The Burger Madman of Boston,* J. Kenji Alt is at it again.
The Cook's Illustrated associate editor and GoodEater.org blogger has branched out to the Boston Globe, checking out ten Beantown burgers (in one day!) for the paper. He divides the burgers into grilled and griddled categories, making the observation that the East Coast is all about thick, grilled burgers while the West Coast is about griddled fast-food-style sandwiches.
Who comes out on top? West Coast–style Flat Patties:
Flat Patties comes closest to the benchmark set by California's In-N-Out Burger. The patty has massive beef flavor, is loaded with juicy fat, and features a squishy and wide bun that fits the meat like a glove. In line with their moniker, the well-seasoned meat is pressed flat on the griddle, delivering maximum crust formation, and comes with a sweet and tangy sauce. Add in that it's the cheapest burger of the lot, and you've achieved beef nirvana.
Flat Patties
81 Mount Auburn Street, Cambridge MA 02138 (map)
617-871-6871
For a burger expert, he did a really crappy job with this article. What is this nonsensical and unattributed assertion about "east-coast" vs "west-coast" styles? Because the west coast has in-n-out, that's what all burgers are like? I think not. Isn't the Counter partially responsible for the burger renaissance in this country? Is father's office's burger "fast food style"? Aren't most of the heralded burgers in NYC griddled (Shake Shack, Burger Joint, Melon's, etc.)?
Also, leaving out Bartley's and RF O'Sullivan's? Cmon.
Wow - nothing stirs passion in people more than an opinionated story on burgers, I see! A little self-defense here:
@BKNYDan I left of Bartley's because IMHO, it's one of the most highly overrated burger spots in the country (perhaps only surpassed by Corner Bistro). The meat is flavorless, and I don't think they've ever been introduced to salt and pepper. It's one of those spots that survives on its reputation, funny menus, and toppings alone. For me, a burger should taste first and foremost of beef, and Bartley's fails for that reason. Just because many people continue to go to a place doesn't automatically earn it a spot on a list!
@millions I did cover RF O's. It came in number 8 out of ten. Failed for mostly the same reason as Bartley's did: no seasoning, and hardly any beef flavor. Another highly overrated burger.
As for the east/west thing, I'm not claiming that every burger on the east coast is grilled, and every one on the west is griddled. I'm stating the fact that thin griddled burgers first became popularized in the 1940's in california, and to this day, the best examples of that style of burger remain in California. On the other hand, thick grilled burgers first became popular in steak houses and pubs on the East coast, and again, to this day, that's where most examples of that kind of burger can be found.
Read up on the Shake Shack, and you'll find that the burgers there were very specifically modeled after the California style. New York had it's burger renaissance (and consequent influx of west-coast style burger joints) a few years before Boston, and the Shake Shack was one of the forerunners of that shift.
If it came across as a blanket statement (all east coast burgers are fat and grilled, all west coast are thin and griddled), that was not the intention. The point was just that those are in fact two recognized styles of burgers that sprang up on opposite coasts, and that for the first time in Boston, you can find decent quality versions of both.
And here's a quick link to a past post about the "west-coast style burger" by AHT's venerable Nick Solares.
Someone's got my back!
I have been getting a whole lot of angry emails from Bartley's devotees, but it's nothing compared to what I would have gotten had I included it on the list and stated my honest opinion!
So you went to Boston to find a California style Burger! Whats next going to Calfornia to find the best Clam Chowder? I think you should have just stuck to where in Boston is the best burger. Lumping them into regional catagories, to me, sounds as though you're heading in with a bias.
I'm not going to continue the Tupac vs. Biggie debate, Kenji. Having lived in New York, L.A., and Boston, I absolutely take issue with your characterization, but we'll have to agree to disagree.
As for RF's, you are dead wrong. I will be in Boston tomorrow, and I will be driving over to RF's for lunch at 1pm to reconfirm my opinion that this is thew best burger in Boston, grilled though it may be. I challeng you to a burger-tasting throwdown.
What's interesting here is that not one of you who disagrees with Kenji provides any facts or opinions. Since I live in North Carolina and am not familiar with Bartley's or RF O'Sullivans, it would be nice to hear why you folks think these places ARE worth the mention.
