It's certainly subjective and there's not really a published criteria. To a civilian, it's kinda like a dog show. To you or me, all the dogs look like perfect dogs, but a judge looks for specific things, things most people wouldn't care about (or even consider "good"). There's room for some subjectivity there, but the difference is, the judging criteria for dogs is public.
What does a Michelin star really mean? Is there a secret criteria (beyond "use local ingredients")? The guy in the article contradicts himself!
For one star, definitely should use local products, care, good depth of flavour in the sauces, careful presentation and service that matches.
Of course, over the years Michelin has spoken more and more about the fact that the stars are a reflection of the cuisine, not the service, it’s all about what is on the plate.
Even "use local ingredients" doesn't really fit. Some places have that as a focus, sure, but others will fly in specialty seafood from the other side of the globe.
What does a Michelin star really mean? Is there a secret criteria (beyond "use local ingredients")? The guy in the article contradicts himself!
For one star, definitely should use local products, care, good depth of flavour in the sauces, careful presentation and service that matches.
Of course, over the years Michelin has spoken more and more about the fact that the stars are a reflection of the cuisine, not the service, it’s all about what is on the plate.
Does service matter or not?