I think the whole premise of this show is fantastic with the 4 crazy ingredients having to be whipped into a dish in a limited amount of time and the winner must survive 3 rounds where 1 person is "Chopped" after each course
But, the judging appears to be disingenuous and biased. They seem to favor personalities, stories and potential over the actual dishes served. They let their favorites through even when given uncooked dishes or those missing a basket ingredient. This is the only show of this type of the ones I watch (the others are Guy's Grocery Games and Forged in Fire) where I can't consistently guess the winner based on the judges' comments. Is this because the judges let through who they like best without regards to the established criteria/parameters or is it just a case of poor editing? Anyway, if you ignore that aspect, it is very entertaining to watch just to see what the chefs come up with in each round.
But, the judging appears to be disingenuous and biased. They seem to favor personalities, stories and potential over the actual dishes served. They let their favorites through even when given uncooked dishes or those missing a basket ingredient. This is the only show of this type of the ones I watch (the others are Guy's Grocery Games and Forged in Fire) where I can't consistently guess the winner based on the judges' comments. Is this because the judges let through who they like best without regards to the established criteria/parameters or is it just a case of poor editing? Anyway, if you ignore that aspect, it is very entertaining to watch just to see what the chefs come up with in each round.