If what Kenji says is true, that the actual patties are underseasoned and flavorless, then I would likley agree with his assessment. I don't care how much fancy crap you pile on a burger, if you don't have good beef and its not well seasoned, its just a mealy coaster to support toppings to hide its taste.
What would you like me to say, that they DO use salt and pepper? Is that going to sway you to my point of view? RF's uses high quality beef, which I believe it grinds itself. The grind is course, they don't smush the patty, my burger has always been cooked medium rare. I like the soft sesame bun, the iceberg lettuce is crisp, pickles available...it's simply a juicy, flavorful, fresh, and well-executed burger.
All you've heard from Kenji is a bald assertion that it's underseasoned - an assertion with which I vehemently disagree.
That's exactly what I was after - info as to why you like it with a little thought behind it. I didn't say I agreed with Kenji point blank, but until your post, he was the only one to offer relevant info and not just "You are t3h sUck b/c Bartle3y's is t3 sh1t!!!!".
My point was that we need actual debate with info from both sides. And I do thank you for providing some good info on RF's.
On a side note, glad to hear they will cook medium-rare. NC state law says they can't serve burgers under medium here :(.
I might even be able to meet you at RF's tomorrow. You'll be there at 1? I'll try and make it.
I went to RF's a couple times in the process of the review (I had been there a few times years before, but stopped going because I never really liked it). Both times that I went to RF's, they were underseasoned. I know you disagree with that, but here are some facts (not just my opinion!) that may convince other people that RF's doesn't know what's up.
They advertise on their menu that their beef is lean, and they are indeed correct. The problem is, lean beef doesn't taste good! It taste "wet" rather than "juicy," and has a tendency to become very leathery, especially when done over a hot grill. The burgers I've had at RF's have a good 1/8th to 1/4 inch layer of dried out beef on their exterior.
Another thing that I took major points off for: the one time I ordered a cheeseburger there, it came with cheese alright - but the cheese slice was on top of a slice of cold under-ripe tomato. Obviously, it never melted, thus completely destroying the point of putting cheese on a burger in the first place!
I appreciate you not wanting to enter a childish fight on burger classification, but I think we can have a well-thought-out, constructive debate if we both agree not to sling mud. Which part of my classification do you take issue with? Understanding of course, that I have never said that these are the only burgers you find on each coast, only that these are the coasts where they were first popularized, and thus generally produce the best examples of.
Anyhow - let me know if you want to hit up RF's tomorrow.
And if any other SeriousEaters in the Boston are read this, meet up with us so we can get a more balanced verdict!
I know what you mean about popular and tasteless. A chain here, Fudruckers, grinds their own meat, has all the usual condiments--you can have your lettuce shredded OR in whole leafs--etc, etc. The bugers are made to order, large, good bread, etc. It is like eating nothing--no flavor of any kind. I don't know how they do that!
Burger Throwdown over. It wouldn't say that I wiped the floor with millions, but even he admitted that RF's is overrated and survives mostly on nostalgia.
Photographic proof of mediocre burger practices to follow soon...
This may be a little highbrow, but seeing as you have radius and craigie's on here i don't think this would be too much to inquire about, but no love for the Bristol Burger? It's been a while since I've had the pleasure of enjoying this particular burger but if my memory serves me this has consistently been one of my favorite burgers in town. (But seeing as you hate on my local favorite - Bartley's - I'm afraid you may disagree.)
All the separate parts of the bristol burger were good (meat was well-cooked, well seasoned, bun was right texture. Where it failed however, was the construction - it's a case where the burger shrinks in circumference and bulges in height as it cooks. So the result is that it ends up much too small width-wise for the bun (the bun hangs about an inch over in all direction), and too tall, so when you bite into it, the first few bites are all bun, then as soon as you hit the meat, its shape causes it to kind of squeeze out the back (backslide).
So, not a bad burger, but needs a little more detail in its construction, I think.
Thanks for commenting! Your comment has been accepted and will appear in a moment.
Add a comment:
Previewing your comment:
HTML Hints
Some HTML is OK: <a href="URL">link</a>, <strong>strong</strong>, <em>em</em>
Comment Guidelines
Post whatever you want, just keep it pleasant. We reserve the right to delete off-topic or inflammatory comments. Learn more at our Comment Policy page.
