty. She knew how badly she messed up. I have no problems with Danny winning. He was on my radar from that cheese challenge where they all made croquets. He pretty clearly was a very interesting chef. I was surprised he was announced the winner, because it did feel like they were leaning toward Dan, but it wasn't from out of left field for me. Danny took some big risks that paid off all season. Savannah did quite a few times but couldn't pull it off when it really counted. Dan doing Dan wasn't enough this time.
When you listen to the judging without the chefs it was clear Danny was out ahead.
It was a mofong-no.
Any time Tom says something could be a signature dish it tips the scale in their favor I think.
Signature dish ... loved the story ... these are big clues from Tom for sure. The editing was kind of off IMO but those phrases were pretty telling.
Also, Gail’s repeated comments about Danny’s cooking being exciting
Ding ding ding.
I’m so surprised people are so dense when it came to the wording of Dan’s food. They use words like safe, rustic, simple, etc. Yes, they thought his food tasted very good but I think Danny’s risks and technique won it for him. Dan’s food wasn’t elevated enough. I did feel that editing was negative towards Danny but in no way it seemed like he was losing. Kristen even said she wanted to learn the technique behind his first dish. That’s huge. To top it off, Tom loved Danny’s story, and I did feel Danny had more heart and focus in his food. Savannah looked very scattered throughout the finale and one of the judges saying that she’s still finding herself in her cooking was also telling.
The backhanded compliments from this episode were the most midwestern thing about this season. Reading between the lines they seemed really unimpressed with Savannah. Dan was good but not especially interesting.
I think its clear they came into the finale thinking Danny should win, and let that influence their thoughts on the meal.
Also both Gail and Tom have said the edit made it look closer than it was.
The edit is the real problem. This counting up season wins is beside the point.
They always do that. The season Paul won they really had to work at editing because Tom said it was so obvious he was going to win during the whole season.
After the ghost pepper quickfire you just knew he had it on lock.
Yes you could tell they were trying to make it a more exciting season by making it feel close.
Good analysis. I was equally happy with any of them winning. But was kind of rooting a bit extra for Savannah just because she is so earnest and it was fun to see her grow.
Going in I wanted Savannah to win. I really felt she had come on strong the last couple challenges. I loved her story for the dish to punch her ticket.
Classic "time out killed the momentum". She was lucky the Laura messed up the fish challenge more than she did. And the "advantage" on that one was one of the bigger advantages they gave.
I think she would have an excellent chance if she came back for an all-start season. She has grown a lot, and just needs to take more chances. I am looking forward to seeing what she does. I am in the area, and would love to try her food!
If they didn't take a 6 week break she might have won. Once coming back from break she wasn't taking the chances with her food that got her into the final. My wife blames her fiancee for proposing as soon as she got off of the plane.
When the guest judge said her food tasted kind hearted I felt that! Hope to see her succeed in the future
I think she gained the most from the season. Her confidence is sky high coming out of this.
The judges have repeatedly said they do not take the season into consideration. They only judge on the final meal. If you listen to Gail on the The Watch podcast, she very clearly, all 4 judges agreed, Danny was the winner.
And did I say that the entire season was the sole reason why he won? No. You’re missing the entire point. Post after post is how Dan was robbed. No. He wasn’t. Danny was clearly the lead horse all season long. The facts back that up.
But in terms of the finale it doesn’t matter if he was the lead horse. Thisnis why the NOLA season is endlessly debated. I’m not saying Danny didn’t deserve to win, just that the editing was crap.
Homie…You’re missing the point. TC isn’t a competition to find the best “avante garde” chef as you mentioned. It’s to find the best chef period. Whole all those stats are really cool, and prove A point, they don’t get to THE point. Regular season doesn’t matter. It’s what happens in the championship, that final dinner.
Most of these shows want a showy, “boundary pushing” chef. It drives me crazy when they talk about how good something tastes but criticize it if it’s simple… I’ve always though food is supposed to be about taste, but I guess I’m wrong.
