www.viamichelin.com seems to say that Singapore has 21 1-star spots, 6 2-star spots, and 1 3-star spot. That's 36 stars, I think, which should put it on your list.
The Michelin Guide favors technique over all else. Flavor counts for a lot, but Japanese food involves more technical skill than say...a delicious hamburger. Sushi chefs train for up to 10 years before they present their own food for restaurant consumption. I haven't researched it myself, but I suspect that's the source of a lot of Japan's accolades.
Since Michelin started covering Japan, they've crushed the rest of the world. Tokyo took over from Paris' nr 1 slot and look at their lead in stars...
Michelin itself didn't forsee this when they started covering Japan, but even pretty small restaurants managed to blow away the Michelin judges. I don't think it's just a hype as they've been rating them for at least a decade now. I guess the quality of the restaurants just must be extremely good (or expensive?).
One of the things that may have so few people getting Kobe is that it is sometimes considered to be part of greater Osaka. It's possible for people used to the quizzes here to consider Kobe (and Yokohama, Chiba, Kawasaki, and others) as parts of other metropolitan areas.
Chiba city is a bit far and less urban compared to Tokyo, Yokohama is not a fancy place besides the area close to the bay, and Kawasaki is an industrial city. Something you might have not have learned from the stats! Kyoto has many restaurants that is running for centuries, and Osaka is famous for the local food. Perhaps Kobe was nominated for the steak houses...?
Right. I get all that. I'm just saying that folks on this site might not be used to disaggregating metropolitan areas. On most quizzes, Kobe is subsumed under Osaka. The others are simply similar examples.
If most of the meals served in the top restaurants spend all of their time presenting meals that look like the given photograph, as well as being very expensive, I personally would rather have a proper meal. I think the modern criteria for top restaurants give more kudos for fancy presentation, wine list , ambiance etc. than for a really good food. I personally would rather have a really good Prime Rib Steak than a couple of slivers of raw tuna.
Michelin itself didn't forsee this when they started covering Japan, but even pretty small restaurants managed to blow away the Michelin judges. I don't think it's just a hype as they've been rating them for at least a decade now. I guess the quality of the restaurants just must be extremely good (or expensive?).