Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A friend called and asked me what he should do with it?
I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Kswck" wrote:
> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? Send it to me. lol Depends how many are coming for dinner. That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze it. I would cut it in half. I'd debone the large end, tie for roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. Roast the smaller end as a standing rib roast. I think for the home cook it's best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same doneness throughout. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article
>, Sheldon > wrote: > "Kswck" wrote: > > A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > > I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > Send it to me. lol > > Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze > it. I would cut it in half. I'd debone the large end, tie for > roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. Roast the > smaller end as a standing rib roast. I think for the home cook it's > best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to > fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same > doneness throughout. Agreed. Trying to roast that thing whole would probably end in disaster. -- Peace! Om "Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot survive." -- Dalai Lama |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Omelet > wrote:
> In article > >, > Sheldon > wrote: > >> "Kswck" wrote: >>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? >> >> Send it to me. lol >> >> Depends how many are coming for dinner. >> >> That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze >> it. I would cut it in half. I'd debone the large end, tie for >> roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. Roast the >> smaller end as a standing rib roast. I think for the home cook it's >> best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to >> fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same >> doneness throughout. > > Agreed. Trying to roast that thing whole would probably end in disaster. Not agreed. Restaurants do this all the time. They roast them whole, just like I posted the recipe for earlier which Sheldon called bullshit. 500F for 20 minutes, then 225-250F for the remainder of the time. This works for any large piece of meat and produces a perfectly even doneness throughout. -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 21, 10:36�am, Sqwertz > wrote:
> Omelet > wrote: > > In article > > >, > > �Sheldon > wrote: > > >> "Kswck" wrote: > >>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > >>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > >> Send it to me. lol > > >> Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > >> That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze > >> it. �I would cut it in half. �I'd debone the large end, tie for > >> roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. �Roast the > >> smaller end as a standing rib roast. �I think for the home cook it's > >> best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to > >> fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same > >> doneness throughout. > > > Agreed. Trying to roast that thing whole would probably end in disaster.. > > Not agreed. �Restaurants do this all the time. �They roast them > whole, just like I posted the recipe for earlier which Sheldon > called bullshit. �500F for 20 minutes, then 225-250F for the > remainder of the time. �This works for any large piece of meat and > produces a perfectly even doneness throughout. Sqwartz, you are DEFINITELY FULL OF SHIT... you've never in your life cooked a rib roast, in fact you've never seen one except those small sections at your favorite SHIT warehouse stupidmarket. An 18 pound rib roast is indeed the full primal section, inclusive of chine bone. The info I gave previously is correct... but yoose imbeciles believe whatever you want. http://www.beefandvealculinary.com/C...efRibRoast.pdf |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sheldon > wrote:
> On Dec 21, 10:36�am, Sqwertz > wrote: >> Omelet > wrote: >>> In article >>> >, >>> �Sheldon > wrote: >> >>>> "Kswck" wrote: >>>>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >>>>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? >> >>>> Send it to me. lol >> >>>> Depends how many are coming for dinner. >> >>>> That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze >>>> it. �I would cut it in half. �I'd debone the large end, tie for >>>> roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. �Roast the >>>> smaller end as a standing rib roast. �I think for the home cook it's >>>> best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to >>>> fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same >>>> doneness throughout. >> >>> Agreed. Trying to roast that thing whole would probably end in disaster. >> >> Not agreed. �Restaurants do this all the time. �They roast them >> whole, just like I posted the recipe for earlier which Sheldon >> called bullshit. �500F for 20 minutes, then 225-250F for the >> remainder of the