How Harry scores.

Source weights are then adjusted by review-volume confidence (section 03) and by source-disagreement penalties (section 04).

The Score tells you how good a place is out of 100. The HH Staris the headline on top of it — a 1-to-5-star award for the restaurants that are consistently, provably excellent. It's Harry's own mark, not a badge borrowed from anyone else, and it's the opposite of a Michelin star in three ways: it's price-blind (a taco stand and a tasting menu compete on the same axis — judged on the Harry Hungry Score alone, never on price), the thresholds are published (below), and it's available anywhere Harry has the data, not just a handful of chosen cities.

A high number on its own isn't enough. A star only goes to a place with a verified review base— a real volume of reviews, or genuine critic coverage — never a thin or gameable sample, and never to something that isn't a restaurant (food tours, shops and permanently-closed spots are ruled out). The top tiers demand more: four and five stars require the review sources to agree — no single-site hype — and five stars also require a spark of distinctiveness, memorable rather than merely high-scoring. The star is derived fromthe Score; it's never an input to it, and no restaurant can pay to appear.

Stars have inertia. A restaurant has to clear a tier's bar for two months runningbefore it's awarded — and fall short for two months before it loses one. No star handed out or taken away on a single noisy month, and never to a thin or unverified sample. Each starred restaurant's card shows exactly which bar it cleared and since when.

One caveat: the HH Star is only as complete as what Harry has indexed. It covers the cities and cuisines in his database so far — a genuinely great place he hasn't reached yet simply isn't eligible until he does. It's a growing list, not a finished map of the world.

See who holds one: the HH Star list.

Worth It is notthe same as cheap. Harry doesn't punish expensive places — only disappointing ones.

• -8

  Google clapping. Yelp grumpier. Harry splits the difference.

• +1

  Yelp loves it more than Google does — usually a real food crowd.

• -5

  Tripadvisor loves it. Translation: tourists love it.

• -3

  Critics rave. Crowd divided. Could be brilliant. Could be a $240 mistake.

• -6

  Looks promising but the sample size is tiny. Harry's watching.

• -7

  Old reviews say great. New ones say not anymore. Slipping.

• -5

  Skewed by visitors who only eat there once.

• -5

  A lot of the noise is brand, not bites.

• Great Value

  Unusually good for the money. Cheap or moderate, hits above weight.

• Smart Spend

  Fairly priced, reliably good. Default safe bet.

• Solid Pick

  Does the job. Fair-priced, neither special nor disappointing.

• Worth the Splurge

  Expensive, but the experience earns the bill.

• Occasion Worthy

  Pricey enough you want a reason. The food gives you one.

• Cheap but Cheerful

  Not elite, but satisfying for the money.

• Paying for the Scene

  Decent food. You're partly paying for brand and vibes.

• Tourist Tax Warning

  Expensive and suspiciously famous. Brand outshines kitchen.

• False Economy

  Cheap, but cheap in the wrong way. Skip.

• Whether you'll get on with the waiter.
• If the kitchen had a bad night.
• Allergens. Always check with the restaurant.
• Whether tonight's special is any good.
• If you're in the mood for what you said you were.
• Whether the menu's changed since the last review wave.