Burgers By the Numbers

A dazzlingly ambitious and comprehensive burger rating summary (110 eaten!) over at Mpls.St. Paul. One nagging thing, though: the miserable Matt’s jucy gets a higher rating than the Nook‘s? For real? Adam Platt defended the decision via email, calling the Matt’s burger a “cheesy char machine” (when it’s not “just jerky with melted cheese”) and explaining that his team had a “dislike of the viscousness of Nook’s cheese.” Well that’s, just, like, your opinion, man [link contains zesty language]. Actually the real problem may be this: The Mpls.St. Paul team ate at the Nook in the middle of the afternoon dead zone, and there’s an eerie and direct relationship between the size of the crowd at the Nook and the quality of the burgers.


  1. HungryinSW

    Very interesting – has me excited to go out and try a few on the list. I think they should clarify (maybe I missed it) that we should not cross categories for comparison – it would be a shame if anyone actually though a Culver’s burger was superior in comparison to say, the 112 eatery offering…

  2. Kris

    The print version of the article is easier to follow, and has some make your mouth water pictures! Maybe in a few weeks that version will be posted on their website; usually there is a lag.

  3. brian

    I have to say that I’ve had the burger at Cafe Levain (of “Luxury Burger” fame) and I would have rather had a Culver’s burger. Now Culver’s over the Lion’s Tap? Poppycock.

  4. Marni

    I like that they’re not putting “luxury” burgers like 112 in the same category as something like Smashburger or Culver’s, because then you’ve got kind of an apples-to-oranges situation.

    But speaking of breakthroughs in burger quality metrics, one of my favorite articles is from Minnesota Monthly’s July 2008 issue in which Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl unveils her Burger Inherent Awesomeness Quotient. I might be biased because we work at the same company, but honestly, her equation is not only hilarious, it makes quite a bit of sense too.


  5. Kyle

    Ok, this debate is growing old. Comparing the nook to the jucy is like comparing the red sox to the yankees. Each side has similarly compelling arguments as to why their chosen burger is better. However, they are very different burgers, even if they both have cheese in the middle.

    The Lucy is the superior burger simply because it is a very unique enterprise. That burger should not taste good. It is a poor quality bun, with mediocre ground beef, and american cheese. Somehow, Matts is able to char the outside in such a way that the result is crispy outside/cheesy inside that is virtually impossible to replicate, and is simply delicious.

    Nook, on the other hand, produces a very good representation of a Minnesota picnic burger. It is thick, with a good quality bun, fixins’, and slightly crispy exterior and viscous interior cheese. While tasty, it is something that you could probably replicate at home given the proper ingredients. It is very much a better than average bar burger, of which you can find very similar representations (without a cheese center) in just about every city in minnesota above pop. 2000. Also, it is a knock-off of Mpls original, which further demerits it.

    If you are from pigs eye, I understand that you like your city, and therefore its most reputable burger. If you are from mpls, and prefer the nook, I’m guessing you prefer the picnic style. But as for unique, tasty food, the Lucy simply cannot be beat.

  6. Ro

    Man, I think The Blue Door Pub has the best burgers in town. I wasn’t a big burger guy until the Blue Door opened… now I try them everywhere and can’t find a better one.

  7. Shogunmoon

    Thank goodness. The local press may have gone just gone as long as two whole days, in a row, without covering burgers. Thank goodness this has been rectified.

Comments are closed.