time. �This works for any large piece of meat and >> produces a perfectly even doneness throughout. > > Sqwartz, you are DEFINITELY FULL OF SHIT... you've never in your life > cooked a rib roast, in fact you've never seen one except those small > sections at your favorite SHIT warehouse stupidmarket. > > An 18 pound rib roast is indeed the full primal section, inclusive of > chine bone. The info I gave previously is correct... but yoose > imbeciles believe whatever you want. > > http://www.beefandvealculinary.com/C...efRibRoast.pdf What exactly are you disagreeing with me about? Yes - a full prime rib roast is the whole rib section, but it's not all the ribs - it's only ribs 6-12. If that's what you're referring to, then please find the correct post where you mentioned that and respond to that post rather than my post where we're discussing cooking methods. I know it's hard to concentrate with all that cheap vodka sloshing around in your brain, but just put in a little more effort to be coherent, OK? As for your cooking method, it would ruin a rib roast. -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote: > Omelet > wrote: > > > In article > > >, > > Sheldon > wrote: > > > >> "Kswck" wrote: > >>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > >>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > >> > >> Send it to me. lol > >> > >> Depends how many are coming for dinner. > >> > >> That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze > >> it. I would cut it in half. I'd debone the large end, tie for > >> roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. Roast the > >> smaller end as a standing rib roast. I think for the home cook it's > >> best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to > >> fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same > >> doneness throughout. > > > > Agreed. Trying to roast that thing whole would probably end in disaster. > > Not agreed. Restaurants do this all the time. They roast them > whole, just like I posted the recipe for earlier which Sheldon > called bullshit. 500F for 20 minutes, then 225-250F for the > remainder of the time. This works for any large piece of meat and > produces a perfectly even doneness throughout. > > -sw Okay. I'm just chicken. ;-) -- Peace! Om "Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot survive." -- Dalai Lama |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 10:46:50 -0600, Omelet >
wrote: >> Not agreed. Restaurants do this all the time. They roast them >> whole, just like I posted the recipe for earlier which Sheldon >> called bullshit. 500F for 20 minutes, then 225-250F for the >> remainder of the time. This works for any large piece of meat and >> produces a perfectly even doneness throughout. >> >> -sw > >Okay. I'm just chicken. ;-) If you've never tried it, you need to someday. It works! I tried it after a local newspaper posted "the best method" a few years ago and haven't looked back. -- I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond. Mae West |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sheldon > wrote:
> "Kswck" wrote: >> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > Send it to me. lol > > Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > That's probably the entire rib section, Nope. Ribs 7-13. -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sqwertz > wrote:
> Sheldon > wrote: > >> "Kswck" wrote: >>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? >> >> Send it to me. lol >> >> Depends how many are coming for dinner. >> >> That's probably the entire rib section, > > Nope. Ribs 7-13. Make that 6-12. Rib #13 is Chuck, rib #5 is short loin. -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 21, 10:43�am, Sqwertz > wrote:
> Sqwertz > wrote: > > Sheldon > wrote: > > >> "Kswck" wrote: > >>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > >>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > >> Send it to me. lol > > >> Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > >> That's probably the entire rib section, > > > Nope. �Ribs 7-13. > > Make that 6-12. �Rib #13 is Chuck, rib #5 is short loin. > > -sw Six ribs is like 10 pounds... how does that come to 18 pounds, MORON. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sheldon > wrote:
> On Dec 21, 10:43�am, Sqwertz > wrote: >> Sqwertz > wrote: >>> Sheldon > wrote: >> >>>> "Kswck" wrote: >>>>> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >>>>> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? >> >>>> Send it to me. lol >> >>>> Depends how many are coming for dinner. >> >>>> That's probably the entire rib section, >> >>> Nope. �Ribs 7-13. >> >> Make that 6-12. �Rib #13 is chuck, rib #5 is short loin. >> >> -sw > > Six ribs is like 10 pounds... how does that come to 18 pounds, MORON. That's _7_ ribs for those who can count (duh!). Prime (or Primal) Rib is ribs #6-#12 - period. And that comes to 16-22 pounds. Those of us who *have* bought a whole prime rib or shop the big fercockatah box stores know this.. You will never find a prime rib or standing rib roast that includes anything outside of these specific ribs. Anything lower is chuck, anything higher is [short] loin. Your prime rib ,OTOH, comes in form of 4x3x2" cans and is labeled "SPAM". -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Sheldon" > wrote in message ... > "Kswck" wrote: >> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > Send it to me. lol > > Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze > it. I would cut it in half. I'd debone the large end, tie for > roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. Roast the > smaller end as a standing rib roast. I think for the home cook it's > best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to > fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same > doneness throughout. > I'm told it is 17 1/2 inches long. I suggested he cut it in half, but he wanted a whole chunk. The bones have been cutoff and retied. There are about 20 people for dinner. Fortunately, I am not one of them as I would be handed the thing and be told to cook it. I have a turkey pan that is 17 inches long, but I doubt squeezing the thing into it would have good consequences. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 21, 11:11�am, "Kswck" > wrote:
> "Sheldon" > wrote in message > > ... > > > > > > > "Kswck" wrote: > >> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > >> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > > Send it to me. lol > > > Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > > That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze > > it. �I would cut it in half. �I'd debone the large end, tie for > > roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. �Roast the > > smaller end as a standing rib roast. �I think for the home cook it's > > best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to > > fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same > > doneness throughout. > > I'm told it is 17 1/2 inches long. I suggested he cut it in half, but he > wanted a whole chunk. The bones have been cutoff and retied. > There are about 20 people for dinner. Fortunately, I am not one of them as I > would be handed the thing and be told to cook it. > I have a turkey pan that is 17 inches long, but I doubt squeezing the thing > into it would have good consequences. The story is in transition, now it's inches, not pounds, and it's not a bone-in rib roast anymore... you were told, well, now it's pure hear- say... other than **** poor manners for asking your advice (but for not inviting you) you really haven't a clue what your acquaintence has, I've no idea either. He should ask the person who already butchered it. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Sheldon" > wrote in message ... On Dec 21, 11:11?am, "Kswck" > wrote: > "Sheldon" > wrote in message > > ... > > > > > > > "Kswck" wrote: > >> A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > >> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > > Send it to me. lol > > > Depends how many are coming for dinner. > > > That's probably the entire rib section, would be a shame to freeze > > it. ?I would cut it in half. ?I'd debone the large end, tie for > > roasting, and use the bones for grilling or braising. ?Roast the > > smaller end as a standing rib roast. ?I think for the home cook it's > > best to make it into two roasts... whole it'd probably be too long to > > fit the oven, and would be near impossible to cook to the same > > doneness throughout. > > I'm told it is 17 1/2 inches long. I suggested he cut it in half, but he > wanted a whole chunk. The bones have been cutoff and retied. > There are about 20 people for dinner. Fortunately, I am not one of them as > I > would be handed the thing and be told to cook it. > I have a turkey pan that is 17 inches long, but I doubt squeezing the > thing > into it would have good consequences. The story is in transition, now it's inches, not pounds, and it's not a bone-in rib roast anymore... you were told, well, now it's pure hear- say... other than **** poor manners for asking your advice (but for not inviting you) you really haven't a clue what your acquaintence has, I've no idea either. He should ask the person who already butchered it. Sheldon: the roast is 18lbs and 17 1/2 inches long, bone has been cut off and tied back on. This is being made by a guy whom you would classify as having TIAD. Per him: steaks should have LOTS of garlic powder and 'maybe' some black pepper. I ask merely for information in that I wouldn't try to cook something that big in a convential oven, rather I would like to offer him some advise to prevent him from looking really stupid when it is overcooked-perhaps that is not possible. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Kswck" > wrote in message ... >A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > I'd do it the same way as any other rib roast. Assuming you have a pan long enough. Keep in mind, it may take a little longer than a small roast, it wont take a lot longer. The cross section of the roast is about the same no matter if it is 4, 8 or 18 pounds. I could not guess at the time, but I'd definitely have the thermometer plugged in to it. There have been a couple of threads about cooking a rib roast in the past couple of days. Pick a method that sounds good to you and go for it. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'd say....cut that big boy in half and cook TWO nine pounders. Better
