I mean, I could tell based on my understanding of physics and cooking that it was not going to turn out as one would hope.
But I plowed through and made it anyways. In the end, every single concern I had about this preparation rang true.
I knew going in that it couldn’t possibly cook consistently because the bottom would be a solid mass and the top would be split apart with varying gaps.
I knew that convection would not carry the moisture away from the bottom of the fins but it would desiccate the tops properly. I felt that the tops 1/3 would have crispy delicious skins but the base would have tough leather. I was right.
I knew that both ends would be rock hard and inedible but it had to be that way in order for the thicker parts to absorb enough heat.
I knew that applying an oil to the top was a very delicate game because it would just saturate into a grease pool if it dripped/pooled to the lower part.
I feel like this is a misbegotten recipe. A big series of fanciful ideas that are visually impressive but do not deliver in the taste department. Seems like it’s from a time before cooking science was well understood.
Physics prevents this from being cooked anything other than inconsistently.
As the fins rise and spread out, the amount of moisture that can dissipate can be plotted on a curve with the bottom of the potato always representing the least amount of moisture dissipation, and the outer part at the top always having the most.
And it gets more complicated because as the potato curves on each axis it becomes thinner on the edges so there’s a gradient in moisture dissipation there too.
In a practical sense this means that every X, Y, Z point on this potato is cooked different. Some points will be perfect but by definition it means other points will not and cannot be perfect. And other points must be awful.
There is a fundamental flaw in this design, which changing the temperature or cooking duration cannot solve.
I wonder if the tater could be sous vide after slicing to perfect temp and then somehow flash crusted. Similar idea to twice cooked fries that are boiled, frozen, then fried.
To get a more consistently cooked product, I think the geometry of the surface would need to change or we would need to use a cooking device that could deliver a different amounts of heat energy to different points.
I mean, I’ve had this prepared professionally and it was exceptional and consistent. And I knew immediately I probably didn’t ever want to prepare it myself.
Sometimes I think the highest regarded dishes are about the way they look rather than the process, execution, or the taste. The more I learn to cook, the more I appreciate the nuance of each step!
I would never make this again.
I mean, I could tell based on my understanding of physics and cooking that it was not going to turn out as one would hope.
But I plowed through and made it anyways. In the end, every single concern I had about this preparation rang true.
I knew going in that it couldn’t possibly cook consistently because the bottom would be a solid mass and the top would be split apart with varying gaps.
I knew that convection would not carry the moisture away from the bottom of the fins but it would desiccate the tops properly. I felt that the tops 1/3 would have crispy delicious skins but the base would have tough leather. I was right.
I knew that both ends would be rock hard and inedible but it had to be that way in order for the thicker parts to absorb enough heat.
I knew that applying an oil to the top was a very delicate game because it would just saturate into a grease pool if it dripped/pooled to the lower part.
I feel like this is a misbegotten recipe. A big series of fanciful ideas that are visually impressive but do not deliver in the taste department. Seems like it’s from a time before cooking science was well understood.
Maybe next time you could try lower heat for longer. Or not, if this is not for you, you do you.
Physics prevents this from being cooked anything other than inconsistently.
As the fins rise and spread out, the amount of moisture that can dissipate can be plotted on a curve with the bottom of the potato always representing the least amount of moisture dissipation, and the outer part at the top always having the most.
And it gets more complicated because as the potato curves on each axis it becomes thinner on the edges so there’s a gradient in moisture dissipation there too.
In a practical sense this means that every X, Y, Z point on this potato is cooked different. Some points will be perfect but by definition it means other points will not and cannot be perfect. And other points must be awful.
There is a fundamental flaw in this design, which changing the temperature or cooking duration cannot solve.
Too much delta t leads to too much delta T.
I wonder if the tater could be sous vide after slicing to perfect temp and then somehow flash crusted. Similar idea to twice cooked fries that are boiled, frozen, then fried.
To get a more consistently cooked product, I think the geometry of the surface would need to change or we would need to use a cooking device that could deliver a different amounts of heat energy to different points.
Id wrap the top half in foil, cook it upside down for 50-75% of the cook time, then flip rightside up and take the foil off to finish.
https://www.simplyrecipes.com/recipes/how_to_cook_potatoes_sous_vide/
Go for it, let me know how it turns out!
I mean, I’ve had this prepared professionally and it was exceptional and consistent. And I knew immediately I probably didn’t ever want to prepare it myself.
So its a skill issue. Check.
Sometimes I think the highest regarded dishes are about the way they look rather than the process, execution, or the taste. The more I learn to cook, the more I appreciate the nuance of each step!
This is only related because it’s for the rich, but I was watching a show the other day and apparently there exists a £21,000 TACO.
It didn’t even look good tbh.