One could just about name the winner of this show by about the third episode. Eliminate the trash-talkers and the physically unattractive and the contestants with the personality of a wet tortilla and you have your field. Add points if there's some sort of a sob story behind the contestant.
If you think that the judging can't be rigged, then you must think that TV professional wrestling is the real, true and honest thing.
Consider the following (which have been addressed with other countries' versions of this series, but not the USA):
1. The judging isn't blind--the judges are perfectly aware of who cooked what and are perfectly free to feign criticism or praise.
2. The actual prep work performed by the contestants is shown in very carefully edited clips. As this series has progressed, less and less of preparation has been shown, so you really don't know what's being done by anyone.
3. Apparently, the rules do not allow a kibitzing Joe, Gordon or Graham to be told to go away during prep. It's amazing that fingers haven't been lost. But if you want to throw a contestant off balance, just try jabbering at her or him while he or she is trying to cook.
4. The judging criteria aren't made public beforehand, so something that the judges will allow to pass in one round becomes a fatal error in another.
I gave up on "Hell's Kitchen" because of Ramsay's screaming and cursing and the penchant of the show's producers to select contestants who are incredibly stupid, smoking (what chef really wants to abuse the most valuable tool in his arsenal--his sense of taste?) trash-talking and mean-spirited.
I'll go back to watching Jacques Pepin, thank you.
