I think there has been and will be as much discussion about the finale’s format as there will be about the result, which is somewhat unfair to the two chefs, but, in my opinion, a little unfair to the format itself. Switching to cooking live in front of an audience and serving the judges one course at a time for what appeared to be on-the-spot decisions was somewhat reminiscent of Iron Chef, although that show’s “live” judging element was merely a trick of the cameras anyway. This Top Chef format was far more transparent than previous finales (and than Iron Chef) because viewers could see the judges’ decisions on each plate and heard detailed opinions from a majority of the judges on each. It also insulated the judges from outside interference, accusations of which have appeared in the past, prompting vociferous denials from Tom. The end result of the format change was a greater emphasis on the food, which is what we want, right?
The main criticism I heard from you on Twitter was that the new format reduced suspense or drama because at the 52-minute mark, when the show went to commercial, it was obvious who had won because there wasn’t time for the opposite result. Given how much criticism the show took this year for the elimination of Kristen, which was painted (rightly or wrongly) as a move to raise interest in the show and in Last Chance Kitchen at the expense of choosing the best chef, I’ll gladly take a reduction in drama in exchange for feeling like the best chef won – and understanding why she did so.
On a related note, does Stephanie Izard go into therapy now? Her entire identity has been cut in half!
* It is so odd that Top Chef is now a brand (or sub-brand) of frozen food. Is that not kind of antithetical to the idea of the show? Chefs get sent home for using frozen or previously-cooked ingredients.
* On to the show – Brooke and Kristen come out from back stage and seem overwhelmed by the space and the size of the crowd. One advantage neither mentioned: They have tons of space to move and for the heat to dissipate. Each has chosen two teams of three sous chefs from eliminated chefs. Brooke goes for skills, choosing Stefan, CJ, and Kuniko (great choice). Kristen says she just wants “good people, no egos” and takes Sheldon, Josh, and Lizzie. Sheldon and Lizzie might have been the two least egotistical chefs of the season, and all three of hers made it very far in the competition. Editing can be misleading on something like this, but I thought Kristen’s team was humming the whole night – we saw no discord, almost to the point where they were quiet, like they’d worked together for ages. Brooke’s team wasn’t loud, but we saw more of them, which is usually not a good sign.
* The format is a five-course meal, judged one course at a time, so the first chef to win three courses wins the title. I’m surprised no one is agitating for a best-of-seven format. Meanwhile, chefs from smaller markets are arguing for a one-course play-in meal.
* The only restrictions beyond time are that the chefs must use scallops in the second round and red snapper in the fourth round.
* Brooke says she’s “going for bigger, bolder flavors.” Kristen is going for “simple and clean, nicely executed, and pretty.” I don’t know that either of these is a clearly superior game plan, but Kristen does “simple and clean” like Greg Maddux “threw strikes.”
* So three hundred people are there to watch three hours of cooking? That’s longer than any of this year’s Best Picture nominees. I hope the conversation was good.
* Gail points out to Stephanie Izard that there will finally be another female Top Chef. Seth Macfarlane is still waiting for the nude scene.
* Brooke’s pig ear salad sounds amazing, and she has it on her menu at the Tripel. I need a report, people.
* Kristen says that at Stir Boston she’s typically cooking for just ten people. I can see why cooking for such scale would be intimidating – look at how many plates they had to do for each course.
* I love how the sous chefs are all so clearly into it even though it’s not their fight. Some of that is professionalism, much of it is probably love of food, and I’m sure a small part is that everyone likes the two finalists. Is there a tradition where the winner buys her sous chefs something, like a quarterback taking the offensive line out to dinner?
* The food! Course one: Kristen does a chicken liver mousse with frisée, mustard, prunes, hazelnuts, and pumpernickel. Emeril loves the mousse and chicory, calling it “very classic.” Tom says mousse was well seasoned. Gail loved the mousse, velvety airy texture, but also admits (in so many words) to being a bit of a chicken-live mousse harlot.
* Brooke serves that crispy pig ear and chicory salad with a six minute egg, apricot jam, candied kumquats. That sounds amazing, probably better in the description than Kristen’s, but it sounds like CJ overcooked enough of the pig ear strips to knock it down a peg. Hugh says the salad dressing was really balanced and that Brooke has a real knack for that.
* The vote: Kristen gets votes from Hugh, Gail, and Emeril and wins the round. I don’t know if that meant she got all three, or if we just saw the three who voted for her.
