I have a very old magic seal pressure cooker but it needs a gasket.

"U.S. Janet B." wrote in message
...

On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 20:36:30 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>
>
>"Cheri" wrote in message news >
>"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sunday, July 29, 2018 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-10, Cheri wrote:
>>>
>>> I used mine today to cook some red cabbage and ham for later use.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> One of these days, I'll get one of those things, to make one of those
>> dishes.
>
>
>Since it cooks quickly (a little vinegar added to the water too) the
>cabbage
>stays a nice color instead of that faded out bluish color. I use mine a
>lot,
>more than the slow cooker actually, but I'm home all day now, so not making
>meals that are done when coming home from work.
>
>For a low and slow meal, I really love Wayne's recipe for the pot roast and
>dried onion soup wrapped in foil, so easy, so good.
>
>Cheri
>
>==
>
>You wrap the meat in foil in the pressure cooker?
>
the conversation has drifted to pot roast in general and preparation
of a particular way to do it in the oven. You'd have to check with
Wayne's post for the particulars
Janet US

==

Ahhh OK thanks As I have said before, I don't get all posts and often I
just get the responses

I didn't see that recipe.

"Cheri" wrote in message news
"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Cheri" wrote in message news >
> "dsi1" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sunday, July 29, 2018 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-10, Cheri wrote:
>>>
>>> I used mine today to cook some red cabbage and ham for later use.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> One of these days, I'll get one of those things, to make one of those
>> dishes.
>
>
> Since it cooks quickly (a little vinegar added to the water too) the
> cabbage
> stays a nice color instead of that faded out bluish color. I use mine a
> lot,
> more than the slow cooker actually, but I'm home all day now, so not
> making
> meals that are done when coming home from work.
>
> For a low and slow meal, I really love Wayne's recipe for the pot roast
> and
> dried onion soup wrapped in foil, so easy, so good.
>
> Cheri
>
> ==
>
> You wrap the meat in foil in the pressure cooker?


No, just put the chunks in with the cabbage.

Cheri

==

Thanks)

On 7/29/2018 10:13 PM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 01:58:45 -0000 (UTC), Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>> On Sun 29 Jul 2018 06:27:22p, U.S. Janet B. told us...
>>
>>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 20:36:30 +0100, "Ophelia"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Cheri" wrote in message news >>>>
>>>> "dsi1" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Sunday, July 29, 2018 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-10, Cheri wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I used mine today to cook some red cabbage and ham for later
>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheri
>>>>>
>>>>> One of these days, I'll get one of those things, to make one of
>>>>> those dishes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since it cooks quickly (a little vinegar added to the water too)
>>>> the cabbage stays a nice color instead of that faded out bluish
>>>> color. I use mine a lot, more than the slow cooker actually, but
>>>> I'm home all day now, so not making meals that are done when
>>>> coming home from work.
>>>>
>>>> For a low and slow meal, I really love Wayne's recipe for the pot
>>>> roast and dried onion soup wrapped in foil, so easy, so good.
>>>>
>>>> Cheri
>>>>
>>>> ==
>>>>
>>>> You wrap the meat in foil in the pressure cooker?
>>>>
>>> the conversation has drifted to pot roast in general and
>>> preparation of a particular way to do it in the oven. You'd have
>>> to check with Wayne's post for the particulars
>>> Janet US
>>>
>>
>> For Cheri, this is the recipe. It is never cooked in any kind of
>> pressure cooker.
>>
>> 4 Pounds Beef Chuck Roast
>> 1 Package Onion Soup Mix
>> Heavy Duty Foil
>>
>> 1. Use two long sheets of foil. Sprinkle onion soup on roast, after
>> placing it in center of foil. Wrap roast loosely, but secure enough
>> to hold the juices in. Place in large pan.
>>
>> 2. Bake 9 hours at 225 degrees. Remove from oven and let sit for
>> at least half an hour before serving.
>>
>> 3. Notes:
>>
>> 4. Herbs may be added, if desired. A bay leaf, a splash of
>> Worcestersauce sauce or soy sauce. Do not add any other liquids.
>>
>> 5. If the roast is served still warm from the oven, it must be
>> served in chunks, as it is too tender to slice.
>>
>> 6. The roast may be chilled overnight right in the foil. It can be
>> neatly sliced while chilled, arranged in a baking dish, covered with
>> gravy, and reheated gently before serving. It is at least as good,
>> if not better, served this way.
>>
>> 7. The juices make an excellent base for gravy, and should be
>> diluted by at least half as much or more of water, to taste. If the
>> roast is chilled, the juices will become jellied. Scrape away from
>> the meat into a saucepan, mix with water, and thicken with a roux.
>
> thanks Wayne. I've copied and saved
> Janet US
>
Me too. I usually use chuck roast but I tend to do it in the slow
cooker (crock pot) after browning the meat. I think my mother used to
cook it in the oven but it wasn't wrapped in foil or cooked for 9 hours
at low heat. This is different.

