cutting chicken before frying

Not necessarily the people on Cheftalk, Siduri, but, in general, most people don't even know how to break down a bird, let along take it to the next step as you do. That's why the markets sell more packaged pieces, nowadays, than whole chickens.

Plus I'd have to say that most people aren't quite that impatient, either.

In my own case, if I were going to go to the bother of half boning, I'd just go all the way, and make everything boneless. But that's just me.

Well theres a great old trick....it's called BRICK CHICKEN ...you split the whole bird in half.....remove breast bones...olive oil up a cast iron pan and heat it on high..make sure you have some oven gloves around cause that handle gets hot! Marinate your flattened semi deboned bird in your marination of choice ( mine is simple olive oil, lemon juice oregano and S& P.

your gonna need two bricks for this dinner ...lol   wrapped in foil  Place your bird skin side down on that heated smokin pan and place your bricks ontop!....I know it sounds crazy but 10 minutes later , flip your bird..throw the pan into the oven and wow only about 5 more minutes at a 450 degree oven you got yourself a whole cooked chicken! Wonderfull crispy chicken

and soooo moist inside...be extra carefull ....with the cast iron it takes along time to cool down

I edited this because I spelled moist wrong  ...what a goof.....lol   

Siduri - risotto must drive you mad then hehe.  Gotta stir that one endlessly.

As for de-boning chicken, I tend not to do that.  It comes out to my taste a better flavour when the bones are in.  If you are pushed for time then sure fillets (thigh or breast) are a faster option.  I have to say my preference is to buy the whole bird then break it down as i like it.  But I do have spare time as I work at home, not everyone has that, ummm, luxury? (another topic totally :) ).

Your style of doing the chicken would be very time efficient, and very similar to the Oreiental way of piecing the chicken prior to frying.  Quick, tasty, crispy.

Gypsy,

I've heard of that and always have wanted to try it.....Question - does this squeeze the juices from the bird?  Just a thought. 

DC, the bricks do not squeeze out the juices. They serve two functions. One is to put enough weight on the spatchcocked bird so that as much of its surface area as possible is in contact with the heat. The other is to retain heat, like a cover, but without the steaming effect a cover would produce.

It is only effective with a spatchcocked bird. A chicken with the bones in would require a lot more weight before it could flatten down enough against the heat.

Thank you for that KYH - I just had in mind a post I had a reply to in which I commented on, well, asked really, about benefits of pressing down a steak to get good grid marks and received an answer of a resounding no :)  Haven't tried to cook a spatched chook before but I may give this a go.  Got bricks - need chook.

Siduri - you sound the same sort of cook I am.  I never want to be chained to the stove just to make some food.  People will argue about what's a risotto and what's a pilau, but in the end, they are much the same.  Unless the cooking is done in a high end restaurant and people enjoy, I say blah to conventional methods, if I can make it work more easily.

This is why I don't make cakes......

People will argue about what's a risotto and what's a pilau, but in the end, they are much the same........................I say blah to conventional methods, if I can make it work more easily.

DC, you're arguing two different points, here.

First off, other than being made with rice, risotto and pilau are not the same, not even close. It's not a matter of taste or preference, but of definition. And, as you know, I get my nose a little out of joint over this, because pretty soon there will be no communication. May a well just divide food into two categories, cooked and uncooked, and be done. After all, a beefsteak made on the grill, and a pork shoulder slow cooked in the oven, in the end are pretty much the same as they are both cooked.

Making something work more easily is, of course, a different issue. The question you have to ask is this: Is it really the same thing made easier? Or is it almost the same thing (or a similar enough thing) as to make no never mind on my table?

