Pittsburgh is a better sushi town than Boston

By adamg - 8/27/10 - 8:09 am

Sure, you can get good sushi if you have a lot of money and, sure, Pittsburgh is inland, but Dave Copeland makes the case that day in, day out, you'll get better sushi there:

The reason Pittsburgh excelled is because it didn’t have the glut of mid-level and hole-in-the-wall sushi places that Boston suffers from. Those places in Boston don’t attract crowds because there are so many to choose from. They do a decent business, but not a brisk business. That means fish seems to sit longer and seems to taste less fresh than it did in Pittsburgh, which is four hours inland.

Dining
sushi

Comments

I disagree. Having lived in

By reddot (not verified) - 8/27/10 - 9:28 am

#1

I disagree. Having lived in Pittsburgh recenty, the sushi there is pretty crappy. Even the supposedly best restaurant there was nothing special. And b/c it's so far inland, even though Pittsburgh in general is cheaper for a lot of things, fish is a lot more expensive.

also disagree

By nathanael - 8/27/10 - 10:12 am

#2

There are plenty of brisk business places here with decent prices (ala Fish Market in Allston).

Holes in the Walls

By Love them shadows (not verified) - 8/27/10 - 10:24 am

#3

Can't comment for all holes in the walls in Boston, but two Washington Square HITWs, Minato and Super Fusion, have what I think is the tastiest and best value sushi around, hands down. And that's in landlocked Brookline!

Four hours inland? Does he

By NotWhitey - 8/27/10 - 11:08 am

#4

Four hours inland? Does he think they catch all the fish along the waterfront? The 'fresh' 'raw' tuna you get in Tokyo may come from Massachusetts waters, and is frozen before they put it on the plane.