Yeah, well, no one ever said San Francisco was the buffalo wing center of the universe. Certainly not Midwest Ted. But the lack of wing joints still surprises me. Maybe we're not looking hard enough, but we've only found two so far. And New Yorker's Buffalo Wings (number two) is fairly lackluster, I'm sad to report.

Similar menu to Original Buffalo Wings (number one), with the wings and the fresh potato chips and the blue-cheese dipping sauce and veggies on the side. But it just seemed a little bland in comparison. Not really bad, mind you -- just nothing to write home to Buffalo about. The wings seemed to have a little less zip than OBW, and not just in the heat department. Maybe they were not fried to the same crispiness, I don't know. It's becoming increasingly clear -- I can deny it no longer!!! -- SF ain't no wing town.

But hey, we still have OBW, who do a fine job. And if I have my way the Füd Court will soon present a make-your-own-buffalo-wings-at-home feature. So stay tuned. And let us know of any good wings out there, for crying out loud.

Vardigan

I'd hate to hear what Midwest Ted would say about New Yorker's Buffalo Wings. The judges found them pretty mediocre, even based on our apparently lower standards. Like Judge McClure said, the sauce is the downfall. Admittedly, we may have ordered poorly (because I made the call). I stammered some, and we didn't have a menu, so I said something like "mild hot." Whatever that means. And what we got was certainly mild. Bland, I'd say. And buffalo wings should NOT be bland.

Yet they're still buffalo wings, and I ate them eagerly. I enjoyed eating them. But not overly. I'd recommend them if Original Buffalo Wings shut down or quoted you an unacceptable delivery time.

For those of you curious about the "beak" count (number of malformed, anemic, and stunted wings), I counted three. That's out of 50 -- not bad. I started to eat one, as they were the only things left at the bottom of the box. Then I thought better of it. People shouldn't eat beaks.