Dear AHT: Sick of Undercooked Burgers

Posted by Robyn Lee, November 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Here's a question we received yesterday in the AHT inbox from Serious Eats reader ratbuddy.

Does this photo make you go, "Nooooo!" You're not alone. [Photograph: Robyn Lee]

Please get at least one reviewer who likes their meat cooked. Seeing every burger you review (under)cooked rare or medium rare is getting old and I'd bet many of your other readers would agree. That poll on burger-doneness ended up with almost half the voters selecting medium or higher. Where's our representative??

Thanks.

Here are some responses from the AHT crew on optimal burger doneness.

Nick Solares (NYC/NJ correspondent):

The burgers you refer to (rare, medium rare) are no more "under cooked" than the well done ones you like are "over cooked." Temperature preference is a subjective parameter. I may critique a restaurant for not delivering a burger as ordered, but if it is delivered at a predetermined temperature (In-N-Out, Five Guys, all the slider joints I have reviewed) then I judge the burger for what it is. And, for the record, while I like my burgers rare (and my steak black and blue), I have given plenty of positive endorsements to burgers cooked all the way through. In fact, of my last 14 reviews 10 of them have been of burgers that were cooked medium or beyond. On the occasions when I review burgers that are rare, I often note on how I think they will be when cooked further.

Damon Gambuto (Los Angeles correspondent):

What I am looking for in my burger's temperature you might call the sweet (meat) spot. There are a number of things about how a burger is cooked that affect the texture and flavor, but, generally speaking, cooking a patty to a medium rare maximizes two important aspects of—what is for me—the pleasure of eating meat.

As I understand it, there is connective-tissue (collagen) in meat that, when raw or undercooked, is fibrous and tough. For me, chewing meat that is raw or undercooked initiates a bit of a gag reflex from that tough, fibrous chew. Certainly grinding meat (steak tartar) or slicing it thinly (carpaccio) combats this, but my preference is to do away with that feeling all together. You can do that by adding some heat, a.k.a, cooking. Raising the temperature of the meat turns that tough collagen into fluid (or fluid gelatin). That takes a good bit of temperature all the way through the patty, but what is also happening when you give it all that heat is that moisture evaporates out of your patty (which I think is bad). Too much heating makes for a very dry and mealy burger with lots of the fat and moisture, rendered out of it (searing doesn't "seal in" the juices). The mouthfeel of this burger is much less appealing to my fat and juice-loving self. As it happens, you can phase shift that tough connective-tissue at the temperature (that most folks call) medium rare. So the answer for me is to stop cooking at that temperature to maximize the connective-tissue breakdown and minimize the moisture loss. Not too cool, not too hot; a happy medium (rare).

Daniel Zemans (Chicago correspondent):

Regarding the poll, I can't help but wonder how many of the people who selected medium actually prefer the taste of medium as opposed to being scared of the health issues regarding ground beef that have been, in my opinion, grossly overstated. For those who have actually tasted a medium rare or rare burger but still prefer the flavor of a medium well burger, there is nothing that I can say that will change their mind. I will say that to the extent beef flavor is supposed to be the centerpiece of the burger, there is far more meat flavor when the burger has more fat and juice in it, elements that leave the burger the more the meat is cooked.

Leaving aside the debates over taste, it seems to me that ratbuddy's issue is less with our descriptions than with exposure to pictures of burgers he finds unappetizing due to the abundance of pinkness. To that complaint, I have a couple of thoughts. First, I think the more colorful burgers make for nicer photos. Second, I think pictures of a medium rare or rare burger do a much better job of getting across the chef's technical skill. A burger can be made of the highest quality meat and be masterfully seasoned, but if it's not cooked to the requested temperature, the burger eater will be disappointed. People can look at a picture of medium rare or rare burger and know how they were cooked. The visual distinctions between burgers cooked anywhere on the spectrum above medium are virtually, if not entirely nonexistent. So to the extent a picture can enhance a description of the doneness of a burger, a photo of a burger cooked all the way to medium or beyond isn't going to be much help.

And me:

I gravitate towards the medium rare-rare end to increase my chances of burger deliciousness. When I can request how I want a thicker burger cooked (not at places like In-N-Out and Five Guys), I go for medium rare because most of the ones I've eaten that were medium or beyond tasted too dry. Not to say that raw meat is always delicious, but dry meat is...usually not.

Who else wants to see more cooked burgers on this site?

View other entries from Dear AHT

Post a Comment Favorite this!  (0)

Tags: Dear AHT