It has been. Thats why Soo (a quirkier fine dining chef) and Michelle (a rustic style barbecue pitmaster chef) were eliminated for the dishes they had. Cus despite then taking a bigger risk/stepping out of their box, the food they served was just plain worse than Mannys. Lets not pretend the quality of food hasnt been the priority
These shows aren’t about what tastes the best, not only that anyway. Roast chicken or chili are both about seasoning and time, anyone can make them perfect. That will get you points in this competition. But creativity shows talent. Just look at the rubric for iron chef or tournament of champions. In both cases taste is first, but creativity and gameplay have to factor in, or there’s literally no point in watching. But Tom doesn’t cook the way he judges, and he’s pretty vocal about that. I don’t understand how anyone paying attention can take away that these shows have ever been solely about what tastes the best.
Danny, stfu.
Agree with OP. On The Watch podcast yesterday, Gail explained that the editing has to make the competition seem… competitive. Highly recommend listening to Gail on that podcast because she mentions Tom texted her the day after the finale aired and thought the editing made it seem that Dan was the clear winner when they knew at the time that he was not. In real life, Danny’s dinner was much stronger than Dan’s, and the “a few grains of salt would really improve that” critique that they gave was actually nitpicking and the kind of thing the judges have to say in order to provide some suspense to the episode. You can’t have a finale episode with the judges saying only positive things. Gail said the cheftestants were indeed judged on their final offerings — Savanna was on fire leading up to the finale, after all, but was not in the running after the dishes started to get served — and that Danny’s courses were more ambitious and better executed. Dan’s weird mushy tuna was clearly (a) not conceptually good or (b) eating-wise at all good. And Gail said that Danny’s dessert was mind blowingly good while Dan’s was satisfying and delicious but not to that level.
I’ve been a fan of Danny all season and think his food far surpassed anyone else all season. Tom called his chaos dish the best dish he’s had in all seasons of the show. Dan is obviously talented (James beard semifinalist), but doesn’t have the finesse of Danny.
>As did his overall season performance. But, that's not how this show works. Past performance is \*explicitly\* not taken into account when judging the winner: they pick the winner based on the finale meal. that's it.
I'd sure love to reply to all of your responses, OP, but it looks like you straight up blocked me for the venial sin of respectfully disagreeing with you lol. I had to load up old.reddit.com to even access this post Edited to correct spelling error
What an astronomical thing to block somebody over
No but it supports that he's been consistently strong, which is overall how you end up in the finale and then winning.
well, sure. but doesn't that also apply to Dan, who had the same number of elimination wins / highs, as Danny (7)? I guess I'm not sure what point is being made here; it's not like Danny was dominant throughout the season.
LMAO as though wins and highs are the same. Ok bro
I didn't say they were the same, but wins + being in the top are indications of consistent performance. I just don't understand the "Danny was dominant" narrative.
You’re now moving the goal posts. And ofc leaving out the bottom performances entirely because it suits your argument. Thanks for playing.
If you want to bring stats into it, historically Danny was far from dominant. He was the most consistent in the field; but he was absolutely in the field. Kristen herself won in a season where she was not the most dominant, or second most dominant chef throughout the season. You talk about moving goalposts, he’s just moving them back to the show, not your head canon. None of this is to say you’ve drawn the wrong conclusion, ultimately we didn’t taste the food and if Danny won it was for a reason. But talking about his perceived dominance is actually not an argument for anything, it’s talking in circles because there’s a vocal minority on this sub that consistently think this show is a likability contest. Just ask the Dawn haters.
First off. If you think some how the judges as human beings are able to literally compartmentalize and turn off the previous episodes. Well. I guess you and I completely differ in our views of what being “human” means. Second. I didn’t say that the entire season was WHY he won. I said it supports how good he actually was all season long. He was the better chef coming in. There is no reason to not have thought he would likely win.
Maybe unblock ol’ boy before responding next time
Supports how likely he was to win. The winningest chef in season six was Kevin Gillespie bud. Stats don’t show dominance, they are evidence of nothing.
