I know the op hasn't posted his negative comments on Chicago food in a while, not here nor on his muck-raking blog but I thought I would weigh in on his original question.
Nobody uses Zagat in Chicago. Chicago is a word-of-mouth kind of place that doesn't often succumb to the theatrical presentation of a restaurant but, instead, applauds the actual food the kitchen delivers. This is why I think LTH exists. Chicagoans like to express their opinion of who has the best this or that as well as give you a hole-in-the-wall restaurant that they feel is better than "anything downtown."
Chicago is not NYC, nor does it strive to be. Sure, there are some corporate backed restaurants in the loop that follow the NYC model of what makes a restaurant, aka: style over substance but a true Chicagoan isn't easily fooled. I'm always amused about the NYC'ers negative comments on this board or the general national media about food in Chicago, as though our city and its restaurant goers actually seek the same thing that NYC offers.
I can actually say similar things about NYC and it's food. The places I've been taken to there, by NYC locals, have looked really nice, have given off an air of sophistication (a NYC favorite term when speaking of restaurants), but the food always seems to disappoint at its respective price point ($80-100 per couple range). NYC seems to have wonderful, high-end restaurants but lacks the 2nd tier places that are most frequented here in Chgo. All in all, NYC stands as wonderful in its own right and I would not dare compare it to Paris or Tokyo or even Hong Kong, risking NYC supporter's defensive comebacks, unmasking their own "inferiority complex."
What you may find is that Chicago is a bit grittier (less sophisticated as you may) but truer in its food quest. Our ethnic places may not be much to look at but the food can be outstanding. A city of our size also has its fair share of high-end dining, holding its own on an international level but please, let's drop the comparisons.