QUOTE (KSboy @ May 1, 2008 - 06:02 PM)

OK, I've finally gotten through all the posts on this thread, so I will add a few disjointed thoughts of my own:
First, like dcjew/simplebear, I really liked this episode. I liked its focus on real-world, down-to-earth food realities -- i.e., how to cook a good, wholesome, nutritious meal for a family that is on a budget and needs something that the kids will eat without complaining. As someone who personally buys organic as much as possible and only grows organically in my garden, I loved the fact that this challenge was more concerned with health and nutrition than high-brow gimmickry. (I think that Richard is one of the most talented of this season's contestants, as were Marcel and Hung in the seasons before, but I honestly find myself gagging when they seem to revel in chemical cooking, rather than bringing out the natural, wonderful flavors of foods.)
Second, I can't help but agree with the numerous posters who found it ironic that the cooking on a budget challenge involved shopping at Whole Foods. It would have been a bit more real-world to march everyone down to Aldi's, a discount food chain that I know has at least a few stores in the Chicago area since some of my in-laws shop there. (But, since Whole Foods is one of the corporate sponsors of the Top Chef, I guess there's no way around that limitation.)
Third, after reading all last week's posts, I finally got convinced of the "worst dish loses" theory of judging. After this week's show, I'm not so convinced anymore. Up until last night, Stephanie was one of the three chefs I thought most likely to win (along with Richard and Dale). But last night, it is hard to believe that her food was not the absolute worst. The judges don't use words like "detest" unless something is really, horribly bad. I can't help believe that the judges chose to save someone who was the worst in one week because she has such a strong history of earlier performance (much like when Richard was saved despite the scales on his fish).
I think that, instead of eliminating one person with a really, really bad dish but otherwise proven culinary skills, they chose to eliminate someone with a record of nothing but mediocrity. The highest praise I recall Mark ever receiving was for making a dish where the NZ version of Vegemite actually, supposedly tasted good.
For me, however, the truth is that, if the judges were going to eliminate someone even if s/he did not produce the worst food, I wish they would have canned the chef whose last success was cooking bacon and who otherwise has demonstrated little other than having the absolutely most horrible personality in the history of Top Chef.
And KS too add to what you said, according to the guest judges blog (and I view all the blogs for show propaganda now) Lisa's food was bland and unseasoned and he liked both Mark and Stephanies food which is insane to me.