Some readers who read my dining entries often ask which cafe or restaurant is better and they sometimes have a difficult time picking among the places I blog, etc. So I was thinking, having a scoring system could make things more organised and could help to answer most of my readers' questions. So here we are, a new scoring system will be added to the end of each upcoming dining blog post.
Sub-score on the quality of food, the quality of service and the quality of ambience/decor will be provided on a scale of 1-10, 1-5 and 1-3 respectively. Indication will be highlighted with the score eg. F7 stands for food quality with score 7; S3 stands for service quality with score 3; and A2 stands for ambience quality with score 2. Please take note all scoring is given based on my own personal views towards the dining experience at a restaurant - food is most important, followed by service then ambience. All these scores will then derive to a total score which will then represent the overall performance of a restaurant (refer below for more details).
However, these sub scores can only be compared across similar category of dining as fine dining can't necessarily be compared to say, hawker stall. For instance, I could rate a hawker place 8/10 and a fine dining could score the same. Thus, please use your discretion when doing comparison. Taking note to my post labels help with this.
F10 : Every dish is absolutely ideal and perfect (Impossible or at least near impossible to achieve)
F9 : Every dish is consistently flawless or nearly so and is perfect for my palate
F8 : Very impressive food that would make me crave for it badly from time to time
F7 : Worthy of a local favourite with tiny issues exist which I don't bother too much because the food is still enjoyable
F6 : Pretty good with some hits and misses on some dishes (lack consistency)
F5 : Average. It is OK but nothing great or nothing too bad either.
F4 : Problems outweighs compliments with the food
F3 : I didn't (couldn't) finish the food - which is a big deal for those to know me - I have a 'do not waste food unless NECESSARY' reputation
F2 : I stopped eating after the first bite - food that made me sick - either metaphorically or literally
F1 : How does this even exist?
S5 : Flawless service where staff go the extra mile
S4 : Service is fully satisfactory
S3 : Service is not the domination game here - average service, which is alright for certain places
S2 : Missed orders, wrong orders, long wait for food, etc.
S1 : I could not stand being there any longer - rude and ridiculous service
Note: Sometimes a N/A would be given to places that are irrelevant to service quality. For instance, you would not care for a good service from a street food hawker unless they treat you rudely, would you? Hence, N/A would be given to these places.
Ambience / Decor
A3 : Usually applies to fine dining - I felt like a Queen or Princess
A2 : Fine ambience which suits what their business is trying to be
A1 : Missing cutlery and napkins, proximity to the next table is too close, too warm / too cold in the restaurant
** Half score for all above-mentioned categories is possible when I am feeling a bit on the fence and not sure if I should give it the benefit of doubt, or not. **
An overall score is calculated through a combination of all the 3 categories' sub scores, which will then give you a final mark to determine one's performance.
So for a review which gets F8 | S3 | A2, the calculation would be,
[(8 + 3 + 2)/18]*10 = 7/10 final score (rounded to the nearest 0.5)
During cases where service is not applicable, the calculation will be as follow,
[(8+2)/13]*10 = 7.5 final score (rounded to nearest 0.5)
** Half scores are also possible in overall score when I am feeling on the fence **
I trust the above-mentioned is clear and I hope this scoring system will help my readers to gain more insights of the food places I am blogging. I welcome any questions or feedbacks regarding this new system. However, anything that is not constructive will not be entertained.