* Brooke’s scallops are huge so she cuts some in half and begins searing them, which seems to me like a big risk of overcooking them. For years I was just so-so on scallops, but I’ve had several great scallop dishes recently – one at the Catbird Seat in Nashville and one at Citizen Public House here in Scottsdale – and I’m finally coming around.
* Stefan’s harassment of Kristen always kind of annoyed me, even though she seemed cool with it, but his trash-talking here, when he tells Kristen he chose light blue “for the baby’s bedroom,” did make me laugh, mostly because of how he baited her.
* Am I the only one who tends to forget that Kevin Sbraga was a Top Chef? Granted, that whole season had probably the least talented crop, but he did win it.
* Brooke talks more about her phobias, which I’m glad to see, obviously. Exposure therapy is huge.
* Michael Voltaggio with the quote of the night: “I’m jealous, dude. I wanna be down there.” The fact that someone who has already won this title and had real-world success as a result could see that pressure-cooker environment and want to grab a jacket and throw down speaks volumes about his makeup, both positive and negative.
* Round two: Brooke serves her seared scallops over a salt cod-potato puree, crispy speck, a black currant and mustard seed vinaigrette, ground juniper, and deep-fried romanesco (a brassica closely related to broccoli). Tom likes the combination of flavors, works really nicely, his scallop perfectly cooked. Brooks says salt cod is her favorite flavor, which would have made a lot of sense if Top Chef were held in 1896.
* Kristen does a sort of crudo preparation, a quick-cured scallop in citrus and lavender, served with with bitter orange, Meyer lemon, and apple. It looks gorgeous, although I’ve never had a cured scallop of any sort. General praise here too, with Padma saying the dish left Kristen nowhere to hide but that she did the scallops proud. If they hadn’t been cruelly ripped from their shells, that is.
* Voting: Brooke gets votes from Gail and Emeril. Kristen gets votes from Tom and Padma. Hugh is the tiebreaker and goes … Brooke. So far, this is pretty TV-friendly, and we’re down to a best of three.
* The chefs have 34 minutes until they need to serve the next plate, which is the first time (I think) the clock has been explained to us. I was kind of confused from the start of this episode – that was probably my main complaint.
* Kristen says she’s going to taking a trip to Korea with some of her winnings to see where she came from – she mentioned in a previous episode that she was abandoned as a baby and was adopted by a couple in Michigan. In an era where international adoptions have become terribly expensive and endlessly controversial, it’s good to have a positive example offered as a counterpoint to the horror stories in the media.
* I can’t believe Brooke made chicken wings. They’re too damn hard to eat, with so little meat relative to the skin and bone. I buy whole chickens a lot but I save the wings for stock. They’re just not worth effort.
* Round three: Brooke serves vadouvan-spiced fried chicken wings with a sumac-yogurt tahini and pickled kohlrabi fattoush. Past winners are saying it’s “ballsy” to serve something so plebeian in a Top Chef finale, although the way she served it was ambitious. She tells Hugh she wanted to redeem herself from the fried chicken challenge, but was this the way? With wings? Emeril loves it but Tom is a little iffy on the side salad.
* Kristen serves a celery root puree with crispy bone marrow, bitter greens, stewed mushrooms, and barely cooked radishes. Emeril keeps raving about the “earthy tones.” Padma’s wasn’t hot enough. Gail liked it. Tom seems unsure of stewing the mushrooms rather than roasting them for caramelization, as she did earlier this season when she won an elimination challenge for making mushrooms and fried onions as side items.
* Kristen gets votes from Emeril, Tom, and Padma, so she’s one away from the win. Padma voting for Kristen despite the temperature issue was a little bit of a surprise.
* Kristen says she practiced her red snapper dish before she got here and was most confident in this course.
* The producers covered the King Arthur name on the bag of flour with duct tape, but really, if you bake at all, you know that logo and color scheme. I would be surprised if they’d used any other brand.
* Michael Voltaggio again with the great quote, saying Top Chef has “made eating out cool.” Even if that’s kind of an exaggeration, I do think the show’s effect on popular culture, especially our culture of eating, is a huge positive, economically and gustatorially.
* Stefan is distracted by a female fan asking about the location of his restaurant. I assume she’s a plant from Kristen. It would have been even better if Tammy 2 was available.
