I want to eat where ever you are going. I've gotten thicker, larger slices of packaged luncheon meat, than the slices of roast beef at any buffet I have been to in years. I usually ask for a second slice and then eat the chicken and fish that is offered also. I always count the Beef as less than an ounce (I have actually weighed it on a take out portion)

On the local news tonight they said the couple offered to pay more and were refused. They also said the couple was told to leave the beef alone and eat the chicken.

Here in the south, that chicken would be fried, so I'm not surprised they refused.

But.....it's still a different story....wonder what's the true story?

We'll never know.... I guess I'll be waiting for the couple to sue for emotional trauma.

The article did not say they made 12 TRIPS to get roast beef, but that they got 12 slices of roast beef -- frankly, not all that much meat at most places I've been.

I know when *I* was on induction, I sometimes packed away an enormous amount of meat. I don't like being hungry -- the fact that I can lose weight without being hungry is a big reason to do this!

I find it astonishing how many of you are willing to judge this couple as being inappropriately gluttonous.

If the establishment wants to set a limit on how much an individual can have of a specific item, they need to set that limit up front, so you know what you are paying for. Setting it after you get there is NOT OK. And if the couple did, indeed, offer to pay extra -- then the management was WAY out of line, and this clearly had to do with some perception on his part.

i got to know how many pounds were talking about not slices.
i can eat about one pound ha ha... slices sounds small. before i started atkins i could eat about two pounds. what ever close the place down, better yet sue em for false advertising. whatever dont blame atkins cause i eat too much ha ha.

I still think they were abusing the priveldge - how long did the management put up with it - they say they were going twice a week, if they were making 12 trips up on each visit - of course I would be upset as a manager - especially if there were other food choices. I have been to buffets here in Edmonton - and the roast beef slices have always been generous - at LEAST 3-4 ounces per slice (as the roast isn't your typical small roast from the supermarket, it is normally a leg of beef), and typcially you get two at a time, unless you ask for more. So twelve trips is being completely gluttoness in my opinion. It wasn't like they were "humiliated publicly" -they were asked politely to eat other things or leave, and THEY were the ones who drew the attention to themselves, requiring a police escort out. I'm sorry, i just don't have any sympathy for them. If they like roast beef that much, perhaps they should cook it at home twice a week and then they can eat as much as they want.

Its funny, because after reading the thread I see judgements against the restaraunt ( by people that are not there and not management) and people judging the couple ( who were not there and didn't see what happens).
Judgement happens. There are valid points on both sides, but for those that pointed out we may never really know, are the most correct in any event.
For myself, if a manager felt the need to request that they eat other things ( and we all know there are OTHER things on Atkins besides BEEF) something had to have been up. Nobody needs bad publicity. But I could be wrong in assuming that.

Exactly, Poofie....

If it wasn't grossly out of line, the management wouldn't risk the backlash.... Maybe they never found it necessary to POST a limit (until now!)

We will never know whether the couple abused the buffet or the owner was rushed in his reaction - but something was bound to happen, since one thing is clear:

Eating low carb means eating the more expensive items at any buffet. We eat more meat, fish, veggies, and leave the cheap maccaroni and cheese and potatoes alone. And given that there may be 10% of the population on a LC diet, I think many buffets are having to make the choice of either increasing price or limiting the amount one can eat from certain items.

Funny...this article seems to state otherwise. http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2..._2002-06-06.cfm

Perhaps their policy has changed since 2002, but even the Chuck A Rama manager interviewed is quoted as saying that "all you can eat means all you can eat" when talking about people who are what they refer to as "heavy hitters."

Excellent article LisaN - after reading that I have to obviously adjust my opinion slightly. I do still think that they were out of line and abusing it, however, obviously the management has been less than perfect if they were promoting all you can eat and then reneging on it.

Here is another view - perhaps the management is considering the fact that they may be sued for contributing to the obesity of their clientele - it seems to be the "thing" these days with so many lawsuits against mcdonald's etc, I wonder if that is one of the triggers for the management? All in all, this is a strange situation.

From what I've heard, none of those lawsuits for blaming a food establishment on your obesity has ever been won. There might have been one case where someone grossly misstated the # of calories in their smoothie drink, but I think that was it.

Possibly, but the premise of the lawsuits against McDonalds was that McDonalds (and other fast food restaurants) promote their foods as "wholesome" and "healthy". As hard as it may be to believe for those of us who actually know something about nutrition, there are those that don't (apparently) believe that french fries and hamburgers are bad for your health when you eat a daily diet of them.
OTOH, it would be a lot harder to convince a judge and jury that you didn't know that stuffing yourself at an all you can eat buffet several times a week was going to make you gain weight.

I've been to plenty of buffets before and making 12 trips to get ANYTHING seems excessive to me. I don't care how small the slices of roast beef were. I am sure there was other things they could have eaten at the buffet. Either other types of meat or preferably vegetables. I would never in a million years get up 12 times to get food at a buffet, even less, the most expensive item in the place. That just seems really over the top and abusive. If I had done that and been called on it, I would have been mortified. I certainly would not have added insult to injury by demanding my money back. Sheesh. I am sure that owner is glad to be rid of those customers. I hope for their sake, their pictures didn't appear in the paper, because they will get strange looks whenever they go to a buffer from now on.