Print
18 Comments:
Meh. In-N-Out burgers are tasty, but I prefer Fatburger. I went to Umami Burger when I was in LA last, it was spectacular.
simon at 1:28PM on 04/29/09
Any review of Boston burgers without Mr. Bartley's is wholly illegitimate. Burger critic FAIL.
BKNYDan at 4:14PM on 04/29/09
For a burger expert, he did a really crappy job with this article. What is this nonsensical and unattributed assertion about "east-coast" vs "west-coast" styles? Because the west coast has in-n-out, that's what all burgers are like? I think not. Isn't the Counter partially responsible for the burger renaissance in this country? Is father's office's burger "fast food style"? Aren't most of the heralded burgers in NYC griddled (Shake Shack, Burger Joint, Melon's, etc.)?
Also, leaving out Bartley's and RF O'Sullivan's? Cmon.
millions at 4:27PM on 04/29/09
Wow - nothing stirs passion in people more than an opinionated story on burgers, I see! A little self-defense here:
@BKNYDan I left of Bartley's because IMHO, it's one of the most highly overrated burger spots in the country (perhaps only surpassed by Corner Bistro). The meat is flavorless, and I don't think they've ever been introduced to salt and pepper. It's one of those spots that survives on its reputation, funny menus, and toppings alone. For me, a burger should taste first and foremost of beef, and Bartley's fails for that reason. Just because many people continue to go to a place doesn't automatically earn it a spot on a list!
@millions I did cover RF O's. It came in number 8 out of ten. Failed for mostly the same reason as Bartley's did: no seasoning, and hardly any beef flavor. Another highly overrated burger.
As for the east/west thing, I'm not claiming that every burger on the east coast is grilled, and every one on the west is griddled. I'm stating the fact that thin griddled burgers first became popularized in the 1940's in california, and to this day, the best examples of that style of burger remain in California. On the other hand, thick grilled burgers first became popular in steak houses and pubs on the East coast, and again, to this day, that's where most examples of that kind of burger can be found.
Read up on the Shake Shack, and you'll find that the burgers there were very specifically modeled after the California style. New York had it's burger renaissance (and consequent influx of west-coast style burger joints) a few years before Boston, and the Shake Shack was one of the forerunners of that shift.
If it came across as a blanket statement (all east coast burgers are fat and grilled, all west coast are thin and griddled), that was not the intention. The point was just that those are in fact two recognized styles of burgers that sprang up on opposite coasts, and that for the first time in Boston, you can find decent quality versions of both.
p.s. Burger Joint is grilled.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 12:41PM on 04/30/09
And here's a quick link to a past post about the "west-coast style burger" by AHT's venerable Nick Solares.
Someone's got my back!
I have been getting a whole lot of angry emails from Bartley's devotees, but it's nothing compared to what I would have gotten had I included it on the list and stated my honest opinion!
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 12:47PM on 04/30/09
So you went to Boston to find a California style Burger! Whats next going to Calfornia to find the best Clam Chowder? I think you should have just stuck to where in Boston is the best burger. Lumping them into regional catagories, to me, sounds as though you're heading in with a bias.
nhfoodie at 2:14PM on 04/30/09
I'm not going to continue the Tupac vs. Biggie debate, Kenji. Having lived in New York, L.A., and Boston, I absolutely take issue with your characterization, but we'll have to agree to disagree.
As for RF's, you are dead wrong. I will be in Boston tomorrow, and I will be driving over to RF's for lunch at 1pm to reconfirm my opinion that this is thew best burger in Boston, grilled though it may be. I challeng you to a burger-tasting throwdown.
millions at 2:37PM on 04/30/09
What's interesting here is that not one of you who disagrees with Kenji provides any facts or opinions. Since I live in North Carolina and am not familiar with Bartley's or RF O'Sullivans, it would be nice to hear why you folks think these places ARE worth the mention.
If what Kenji says is true, that the actual patties are underseasoned and flavorless, then I would likley agree with his assessment. I don't care how much fancy crap you pile on a burger, if you don't have good beef and its not well seasoned, its just a mealy coaster to support toppings to hide its taste.
NCGourmet at 3:14PM on 04/30/09
What would you like me to say, that they DO use salt and pepper? Is that going to sway you to my point of view? RF's uses high quality beef, which I believe it grinds itself. The grind is course, they don't smush the patty, my burger has always been cooked medium rare. I like the soft sesame bun, the iceberg lettuce is crisp, pickles available...it's simply a juicy, flavorful, fresh, and well-executed burger.