* Round four: Brooke serves a braised pork cheek and seared snapper with a collard green slaw, pomegranate seeds, and sorrel puree. Hugh’s snapper perfectly cooked, and loves collards as an alternative to kale. Everyone praises the sorrel but no one seems to know how to pronounce it.
* Kristen does a seared snapper with leeks, little gem lettuce, tarragon, uni, and shellfish nage. So Gail says she found the leeks a little harder to eat because they were slightly stringy, and Hugh absolutely smokes her with five words: “I’m good with a knife.” I wonder if Gail knows who the Marlins’ shortstop is.
* Brooke offers what I thought was a pretty gracious comment: “I want to prove I wasn’t winning because Kristen wasn’t around.” You know, everyone who watched was probably wondering about that – at least, would some of the challenges have been closer? – but Brooke didn’t have to acknowledge Kristen in that way.
* Kristen gets Gail, Emeril (who was obviously torn by the knowledge he was about to help eliminate Brooke), and Tom, making her the tenth Top Chef winner, the second female winner, and the first of Korean descent. I wonder if this would be news in Korea, where, according to some prior contestants on this show, cooking isn’t seen as a highly respected profession yet.
* Brooke is disappointed, and it has to suck to spend so much time away from your family only to come up just inches short. She might be the best positioned runner-up to benefit professionally and financially from her time on the show, since she had several weeks as the clear leader while Kristen was in the relegation bracket. Speaking of which, Kristen thanking Tom “for having this whole Last Chance Kitchen thing” belongs on the highlight reel.
* I only watched a little of the follow-up show, but Sheldon won the fan favorite voting and earned a $10k prize. He was apparently talking to Andy Cohen from Maui via a tin can, but I’m pretty sure he said was going to use the money to “pimp up his 2014 Avalon.” At least he’s honest, man.
Brooke had done well with dessert all season while Kristen kind of blew it off all season; almost felt like the Mets winning game 6 of the 86 NLCS and avoiding the loss in Game 7 to Mike Scott even though they were clearly better than the Astros.
For me, this season is up near the top (of non-all star seasons) in terms of chef talent in the top 2.
In order for me it’s Season 6 (Voltaggios), Season 3 (Hung Huynh & Dale Levitski), Season 10 (Kristen & Brooke).
Am I forgetting any obvious ones?
Jeff: You are forgetting the Chicago season, which had Stephanie and Richard Blais in the final 3. I forgot the 3rd person, probably because I remember her being a longshot.
There has to be a season with all the winners on it coming up soon.
I want to start off by saying that I have no problems with Kristen winning. She seemed like the best chef.
However, I think the format was terrible. Having the judges vote out loud in order makes it easier for one judge to be swayed by another judge and can also create momenutm. I also didn’t like that that each dish was judged completely seperately. If they are going to position the challenge as a five course meal (which must be the case if they were forced to make a dessert) then it should be judged as a meal. Judging each dish gives more credit for a dish looking “cool” (like Kristen’s food) and makes it harder for judges to take into account how the entire meal flowed.
Finally, ranking each meal could have meant a chef could have gotten a win with three mediocre dishes (when the other chef was just below mediocre) and two terrible dishes (where the other chef had the two best dishes of the night)…to me that ruins the integrity of the show and why Top Chef is higher on my list than Chopped (which is basically what last night’s episode was…)
I was a little disappointed with the season only because we didn’t get to see Kristen cook as much. I did watch all the LCKs but felt like those were mostly videos depicting speed chopping and speed cooking and Tom speed tasting. I hope Top Chef revamps LCK to show more of the thought process and provide more difficult challenges to the chefs. Also, incorporates LCK more into the main show somehow. I felt it was kind of hard to root for the clearly the best chef of the season bc she was absent (no thanks to you Josie! 😉 ) the last third of the season.
Jeff – I think I would add Season 4 – Izard and Blais to your list too
I agree with your sentiments about the finale format. I had very little problem with the round by round format. A lot of people pointed out that Kristen had an advantage because the dessert round was avoided entirely. I find this point to be a bit presumptuous. Just because Kristen didn’t make a great dessert on last week’s episode doesn’t mean she doesn’t have the capability to do so. After all, she won a quickfire (the aluminum foil one) by making a dessert. Also, here is a quote from Gail’s blog “I believe they didn’t even have to do dessert, if they didn’t want to, but in this case both chefs chose to, even though neither was plated and served.” If Kristen wasn’t comfortable doing desserts, she could just not have done one. If you remember season 5 (New York), Hosea won the finale without even serving a dessert vs. Stefan.
