I don't buy that for a second.

I rewatched this last night. Part of the team decision was for Nicholas to take the toughest dishes because of his immunity. Stephanie said she was happy Nick was taking the difficult dishes because it was all outside her comfort zone. Funny how that works. If Nicholas had played it safe and Stephanie had failed…

Agree. That's what really bothers me. What do the judges and producers think immunity is? Immunity only has value if it prevents a chef who otherwise would be eliminated from being eliminated. That necessarily means someone who otherwise didn't deserve to be eliminated gets eliminated. And there is also an angle…

And if Nicholas knew that was going to be Tom's reaction, he might have done it differently. He didn't have the 20/20 hindsight we have. And it is hard for me to give Stephanie too much credit for calling out the nest when earlier in the show she stated how relieved she was Nicholas was taking on the difficult…

Exactly. Say Nicholas decided to leave the nest off the dish, and that turned out to be the deciding factor in the French team losing. The same people would be here complaining that Nicholas screwed up by not completing the dish the way it was designed. I don't think anyone can claim that Nicholas tanked it on…

Kristen, Stephanie, . . Nyesha and others. It happens. It's the way the show is structured.

I don't think it is a completely different situation. To the extent it is different, it is a product of the challenge design. Regarding Carrie: The person who didn't make the worst dish that week got eliminated because of Carrie. Is there any real question that Stephanie was the second worst on the losing team this…

I disagree. Completely. Nicholas thought it was okay. Beyond that though, the nest was assigned by the French team leader. Remember at the beginning? It's one of the things she focused on. We could just as easily be talking now about how Nicholas screwed the pooch by not putting the nest on the dish, if he'd…

I can't answer that. I think it has been done this way before.

I agree. If you use immunity, use it wisely.

No. It won't. And it shouldn't.

Nina is abrasive at times. She seems like one of the best chefs, though. Maybe THE best.

Yet Kristen came back and won with Padma as a judge.

Nyesha got screwed the worst of any contestant ever, in my opinion. I think she was one of the top chefs that season, and might have won if not for the ludicrous double elimination.

Except Nick has helped out people he is competing against. He has been honorable. There is nothing dishonorable about winning immunity. I get it, . . we all loved Stephanie. But I can't blame Nick for NOT forfeiting immunity. To my knowledge, nobody has ever done that on the show.

Just a few weeks ago Carrie completely crapped the bed and would have been eliminated except . . . wait for it . . . she had immunity. It happens. It's part of the game.

Why didn't Nick resign? Uh, . . because he WON immunity. That's how the contest works. I can't believe people are harping on this. Stephanie was my favorite too. But I can't fault a contestant for keeping immunity that he won. Fault the show. Fault the structure of the contest. Don't fault the guy with…

Sometimes the structure of the show screws someone. It sucks. Remember when Nyesha got eliminated a few years ago? They eliminated both partners in a team challenge, so Nyesha — clearly one of the top chefs — went down for her partner's mistake. If I remember correctly, she won several LCKs, but just couldn't run…

Nicholas not forfeiting immunity was much different from Kristin "taking the fall" last season. Kristin didn't have immunity. If she did, she wouldn't have been eliminated.

I will see this movie only if Topo's last name is Gigio. And even then only if the character is constantly referred to as Topo Gigio.