All you've heard from Kenji is a bald assertion that it's underseasoned - an assertion with which I vehemently disagree.
millions at 3:39PM on 04/30/09
That's exactly what I was after - info as to why you like it with a little thought behind it. I didn't say I agreed with Kenji point blank, but until your post, he was the only one to offer relevant info and not just "You are t3h sUck b/c Bartle3y's is t3 sh1t!!!!".
My point was that we need actual debate with info from both sides. And I do thank you for providing some good info on RF's.
On a side note, glad to hear they will cook medium-rare. NC state law says they can't serve burgers under medium here :(.
NCGourmet at 3:42PM on 04/30/09
@millions Burger throwdown any time!
I might even be able to meet you at RF's tomorrow. You'll be there at 1? I'll try and make it.
I went to RF's a couple times in the process of the review (I had been there a few times years before, but stopped going because I never really liked it). Both times that I went to RF's, they were underseasoned. I know you disagree with that, but here are some facts (not just my opinion!) that may convince other people that RF's doesn't know what's up.
They advertise on their menu that their beef is lean, and they are indeed correct. The problem is, lean beef doesn't taste good! It taste "wet" rather than "juicy," and has a tendency to become very leathery, especially when done over a hot grill. The burgers I've had at RF's have a good 1/8th to 1/4 inch layer of dried out beef on their exterior.
Another thing that I took major points off for: the one time I ordered a cheeseburger there, it came with cheese alright - but the cheese slice was on top of a slice of cold under-ripe tomato. Obviously, it never melted, thus completely destroying the point of putting cheese on a burger in the first place!
I appreciate you not wanting to enter a childish fight on burger classification, but I think we can have a well-thought-out, constructive debate if we both agree not to sling mud. Which part of my classification do you take issue with? Understanding of course, that I have never said that these are the only burgers you find on each coast, only that these are the coasts where they were first popularized, and thus generally produce the best examples of.
Anyhow - let me know if you want to hit up RF's tomorrow.
And if any other SeriousEaters in the Boston are read this, meet up with us so we can get a more balanced verdict!
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 5:06PM on 04/30/09
Okay, it's on! I just sent you an email. We'll squash this beef (ha!) like gentlemen tomorrow.
millions at 6:26PM on 04/30/09
@millions Done - see you there!
And honestly - any aht/seriouseaters in the area, swing on by RF's at 1 tomorrow (friday the 1st) for an O'Sully's smackdown!
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 6:35PM on 04/30/09
OMG. Awesome. Someone has to go to document this! Any Boston/Sommerville–area people?
Adam Kuban at 7:20PM on 04/30/09
I know what you mean about popular and tasteless. A chain here, Fudruckers, grinds their own meat, has all the usual condiments--you can have your lettuce shredded OR in whole leafs--etc, etc. The bugers are made to order, large, good bread, etc. It is like eating nothing--no flavor of any kind. I don't know how they do that!
richopp at 12:58PM on 05/01/09
Burger Throwdown over. It wouldn't say that I wiped the floor with millions, but even he admitted that RF's is overrated and survives mostly on nostalgia.
Photographic proof of mediocre burger practices to follow soon...
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 2:40PM on 05/01/09
This may be a little highbrow, but seeing as you have radius and craigie's on here i don't think this would be too much to inquire about, but no love for the Bristol Burger? It's been a while since I've had the pleasure of enjoying this particular burger but if my memory serves me this has consistently been one of my favorite burgers in town. (But seeing as you hate on my local favorite - Bartley's - I'm afraid you may disagree.)
younggunfoodie at 5:28PM on 05/03/09
@Younggunfoodie
All the separate parts of the bristol burger were good (meat was well-cooked, well seasoned, bun was right texture. Where it failed however, was the construction - it's a case where the burger shrinks in circumference and bulges in height as it cooks. So the result is that it ends up much too small width-wise for the bun (the bun hangs about an inch over in all direction), and too tall, so when you bite into it, the first few bites are all bun, then as soon as you hit the meat, its shape causes it to kind of squeeze out the back (backslide).
So, not a bad burger, but needs a little more detail in its construction, I think.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 1:50PM on 05/07/09