"Victor Sack" > wrote in message
...
>
> Exactly, and it is not just the meat. However, this is what a lot of
> people really want, because it looks like much but costs little - that
> is why it has become the default, I think. So, it is up to you to
> request thicker slices - it should never be a problem. Here is what I
> posted five or six years ago:
>
> As far as I'm concerned, cutting salmon, sausages, etc. in paper-thin
> slices is a travesty. It serves only one purpose - to cover as much of
> the plate with as little of the stuff as possible. Looks like a lot,
> but costs little and tastes hardly of anything, so thin it is. The best
> smoked salmon I ever ate was on a farm in Finland - they served
> veritable *slabs* of it - and very good quality it was, too. Once you
> taste it that way, you'll never want to go back to thin slices. At
> least that's what happened to me.
>
> Victor

Bubba! Bubba! No wonder I cherish you! I too prefer a thicker cut. Well,
except for the smoked salmon perhaps. The best I ever had was in Ireland.
Wild salmon fresh from the smoker, medium sliced and heaped on country
bread. Not too thin and not too thick --- certainly not slabs, but not wimpy
thin stuff I've found elsewhere. Admittedly, I haven't had salmon in Finland
yet. I dislike artsy-fartsy food. Give me some substance.

Charlie