My complaint was that it seemed like Bravo didn’t have enough time to explain the format in great enough detail. They didn’t even have a chance to show how the sous chefs were chosen. They didn’t show how the chefs came to decide on their dishes. Everything felt extremely rushed. It seems we won’t have to worry about the format in the future though because Tom has already tweeted that he doubts the format would be used again in the future.
Re: Kevin Sbraga – I think he’s just the forgotten winner; I remember him but do not remember him winning and my mom texted me saying she didn’t remember Kevin at all.
Re: the format – I hated it, mostly. Was a complete change from the rest of the show and it’s format. It also seemed incredibly rushed to where you didn’t even really know what was going on or what the rules were. Cooking in front of a live audience looked like fun, however, and having the judges out in the open for their decisions was a nice change.
While I wouldn’t have liked the expected forced 5th round just for the sake of suspense, I hated that I knew Kristen had won based on the clock. Either way, it was a great season and one of my favorite finale pairings; it’s nice when you can root for both to win.
@Justin: I was thinking/hoping the same thing when we saw all nine previous winners together.
Keith,
I think you hit on the main problem with the show when you said you were confused. I know I spent most of the first 20 minutes or so trying to figure out exactly what was going on.
It probably wouldn’t have killed them to remove the past winners video piece and spend a few minutes showing them explain the format and rules to the chefs and then showing them pick their teams.
Also, I can’t be the only one that wants to see a Top Chef All-Star season featuring the winners against each other, even if it would probably be a Masters season.
Comparing it to chopped is a bit much … or even Iron Chef, though the format begs the comparison. Clearly the chefs had more prep time and the rules in advance. I don’t mind the judges voting out loud – they’ve been on the show a while, and know the drill. That said, judging the dishes blind would have been better.
I don’t mind the dish by dish evaluation – yes, the “whole meal” has some sort of flow which gets lost in the format, but it also did not allow the chefs to punt any of the dishes. If Brooke had gotten to 2-2, the dreaded dessert would have mattered, and it would have decided the title.
Indeed it’s a gimmick – but so are all the challenges. At least here, the chefs were not constrained by incongruous mystery ingredients or a time frame which most cooking techniques are eliminated. What I did NOT like though was how choppy the editing was, and how out of sorts the Chef “how they got there” stories were. The plot did not build the way it had in more traditional finals. That said, I liked it.
Stephanie v Blais is an obvious omission. Frankly, I’d say the Josea and Kevin seasons were the least talented casts. And it showed in the results, as basically those winners basically won by being solid all season and knocking the finale out of the park.
While I wasn’t a fan of the format I still think my biggest issue with this season was LCK. I think Kristen was the best chef but I thought injecting her back at the final went against the idea of the competition. Cooking for 30 min at a time isn’t as challenging as what the other chefs went thru in terms of both consistent execution and mental/physical fatigue. I like the idea but think the LCK should be only until a point (perhaps when 5 remain) and then have them battle with the others with some additional restriction for 1 challenge that if they overcome it are back on equal footing with the remaining chefs.
I have a couple of points about the finale, but before getting to those I just wanted to say that (particularly once Josie was eliminated) this season of Top Chef was for me notable in part because the contestants (particularly Brooke, Kristen, Sheldon, and Lizzie) seemed like such thorough decent kind people.
To appear this way on a reality or competition show is I would imagine no small feat as it seems the producers inclination is to take full advantage one’s lesser moments (even if brief) or recontextualize innocent offhand comments to suggest some sort of conflict.
Watching advertisements for Bravo’s other programming during the broadcast puts this in sharp contrast with much if not all of the other reality/competition offerings on t.v. today. Treating people terribly is encouraged and audience is to revel in this. A trend that frankly troubles. That said it was really nice to see collegiality, respect, and empathy on display in the back half of the season.
As to the finale. I’ve read a couple of complaints about simply being through into it with out the proper context. That didn’t really bother me however, I felt like I was able to orient myself as unfolded. That take may part reflect my general disinterest in exposition and my own willingness to throw it out the window at any opportunity in my own profession.