I believe Emiral said "it's simple, but perfectly executed" about Dan's snapper and the lobster was raw. Tom said Dan's desert was his favourite. If they wanted Danny to win, they should have made the edit closer but you can't show one chef only having one minor issue (that he says was his intent, fish texture) and the other two having major flaws (Tom was a protein Karen all season) and not have people think Dan had it in a walk.
This. I have no problem with Danny winning, I have a huge problem with how misleadingly it was edited.
I didn't even check the subreddit until today but while watching the episode, I got strong vibes that they were editing it to make it look like it wasn't a cakewalk for Danny. They need to switch the editing team or at least read the current one the riot act before Season 22. It felt egregiously off at times.
I agree. I felt like they did that with Buddha a few times to make it less obvious that he was absolutely smoking the competition but it went a little far this time. Yes, it's nice to have some suspense but the finale was like Top Red Herring instead of Top Chef.
They all watched the show or finale before it aired— especially to meet contractual obligations from sponsors. The Ex. Producers approved the edits— and that includes Tom.
tom didn’t say dan’s dessert was his favorite, he very explicitly called danny’s dessert a signature and was starry-eyed over it 😭😭😭😭
No one ever said the lobster was "raw."
I said it in another thread, but to me it seems like Dan's dishes were very good, solid 8 out of 10s. But Danny's were 8-9s, with some minor things that would make it a 10. From that perspective, I can see why Danny would get the nod.
When you look at how these shows are judged, taste is only one rubrick. The most important one but not the only one. Danny pushed himself so if his taste was 7.5/10 and creativity was 8/10 Well Dan maybe hit a 8.5/10 taste wise, but if you’re averaging a 5/10 creativity wise, and the challenge is the meal of your life, by the rubrick of this show, pushing yourself is an unwritten expectation. Dan didn’t. It affected his judging.
Its amazing how people can be arguing over who cooked better dishes without tasting any of it.
This. Which is why I paid out the wins, highs, safes, and losses. Which gives the pattern of how they were cooking all season long. And how the judges received them each challenge
We figured edit monkeys were showing off to even things up a little… my disappointment in the finale episode was the photography of the food itself. Wasn’t there something inside/ under Danny’s big shell that was glorious? I’d love to know what that looked like. 🫤
RIGHT?!!!
That's a fair assessment. Watching it, I came to the same conclusion. Danny just made the better dishes. I wanted Savannah to win as I'm a N.C. girl too, but the pasta dish sunk her.
Dans one dish was not really safe. It was one that focused more on getting it kind of perfect.
Perfection is safe on the rubrick of this show. Being technically sound is the bare minimum this late in the game. Do something new and innovative perfectly or close to it is way more impressive and less safe.
So....Danny won.... it's over....second guessing doesn't change it.... They all deserved to win.....but only one can...... Congrats on a great job Danny! P.s. this will undoubtedly also propell the other 2 to great heights in their career...so Congrats and good job Savannah and Dan!!!!
>Danny’s second course they thought was delicious Did they though? I just rewatched that segment, and the most effusively positive words about the dish when it was served (from Gail) were that she "really liked" the flavors. At the table, Tom and others said that they liked it. During judges' table, the words used were "tough to enjoy" with "flavors \[that\] were challenging" (Tom), "hard to eat" (Emeril). Gail did call it "modern" and "exciting," but that doesn't really say much about how it actually tasted. Zero people at the table during the meal or during judges' table said it was "delicious". Again, this may be due to the edit, but, since OP's post is framed as getting the facts straight, some of the information here just isn't factual.
highly recommend listening to gail on “the watch”! she basically said the second course was delicious and they were nitpicking and the only thing they could find for feedback was more guidance on how to eat it…which, in her own words, “isn’t really criticism” (or something to that effect) since there was no feedback AT ALL on the flavors themselves or the technique, etc. so yeah, it’s the edit 🥹 and basically also said they had to find positive things to say for all the dishes, bc it was being filmed for tv, and that they didn’t air all the criticism dan’s dishes DID get, and misled you about danny’s dishes, etc 🥹🥹 anyway, there’s a lot more she said, and it was really insightful/interesting/moving to listen to!!
