MovieChat Forums > Ryôri no tetsujin (1998) Discussion > Why I think the judging is unfair.

Why I think the judging is unfair.

posted 15 years ago by Guardia
10 replies | jump to latest

I just finished watching an episode that featured "vaccum cooking", and in the pre-judging monologue, the MC said that the competition purely focused on taste/quality of the dishes.

I don't think that the judging helps achieve this aim in the show, as every judge knows precisely which chef made which dish. Surely, a double-blind test would make the things more honest. Imagine the bias that must come through on many of the dishes, whether it be through the reputation of chef or a million other reasons...

This is by no means an original idea, as I've seen it in another chef competition show called "The Best".

Do not write here

[–] mswritesalot 15 years ago

While I love Iron Chef, I have to agree with you. The judging would be absolutely fair if the tasters had no idea who made what. I've seen a few episodes where the challenger clearly deserved to win, yet did not win. I attribute that to the fact that the tasters were biased in favor of the Iron Chef.

Ali

[–] Guardia 15 years ago

Wow I thought I was gonna' get flamed for suggesting that... Thanks Ali.

Do not write here

[–] tvashtar2919 15 years ago

The judging has always been a bit subjective and somewhat suspect at times. I have seen them complain highly about a dish being terrible, then give that Chef a total of 19. It can't be easy to compare and we can not taste the item, which is half of the total score, but sometimes we just have to say 'no way'.

[–] funkyskunk 15 years ago

I always felt it was a bit unfair because the panel of tasters are Japanese people who are more accustomed to Japanese food. So a challenger coming in and presenting really different cuisine will have a disadvantage.

[–] JJChandler 15 years ago

"I have seen them complain highly about a dish being terrible, then give that Chef a total of 19."

I've always chalked that up to editing. Without credits, preamble and commercials the show is something like just under 40 minutes long. In that 40 minutes we get the chairman revealing the ingredient, a "one hour" competition, the judging, recapping the dishes and the announcing of the victor. There's gotta be a boatload of footage that they leave on the cutting room floor.

And out of all of that we usually only get a line or two from the judges about each dish. They likely sometimes edit all of that footage to make a challenger's judging look more universally positive and an Iron Chef's judging look more universally negative to heighten the drama.

Ever fired your gun in the air and yelled, 'Aaaaaaah?'

[–] tvashtar2919 15 years ago

I agree with some of your editing points. Another thing I have noticed is how they go on and on about certain dishes, then we don't even see the judges tasting or commenting on it. A lot of it has to be the results of just time issues, but they could have done a better job sometimes. I try not to worry about the final scores and results, considering this is a great show all the way around and quite entertaining. Even losers dishes are usually phenomenal.

[–] xyzfactor 15 years ago

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have seen them complain highly about a dish being terrible, then give that Chef a total of 19."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've always chalked that up to editing. Without credits, preamble and commercials the show is something like just under 40 minutes long. In that 40 minutes we get the chairman revealing the ingredient, a "one hour" competition, the judging, recapping the dishes and the announcing of the victor. There's gotta be a boatload of footage that they leave on the cutting room floor.

And out of all of that we usually only get a line or two from the judges about each dish. They likely sometimes edit all of that footage to make a challenger's judging look more universally positive and an Iron Chef's judging look more universally negative to heighten the drama.

Actually they did that with the Flay vs Morimoto rematch back in Japan. The editors had edited it to have the judges compliment Morimoto more than Flay, but have Flay winning. The old bait and switch editing technique.

That editing worked so well that many Morimoto fans who hate Flay swear it was "rigged" for Flay to win based on the comments Morimoto recieved in the judging.

In reality though, the judging takes about an hour or more for each contestant and as you stated, the editor is basically in complete control of what they want us to see.

[–] bigmuzz 14 years ago

i have often wondered this same thing when watching Iron Chef thru the years.

IMO, the same thing happens in MasterChef.... the judges have clear bias towards certain contestants, and surprise surprise, they always seem to scrape through even if they make dismal failures....

blind taste testing should be used for all cooking shows. it would be the only true way to judge dishes on taste, not on reputation.

[–] Banjo_oz 14 years ago

I absolutely agree with the OP. Although I LOVE Iron Chef (the real one, not the embarrassing spin-off abortions like "Iron Chef America"), its one flaw is the "unfair" judging. Not letting the judges know who made what would be much more balanced, and removed bias towards the challengers that pretty blatantly exists for many of them. After all, if it is only about the food, it should be judged on the food.

I also agree that a lot of dishes/challengers are hamstrung by some of the judges' narrow tastes... this is particularly evident in how more "Japanese" dishes will be received more favourably (I've no doubt Michiba is an amazing chef, but I'm sure his "love" from the judges over all others comes at least partly because he is/was Iron Chef Japan). However, there's not any real way to combat this... more varied judges, perhaps, or at least more open-minded ones, perhaps, but I think this would happen in any show (what little of IC America I've seen certainly seemed VERY biased).

But definitely, "blind" tasting is how judging should be handled.

[–] Owen-13 13 years ago

I suspect that if the "competition" was the main point, they would use blind judging, but they would also be likely to use actual qualified judges. This show is entertainment, which it achieves very successfully, in my judgment. I always enjoy the show, and enjoy complaining about the judging.