I’d agree with Keith, I liked the transparency of the decision making. I also liked that they did away with unnecessary and melodramatic camera movement that has for me plagued judges table more this season than any other. Things are plenty tense, if anything this augmentation only undercuts the tension rather than enhancing it.
I would confess to slightly missing the dramatic pause before Padma says “___, you are Top Chef” as in past seasons. This always feels like a climatic cathartic moment that I frankly find a little movie.
Lastly, I think Kevin Sbraga is likely forgotten as he was never the clear standout during his season. Angelo initially seemed like the one to beat (and may have won had not fallen during the finale. Ed in fact was coming on strong late in the season (winning 3 of the last 5 challenges). Checking Wikipedia, Kevin only won a single elimination challenge and was on the bottom more often than the top during the season.
Sbraga might be a forgotten winner, but the food at his restaurant in Philadelphia is outstanding.
Jeff R, Tom, Sriram –
You guys are all right. I can’t believe I left Season 4 off my list. On a related note, in a completely non-scientific ranking of chefs I’d have both Voltaggios, Rich Blais, Kristen in my top tier. I go back and forth, but I think I have Dale, Hung, Stephanie, Brooke, Paul Qui in a second tier.
The format was questionable and before I watched it last night, I saw a tweet from Tom saying they wouldn’t do it again, so I was dubious from the start. At least we can’t grouse about the results.
Kristen’s cooking seems very evocative of Barbara Lynch’s, which makes sense since she works for her and is high praise. If you’ve eaten at No. 9 Park in Boston, you’ll know what I’m talking about.
Marcel can’t be forgotten as one of the best Chefs, he acquitted himself very well on the past season of Next Iron Chef.
I’d also say that Bryan Voltaggio was the toughest runner-up and has leveraged it the best. One meal at VOLT in Frederick, Md., and you’ll see. Great stuff.
I hate that Kristen won using uni. The judges all commented on how delicious it was, but that is no thanks to Kristen.They were acting like she cooked something spectacular when she just put it on their plate. I think she deserved to win, but that annoyed me.
I also think this format removed the ability for the judge to discuss/argue the merits of each dish. From past shows you’ve heard that they’ve spent literally hours doing this during the finale and yet in this one there did not appear to be any real discussion between the judges.
Just feel a more traditional finale gets to what Top Chef was really focused on in the past: Identifying the chef that cooked the best food. However, it sort of feels as TC tries to get too gimicky that this initial goal is starting to be phased out to allow for more “entertainment”. I still don’t think they got the decision wrong in the end…but definately think it could have impacted other finales.
This show needs blind tasting….badly. This is the Tom C. show – he makes sure the cook HE thinks is the best cook wins, unless that cook completely flubs the finals (like Blais). In fact, in that season, Izzard didn’t do the best cooking in the finals either – heck, she had raw ingredients (although she was the overall better cook than the lady, whose name escapes me, was).
Kristen had the easier rode here. She didn’t have to compete in a series of events, having only to win last chance kitchen, whose sole judge is…would would have guessed…Tom.
The new format final was a sad attempt to “prove” that the judging was objective. Please…Padma will never, ever go against Tom.
Why not blind tasting – especially in last chance kitchen.
I lived in Seoul for the past two years and I asked some of my Korean friends about this years Top Chef and none of them knew a Korean American had won. I do also know that the reason I started watching Top Chef was because it was shown on Korean TV with subtitles a few months after it aired in the States, as are many Western shows. So, it may be that their media there has chosen not to mention it so as not to give away the ending or it just isn’t that significant and therefore all my comments are useless just like my life. Ha, joking.
Regarding a Chef has a profession, I think Koreans are a little further behind the US as far as a chef being an ideal career choice. Business dominates the landscape of chosen professions, but in a certain amount of time I think Koreans will give more respect to people who chose to be a Chef. They love food almost more than we do in the States. And there’s nothing like a side of Kimchi, some soft tofu, and seaweed soup for breakfast, and I’m not joking.
I liked your one game playoff tie-in.
JBR: I think Tom has stated that blind judging would only be useful for the first 3 or 4 weeks. After that, the judges pick up on certain tendencies and would be able to determine who make what dish.
Take that for what its worth.