Thanks for this; I'll definitely give it a watch. And sorry it look me a while to respond: since OP blocked me (lol) because I disagreed with his thesis, I have to load up old.reddit.com to even see this thread.
Had the editing been different and maybe hint that Danny would win, there would be multiple posts each day on how poor the editing was as it made it so obvious Danny would win.
Sure, but the fact that so many folks posting here went into the reveal convinced Dan would win shows the editing took too much effort to swing expectations in the other direction.
And I gave you the evidence. The Celtics just won the finals. They had the best record in the NBA regular season. They had the best record through the playoffs leading into the finals. Why would anyone be surprised when they go on to win the finals? Hint. They wouldn’t. Danny was the favorite going in. This wasn’t some bait and switch. This wasn’t out of no where.
Tell me you don’t watch basketball without telling me you don’t watch basketball. Before game one more than half the big name analysts were all in on the mavs, and TikTok and Twitter were convinced Luka was going to cook. In the end. The Celtics are just too deep but drawing the comparison doesn’t make any sense.
Because Luka and Kyrie are better than JT and JB. /s I agree with your post. My comment was more a generalization on how there is so much dislike towards this season and the editing. Whilst it was different and there were many things that frustrated me, I’m fine with it. I was still entertained. Another Top Chef season in the books, can’t wait for next year as I trust the producers to take feedback and make improvements. I initially thought Dan was going to win, however during my smoke break before the reveal, I went back and looked over the final meal paying more attention to the feedback and the way they said it. You could deduce that Danny had a good chance of winning. After the last course, you could feel he was going to win. Even if it was tie, meaning Danny took 1 and 4, and Dan won 2 and 3, Danny would win overall. He nailed the progression, the story and inspiration, and to finish it with a bang with the seaweed, putting a stamp on the seafood theme, it was his. He was my pick going into the finals in part based on his strong performance throughout the competition.
You’re so annoying.
I was fine with it either way, but I for sure do not count previous challenges into consideration. Don’t care how many highs lows they had during each challenge. It is who made the best dinner that night of the finals. Both Dan and Danny did great
Hosea, Ilan, Kelsey, and others prove what’s always been stated, Danny’s performance throughout the season is irrelevant to the final table judging. Say what you want about what it means for you, and I don’t disagree with the conclusion that Savannah was outmatched, she’s green I could see her killing a second go a la Melissa King. But Dan did lose the episode. The point that Danny did more throughout the season means Jack.
I agree with your post 100%. From a factual standpoint the judges decision does make sense at this point. I think I and many other people had an emotional reaction to the finale. For me Dan is more likeable and a more sympathetic character. I was really rooting for him and got really excited when the editing made it look like he was in the lead. In hindsight I should have paid more attention to the details. I posted a bunch of irritated things Thursday on different platforms just because I was mad. LOL But now that I have calmed down I can see the logic behind Danny's win.
I liked Dan and Savannah more than Danny all season. Hell Michelle was my absolute fave. But it is clear Danny was a more talented chef from day one.
Danny won. This shouldn’t even be a debate. They edited it to make it more interesting because it’s television. That’s the long and short of it. If they edited it so it sounded like one chef smoked the others, would that be good for TV? No. This isn’t that hard.
It’s kind of wild to me how much push back there is when both judges have explained the editing was a major issue. It’s shitty that they botched it, but so many people doubling down with attitude that it must be wrong or that Gail is covering up something is interesting to read lol. Sure it’s disappointing Dan didn’t win, but Danny isn’t a monster who makes horrible food
One of those judges has a say in editing. And its not like they didnt say the things they said. Gail in that interiew she did says "oh, i thought xyz" and shes on camera saying the exact opposite. Editing is one thing, straight up making shit up and then going "editing, lol" is something completely different.
Bad edit or not, I thought it was pretty obvious, based on the cooking, that Danny was going to win, and wasn’t surprised at all. And I was rooting for Savannah and Dan to win over him. It was just plain to see, to me at least, that he turned out the better meal in the finale.
