On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 11:28:13 -0700, "Kent" > wrote:

> It looked interesting on the video. It was a disaster here. There was
> separation of the skin from the meat and the the meat did retain moisture.
> The butter flavor overwhelmed the meat. It was so rich you couldn't eat much
> without feeling the your arteries getting clogged. The disaster, however,
> was what happened to the potatoes underneath the roasting chicken. The idea
> was to ocapture the rendered chicken drippings into the potatoes and create
> a flavorful potato. What happened resulted in a fatty gloppy mess you
> couldn't retrieve in one piece, and what you wouldn't want to eat, if
> you're at all fat concensious.
>
> It was a disaster. IF you look at the video you can more or less see this
> coming.
>
> We'd suggest "don't do it". I like the idea of spatched cock chicken, though
> I've had very little experience with it. Also, I like the idea of inserting
> something between breast skin and breast meat that would retain moisture in
> the meat.

The video ended for me when she was buttering the legs so I didn't see
it all. But I think you're right about too much fat even though she
said she took excess chicken fat off the bird. I have put butter
under poultry skin in the past, but not as much as she did and I
usually separate out most of the fat before I make gravy.

In any case, I'm not sure I'd want my chicken to rest directly on a
bed of potatoes because they wouldn't cook evenly. One of the
comments said they baked the potatoes for an extra 10 minutes. Do you
think that could have helped? I am not adverse to using a bed of
mirepoix vegetables if they're intended to make stock for gravy

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.