I didn’t love the setup, for many of the reasons offered. However, my main objection (and something I spoke to on the last episode recap) is that not all cooking is done with strict time constraints. Yes, in a restaurant, you need timely service. But to achieve that, you often have hours or days to prep. If you want to make that liver dish that got Josh eliminated, you would be able to give it the proper time. I recognize that, practically, you need constraints, and that there is skill involved when working under the pressure of deadlines, but I think the finale should move away from that, rather than towards. Give the chefs three days to put together the best meal they can, plain and simple. To me, that should be what determines who is truly the Top Chef.
You spoke to it in your piece, but I always wonder about the consistency of the effort when they are cooking for large groups in addition to the judges. You sometimes see this mentioned during Restaurant Wars (“I need two salmon dishes… they’re for the judges table”) but I wonder if they put extra effort/attention into the dishes going to the judges (if/when they control this) relative to the other plates. Doing so would be both a natural and intelligent thing to do, but the ability to do so risks undermining the challenge when the size of the audience is actually considered to be a factor.
A solution to this in a format such as the finale would be to have an even number of judges at the table and to have an “audience vote” serve as a seventh one. Perhaps you limit your audience vote to folks whose opinions you can genuinely trust (past winners/contestants), but it makes sure that they aren’t serving 5 plates of deliciousness and 60 plates of muck.
Sriracha
That very well may be true. I can see that. But I do think it’s pretty obvious that they search for best overall chef. The winning Voltaggio should have been eliminated before he got to the finals, but was saved because, despite a seriously bad flub, he was clearly one of the best 2 chefs. Stefan from what I could tell, cooked the best in the final he was in a few seasons ago; the guy who won last year was out-cooked in the final (best cook, but was outcooked in the final) and I mentioned Izzard above. of course, I didn’t taste the food, but I assess this based on judge comments.
Kristen shouldn’t have been eliminated when she did, but only because Josie was much worse. Kristen did a poor job managing that kitchen and menu that evening, and she wouldn’t have been the first contestant to get whiffed because of poor kitchen management on restaurant wars, which really is the seminal episode of every season. I never saw it as a great injustice on its own merits.
If not blind tasting, they have to do something.
I agree with comments above that not only did the finals lack suspense, you saw less actual cooking technique and heard far fewer judge comments about the food they tasted. So to me, it took away from the integrity of the show, which I think is somewhat dubious anyway.
JBR,
I also think that perceptions of the chef and differing expectations factor into the judging far too much/often. Many times, the judges will say that they know a chef is capable of better, while also indicating that Chef A’s failed dish still trumps Chef B’s successful one. While continual underperformance can be a concern when selecting a Top Chef, the fairest way to judge them is against each other, not against themselves. Similarly, chefs too often get called out for doing something new and different, even if they do it well, which seems silly. Sheldon suffered from this, which I think is unfair. If someone makes a bad dish, they make a bad dish. If part of the reason the dish failed was because they were wading into unfamiliar territory, that is helpful feedback, but doesn’t impact the overall taste of the dish, which should be what ultimately matters. But the judges expected something from Sheldon and when he delivered something other, he failed to meet expectations, no matter how good the dish actually was.
I’m not sure if blind tasting is the answer, but I think something should be done. Far too often, it seems the show and/or judges are crafting and responding to narratives that are largely superfluous.
My problem with the finale format is that it DIDN’T focus on the food. It seems like in past seasons, there was much more focus on HOW the final courses were prepared; this season we only seemed to get the ingredients. I could have given up all the look-back videos & interviews with the families to see what all the sous chefs were doing.
I would have liked the finale a lot more if they had:
1) Explained what was going on and why they were doing it this way… the lack of explaining what was going on and the fact that it felt like Iron Chef made this the least interesting Top Chef episodes I’ve ever watched. It seemed like a rip off, lost its suspense and wasn’t fun to watch… I probably played on my phone more than actually watched the episode.
2) Judged the entire meal, not each dish. Odds are you’d get the same result with Kristen as the winner, but whenever I go out to eat, one amazing dish can/does put a restaurant above places that are constantly solid, but never amazing. The entire meal, imo, is more important that each dish individually. I understand things like atmosphere and service aren’t/can’t be factored into Top Chef, but if we’re going to focus on the food, then lets focus on all of it.
While I understand the point of LCK, I also think it’s time to get rid of it, or at the very least not make it a somewhat easy path to the finals for those eliminated later in the show. Contestants should have to re-enter after every, say, four LCKs; but stick with the double elimination (so you can’t go back into LCK if you leave it).