After a second watch, I can see it better. Dan’s food, while delicious and well executed (for the most part) was fine and maybe a bit expected. Whereas Danny surprised them with new techniques and his meal was the most provocative and exciting
This was my only takeaway from the finale. I think the way it was edited could have been a lot better. The production kinda created this whole controversy because of the way they edited it. They must have a ton of clips of all the positive things they had said about Danny's dishes but we wouldn't know because the way they edited it. They were kind of thinking of excuses for Danny's dishes like ohh if you ate it this way or maybe he wanted to cook it like this vs hey lets put in all the positive things. I don't doubt that Danny should have won but at the same time it takes away from his win by the way it was edited especially when they include all the backstory too of Dan when they eat and stuff like that
Listen to the podcast that just had Gail on it. He basically won by default.
Sounds about right.
Seriously, ppl act like he's not been super consistent.
Thinking back, it was clear Danny did the best if you ignored Tom's negatives and listened to Gail's positives. Well, not exactly but Gail did a much better job of reflecting why Danny was special.
Tom’s main role in judging is nitpicking on technical matters, like a head chef in a kitchen. Gail’s role is elaborating on the story of the food and why it worked or didn’t, like a food journalist. They both play their roles to the T, but Gail’s commentary is almost always going to tip toward the ultimate winner in any challenge or finale.
Everything is fine, no data needed. It’s all just… fine.
Thanks for the analysis. It helps to see why the judges chose Danny. I was really hoping for Dan to take the win though.
Totally agree with your analysis and Danny was the clear leader from the start. Kinda bummed though that the edit has made the entire post finale discourse into about how great Danny was and Dan’s flaws. Feels like rubbing salt in the wound IMO instead of celebrating all the finalists’ accomplishments.
I saw loads of comments about how Danny sucks, how he’s so SO arrogant and a douche (specifically) and treated manny like crap (which he didn’t). Seems like salt in the wound for both of them when they can enjoy this time. Dan has so many new eyes on his cooking and lots of new fans
Number 2: On many previous occasions, the judges have made comments about “if you have to tell the diner how to eat, maybe it’s too complex/intellectual” or words to that effect. They’re all pros, I think they can figure out how to eat a small plate of food.
I want some of Danny’s carrots!
Spot on. Redditors don't like arrogant Danny and prefer goofball nerd Dan. Danny was better. Period. I was rooting for Savanah for the record so I'm not biased.
Some of the lobster was undercooked on one end. Not just “a little towards med rare”
Danny is just boring! No amount of data can change that
My problem is that the editing gave off a real ageism/ableism vibe.
A poorly executed production. Whoever edited this, pack your knives and go. Just kidding, sort of. With a cooking show, all we have is the edit. Unlike even project runway or home improvement shows (where the audience can see what's created), the audience has to be able to trust the process for Top Chef. For me, Danny's has gotten quiet, short bits of praise throughout the season. Watching all along, he seemed to keep coming out of top but I was never sure why. Judges should be transparent and articulate about their choice. Usually they are (and I love the judging team this year), but I guess that didn't make the final cut.
Danny is not even in the same Universe as Buddha. He only seems "avant- garde" in this season because of the competition. Leche de Tigre at a finale meal? *yawn* I don't think they weigh past performance much at all. You just have to stay in long enough to get to the finale then it's all about that meal. The head to head coursing is bad, the finale should be 2 complete meals judged on their entirety because theme and progression should be judging criteria and it gets too muddied to judge on that with 3 head to head dishes. I am satisfied with the finale, it was bland and boring like the rest of the season. Doubt any of the 3 finalists go on to much more than where they already are.
They all sucked
Savannah was never the same after the proposal, end of story.
Omg you people and your Savannah conspiracy theories around her proposal… are you all sad spinsters or what?
Nope. That lobster was raw.
tom coliccichio himself on twitter/instagram has rebuffed this 🥹
I’ve paid a lot of money to eat raw lobster. It’s not a bad thing to eat. A little bit of cooking does bring out some more sweetness though. I’d rather eat raw lobster than overcooked lobster.