yet, cut the two halves in half, too. I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it too done on the outside and too rare in the center. Lass |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Lass Chance_2" > wrote in message ... > I'd say....cut that big boy in half and cook TWO nine pounders. Better > yet, cut the two halves in half, too. > > I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it too done on > the outside and too rare in the center. > > > Lass > Do you have that problem with hot dogs and sausages? A big rib roast is the same cross section as the small ones, same as a short or long sausage. Should not be a problem. If it was a round roast, it would be a different story and need slow cooling. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 21, 9:55�am, "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "Lass Chance_2" > wrote in message > > ... > > > I'd say....cut that big boy in half and cook TWO nine pounders. Better > > yet, cut the two halves in half, too. > > > I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it �too done on > > the outside and too rare in the center. > > > Lass > > Do you have that problem with hot dogs and sausages? �A big rib roast is the > same cross section as the small ones, same as a short or long sausage. > Should not be a problem. � If it was a round roast, it would be a different > story and need slow cooling. Beef rib roast is about twice as thick at the large end (distal) as the small end (anterior)... cooked at the same temperature for the same time the large end will still be rare while the small end will be well done... an 18 pounder includes the full large end and full small end... Lass Chance_2 is correct. Restaurants never cook both ends together, they must be separated and the small end pulled first... restaurants almost always serve only the large end, it's fattier and cheaper, the smaller end is what's cut into ribeye steaks Typically when folks buy rib roast for a large number of people they buy all small ends or all large ends, then they can cook them all the same way... the full rib section is never cooked together unless ground into burger. An 18 lb rib section will barely fit into the typical 30" stove oven anyway (they're only like 22" wide, and what about the pan?), a pan large enough would need to span from end to end with no space for proper convection. Once again, for the pinheads, cut the roast into at least two parts... I might have cut four-five ribs of the small end into rib steaks, then the entire larger section could be roasted as one, but still it would be better to make two halves. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lass Chance_2 > wrote:
> I'd say....cut that big boy in half and cook TWO nine pounders. Better > yet, cut the two halves in half, too. > > I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it too done on > the outside and too rare in the center. That's because most of the suggestions here are from people cooking at too high a temperature (above 300F). -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Sqwertz" > wrote in message ... > Lass Chance_2 > wrote: > >> I'd say....cut that big boy in half and cook TWO nine pounders. Better >> yet, cut the two halves in half, too. >> >> I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it too done on >> the outside and too rare in the center. > > That's because most of the suggestions here are from people cooking > at too high a temperature (above 300F). > > -sw Some of us like it that way. I do it at 400 on convection. The contrasting portions are a delectable taste treat, especially the outside bark. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:03:28 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote: >Some of us like it that way. I do it at 400 on convection. The >contrasting portions are a delectable taste treat, especially the outside >bark. I like it that way too, but I like the red part to take up as much space as possible. I love that bark! -- I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond. Mae West |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sqwertz > wrote:
>Lass Chance_2 > wrote: >> I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it too done on >> the outside and too rare in the center. >That's because most of the suggestions here are from people cooking >at too high a temperature (above 300F). That's one reason, the other is that a roast that large cannot really be allowed to come fully up to room temperature before roasting, because it would have to spend too many hours unrefrigerated. So the roast is going to be cold, especially in the middle, when it goes into the oven. To compensate, as Steve states you need a lower oven temperature than for a smaller roast. Steve |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve Pope > wrote:
> Sqwertz > wrote: > >>Lass Chance_2 > wrote: > >>> I cant imagine cooking a roast THAT big without getting it too done on >>> the outside and too rare in the center. > >>That's because most of the suggestions here are from people cooking >>at too high a temperature (above 300F). > > That's one reason, the other is that a roast that large > cannot really be allowed to come fully up to room temperature > before roasting, because it would have to spend too many > hours unrefrigerated. So the roast is going to be cold, > especially in the middle, when it goes into the oven. > To compensate, as Steve states you need a lower oven temperature > than for a smaller roast. This works for anything as small as a single 1" thick steak. The low temperatures are basis of sous vide cooking, which is becoming more and more popular. Even large food processors are starting to use the method (not to mention many of the chain restaurants producing single-serving portions). -sw |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Kswck" > wrote in message ... >A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > Further: It is 17 1/2 inches long, has had the bones cut off and retied. Largest pan available is a turkey pan 17 inches across at its longest. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Kswck wrote: > > "Kswck" > wrote in message > ... > >A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > > I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > > > Further: It is 17 1/2 inches long, has had the bones cut off and retied. > Largest pan available is a turkey pan 17 inches across at its longest. A turkey roaster rack would probably do it good actually, especially if a convection oven is available. An extra half baking sheet under the roaster pan should be big enough to catch drips from the overhang, otherwise make spillways with HD AL foil. I'm of the opinion if should be seasoned simply with kosher salt and FGBP and cooked at high temp for a short period followed by low temp until done as determined by a thermometer. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 21, 11:18�am, "Pete C." > wrote:
> Kswck wrote: > > > "Kswck" > wrote in message > ... > > >A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > > > I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > > Further: It is 17 1/2 inches long, has had the bones cut off and retied.. > > Largest pan available is a turkey pan 17 inches across at its longest. > > A turkey roaster rack would probably do it good actually, especially if > a convection oven is available. An extra half baking sheet under the > roaster pan should be big enough to catch drips from the overhang, > otherwise make spillways with HD AL foil. I'm of the opinion if should > be seasoned simply with kosher salt and FGBP and cooked at high temp for > a short period followed by low temp until done as determined by a > thermometer. Rube Goldberg ridiculousness... I got yer overhang, schwingin'! If a pan that spans from one side of the oven to the other is placed under the roasting pan the roast won't cook at all... at stupid sqwartz's temp of 225 it'll have to take at least two days cooking, to make dehy beef. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:13:55 -0500, "Kswck" >
wrote: > >"Kswck" > wrote in message ... >>A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? >> > >Further: It is 17 1/2 inches long, has had the bones cut off and retied. >Largest pan available is a turkey pan 17 inches across at its longest. > So cut one nice 1/2 inch rib eye steak off one end and viola! you have a roast that will fit in the pan you have. Also remember, it's going to shrink a bit as it cooks, at least enough to end up fitting in the pan. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 21, 11:38�am, wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:13:55 -0500, "Kswck" > > wrote: > > > > >"Kswck" > wrote in message > ... > >>A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? > >> I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > >Further: It is 17 1/2 inches long, has had the bones cut off and retied. > >Largest pan available is a turkey pan 17 inches across at its longest. > > So cut one nice 1/2 inch rib eye steak off one end and viola! you have > a roast that will fit in the pan you have. Also remember, it's going > to shrink a bit as it cooks, at least enough to end up fitting in the > pan. This is cooking, not fitted slip covers. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nina" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 09:17:47 -0500, "Kswck" > > wrote: > >>A friend called and asked me what he should do with it? >>I've never cooked a rib roast that big and need some suggestions? > > My mother used to cook big roasts like this every year. Once you get > around the finding a pan problem, it's no different than any other > roast. Just cook long and slow. <snip> I do have a restaurant supply house nearby-if needed. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Meaty Pork Roast Bone Not Wasted | General Cooking | |||
Standing Rib Roast: bone in or boneless? | General Cooking | |||
New Fasion Hats & Caps: Monster Energy Hats, Monster Energy DrinkHats, White Monster Energy Hats, Monster Energy Fitted Hats, Youth MonsterEnergy Hats, Monster Energy New Era Hats | General Cooking | |||
Terrapin 2007 Monster Beer Tour - Big Hoppy Monster | Beer | |||
Roast Bone Marrow and Parsley Salad | Recipes (moderated) |