I suspect the latter is what's involved. Nothing wrong with that, because now we are in the area of preferences and personal taste. But the fact is, risotto is a technique as well as the dish, and without the stirring---and it's effect on the starch---it is not a risotto---anymore than cooking something is a small amount of water is sauteeing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by siduri 

KY, not liking risotto all that much I wouldn't put my hand in the fire over this (as the italians say) but I think that what I do make is not much of a pilaf, more of a risotto, in that it's creamy and has a similar texture to those I've tried when we've eaten out and someone orders a risotto and i taste it.  I stir it occasionally but vigorously, and it breaks down enough of the surface starch to make a creamy background to the rice - but i would not argue the point with a risotto expert or risotto lover.  I haven;t got the criteria, since i don;t care for it much.  (I like long grain white rice, boiled like pasta, with butter only - or rice in escarole soup. Can enjoy a nice pilaf with some kebab dish occasionally, other than that, i don't much like rice). 

 

But I agree that the shortcuts have to be ways to make something equal or equal enough for the eater's taste.  My mother in law would put fish sauce and mix it with rice and think she made risotto alla pescatora - definitely not!

 

About the chicken, my question was if smaller pieces are not generally used because the chicken doesn;'t come out as well, say, less juicy (a fillet would probably be less juicy, for instance) or if people just never think of doing it. 

 

DC, I make lots of cakes, and there i do follow the instructions pretty much, though I am not a gram-for-gram measurer, and my cakes come out great, even if i never take more than fifteen minutes from the decision of what cake to make to getting it in the oven.  Fifteen minutes would be a lot, and only for a complex cake.  But i love baking even more than cooking.  When i plan dinner, i begin with the desert!  It usually takes me quite a bit longer than fifteen minutes to decide what cake to make - consulting a stack of cookbooks. 

I actually like risotto quite a bit.  I'm one of those folks who doesn't mind putting in the time if the results are worth it.

 

Not to go back to the original point or anything similarly provocative, but like DC, I prefer chicken on the bone for some purposes and "nuggets" for others.  Any extra time and trouble taken for frying pieces on the bone is time and trouble well invested.

BDL

I agree fully. And fried chicken (I assume we're talking deep fried) should have the bone in, for several reasons.

If I understand Siduri's qualification, though, she's not separating the pieces into boned and not boned. Rather she's doing what amounts to a deep score, or a butterfly, of the pieces. This keeps them whole, with the bone attached, but makes the whole thing thinner so it cooks faster.

Not an approach I would use. But each to his or her own.

KYH - I take your point.  I am a home cook and anything that saves me time is a bonus.  Like Siduri, I don't care much for risotto, kind of take it or leave it.  So the way I do it suits us is all I'm saying. For the purists among us, no, this is not the way one does a risotto.  Still tastes good when your stock is good :)  Point taken about classifications.

Siduri,

I agree with you that a whole roasted bird can taste immensely superior to roasted parts. Perhaps because the moisture is kept inside for longer?  Don't know.  Maryland cuts (thigh and leg) taste pretty well roasted.  Maybe as they have more bulk than just pieces.  Drumsticksticks I haven't got the taste or the patience for - it could well be how I cook them but here they seem to be mainly bone and not worth it.  I prefer the wings to them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by siduri 

I generally don;t like jobs that require me to stand around waiting.  I hate making photocopies, I hate to stir things that just need to be mindlessly stirred, i don;t like standing around frying stuff.  But i do love fried food. 

 

So, when i fry chicken, i usually cut the pieces in half - that is, the upper thigh, i cut it along the bone, so one half has the bone and the other doesn't.  I don;t usually do breasts, but if i did i would cut them also into smaller pieces. 

 

My chicken seems to come juicy and good, and in half the time .  (I also do this when i roast chicken pieces, like in a pan with potatoes, at very high heat so they get crispy and browned and remain juicy inside). 

 

Is there any reason why people don;t do it this way?  Am I missing something? 

The proper way to prepare and serve Chicken is to dissect both the breasts and legs in half... so that you have both an 'Inner and Outer' Leg and Breast.
 

The Outer Leg 'Drumstick' is served with the inner breast - and the Inner leg 'Thigh' is served with the outer breast.

on the bone or not doesn't matter, but serving half a chicken thigh is something that even KFC doesn't do.