I came across I was looking for Egon Ronay (but couldn’t remember his name (dementia already!)) as the author of the original Good Food guide, now its run by “Which” (the consumers befuddler)  and is just as useless as their other reviews (i.e. accessible unless you subscribe).I had a nosey round and really liked the idea, it could become a definitive Restaurant site, including good Pubs and the Gastro Pubs.

I tried to select some restaurants in Stockport, but found the selection process a little cumbersome, it seemed odd to choose a specific type of food, for example say Spanish but really I might accept a Cuban or Mexican or even Caribbean Restaurant.We have therefore looked at a more visual restaurant finder based on a map (google), take a look at both systems and let us know your thoughts!

 I found two restaurants in Stockport, and thought “yes I know the Griffin in Heaton Mersey” but was confusing it with the The Gardeners Arms nearby, which we had been in a week or two earlier. I quickly realised my mistake and recognised the Pub the article related to, It is one I spent many years living near to but have not been in, however it has always had a reputation for excellent beer.My initial feeling is that the eat and drink reviewers are more traditional in their Beer selection, liking Camra type Ales, rather than our interest which is more in the Lager and International Beers. They seem to “lunch” more than we do, we are more frequently eating out in the evening, as we are working most days and not able to take much of a lunchbreak.

I also like their “ratings” which I have dubbed “eats” Eats So we are planning to adopt their categories on our site and have offered to share our reviews with them.Below is the reasoning and criteria from, so I guess this fits our reviews too:

  • “eatanddrink prides itself on providing honest reviews of restaurants, products and services. We have a distinct ethos, and a set of rules which we abide by, and insist that all contributors abide by.
  • The full set of rules can be found here, but we have a few things relevant to contributors we’d like to spell out:
  • There should be no connection, financial or otherwise, between the contributor and the establishment being reviewed If you do have a connection, we’d expect an advertising fee!
  • We will need your full name and contact details, though obviously we will respect your wishes in terms of how much, if any, contact details we publish alongside your article.
  • We reserve the right to edit your piece for errors, style and content, but will always get your final agreement before we publish.
  • With regard to Copyright, we expect you to be able to tell us that you hold the copyright to the article, and we will negotiate with you before we publish as to our rights to the article after we publish it.
  • Regarding content and style – you will be able to gauge our style from reviews already published.
  • When reviewing a restaurant, please consider scoring the establishment using our criteria, as described here.
  • To sum it all up, anything we publish must be “Legal, Decent, Honest and Truthful”

Finally, we have a Forum dedicated to contributors, where you can ask questions, make suggestions, or just contact us or other contributors

Eat and Drink Restaurant Rating System (


We’ve introduced our own rating system, to classify restaurants we’ve reviewed.

We’re awarding up to 5 marks maximum, and allocating half an where our calculated score comes more than half way towards the next category. In allocating our marks we take into account the following factors in determining an overall score.

Food Quality
Ambiance / Decor
Cost / Value for Money 30%

As examples, we have eaten in cafes which we would rate 2-3 s even though the facilities and decor were poor – but we had eaten well, and paid correspondingly little. We’d award 20+% for the food, 25+% for value-for-money, and 10+% for service. The facilities and ambiance / decor might perhaps rate 4% and 4% or less respectively.A “posh” restaurant which overcharged us for mediocre food would rate 2-3 s – representing little for value-for money. But if the quality and the service were there it would still only push the award up to ‘mid-table’. We also round down to the nearest half , for example a score of 71% would rate only 3 and a half s and be represented as Half stars imply that the score is above the midpoint of the category.Our rating system for restaurants is therefore represented as:

Score Representation Our Opinion
0 – 20 ☆☆☆☆☆ Fails to meet an acceptable standard in every aspect.
21 – 40 ★☆☆☆☆ Generally poor, probably reflected most significantly in quality and value.
41 – 60 ★★☆☆☆ Generally acceptable but very average, may well exceed expectations in one at the expense of others for example quality and value.
61 – 80 ★★★☆☆ Very acceptable offering significant quality and value, likely to be matched in facilities and ambiance.
81 – 90 ★★★★☆ Extremely good that offer excellence in almost every aspect.
91 – 100 ★★★★★ Excellent and exceptional in every aspect.

Reading the reviews should give the game away as to how a particular score was arrived at! We will also publish the breakdown of our scoring when we get around to it.

If you have any comments on this system, the weightings, or on any particular score awarded, please let us know!”

In general I preferred the content to the site design, which I wouldn’t honestly give many stars (or “eats”) to, I think the problem here may be that perhaps gourmets may manage to also be journalists and racounteurs but by the time you get to Website design and coding you are stretching anyone’s talents, In fact if you look at Phil and Sandro’s “resumés” neither of them pretend to be Geeks (Technology experts!).

Eat and drink extends to so much more than we (being a Mum, Dad and Daughter outfit), are likely to rise to, so please take a look at the site and consider what you could contribute, and keep up to date with the latest in eating and drinking.