Jill

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>> Gary wrote:
>> > Oh wow mom, bet you the family couldn't wait for a pot roast
>> > dinner. ;-o
>> > Individually chosen frozen dinners would be better and timed to
>> > eat while watching Judge Judy.
>>
>> My mom was a very smart woman. As I got older I took over the dinner
>> preparation. The mechanism and implementation for this was not known to
>> me and happened so slowly as to be imperceptible to my developing brain.
>> I would come home from school and make a pot roast. The pressure cooker
>> made it very fast. I have a lot of fondness for them. The ignorant will
>> dis this vessel because well, that's what the ignorant do best.
>
> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
> and food to make one.
>
> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>
> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
> to look forward to.
>
> I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
> gravy would make all the difference.
>
> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>
> oh well

Trader Joes has a really good, precooked roast beef. You have to come up
with the sides.

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
> On 7/29/2018 9:52 AM, Gary wrote:
>
>>
>> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
>> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
>> and food to make one.
>>
>> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
>> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>>
>> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
>> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
>> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
>> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
>> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
>> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
>> to look forward to.
>
> I grew up with pot roast being beef in gravy. No veggies in the pot. The
> beef was browned, cooked with liquid that was thickened to become gravy.
> Usually served with mashed potatoes and another veggie.
>
> I don't know when my grandmother started making it that way but it is what
> I've know for 7 decades so keep your carrots out of it.
>
>
>>
>> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
>> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
>> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>>
>> oh well
>>
>
> Stew is stew and pot roast is a beef roast, not just a stew with bigger
> chuncks of stuff.

Agree. And there are different kinds of stew. My mom never thickened hers
and it was tomato based. Would have been good if she had used seasonings and
cooked the meat for longer.

On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 01:36:26 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Gary" > wrote in message ...
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>
>>> Gary wrote:
>>> > Oh wow mom, bet you the family couldn't wait for a pot roast
>>> > dinner. ;-o
>>> > Individually chosen frozen dinners would be better and timed to
>>> > eat while watching Judge Judy.
>>>
>>> My mom was a very smart woman. As I got older I took over the dinner
>>> preparation. The mechanism and implementation for this was not known to
>>> me and happened so slowly as to be imperceptible to my developing brain.
>>> I would come home from school and make a pot roast. The pressure cooker
>>> made it very fast. I have a lot of fondness for them. The ignorant will
>>> dis this vessel because well, that's what the ignorant do best.
>>
>> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
>> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
>> and food to make one.
>>
>> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
>> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>>
>> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
>> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
>> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
>> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
>> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
>> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
>> to look forward to.
>>
>> I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
>> gravy would make all the difference.
>>
>> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
>> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
>> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>>
>> oh well
>
>Trader Joes has a really good, precooked roast beef. You have to come up
>with the sides.

HUH? Every deli sells cooked roast beef

Gary wrote:
....
> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
> and food to make one.
>
> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>
> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
> to look forward to.

oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?

oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.


> I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
> gravy would make all the difference.

quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.


> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.

not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...


> oh well

haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
of tastes...


songbird

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 12:40:05 -0400, songbird >
wrote:

>Gary wrote:
>...
>> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
>> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
>> and food to make one.
>>
>> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
>> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>>
>> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
>> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
>> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
>> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
>> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
>> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
>> to look forward to.
>
> oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
>and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
>would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
>a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
>it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
>too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
>give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?
>
> oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
>along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.
>
>
>> I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
>> gravy would make all the difference.
>
> quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.
>
>
>> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
>> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
>> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>
> not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...
>
>
>> oh well
>
> haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
>of tastes...
>
> songbird

I usually add 'shrooms, carrots, celery, some bay leaf, s n'p
and a load of barley. I end up with nicely sliced beef and then
luscious beef barley 'shroom soup. I add onion and some garlic
but I leave them whole so I can fish them out for me, my wife gets an
upset stomach from eating onion and too much garlic. For soup I like
to cook barley until it's half dissolved/creamy. For best flavor I
use an assortment of dehy wild 'shrooms. Dehy 'shrooms yield a more
intense flavor than fresh. I don't roast the veggies, I saute them in
the pot after browning the beef roast. With the barley I don't add
potatoes.

"songbird" wrote in message ...

Gary wrote:
....
> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
> and food to make one.
>
> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>
> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
> to look forward to.

oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?

oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.


> I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
> gravy would make all the difference.

quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.


> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.

not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...


> oh well

haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
of tastes...


songbird

==

I thought a joint of meat was called a 'roast' here? That is what I have
learned. If I am wrong I am happy to be corrected.

So I am wondering if a post roast could be just cooked in a pot with water
and other veggies and not actually roasted?

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 21:40:52 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>
>
>"songbird" wrote in message ...
>
>Gary wrote:
>...
>> My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
>> never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
>> and food to make one.
>>
>> That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
>> they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
>>
>> Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
>> had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
>> cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
>> got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
>> shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
>> were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
>> to look forward to.
>
> oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
>and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
>would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
>a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
>it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
>too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
>give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?
>
> oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
>along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.
>
>
>> I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
>> gravy would make all the difference.
>
> quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.
>
>
>> I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
>> the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
>> thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>
> not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...
>
>
>> oh well
>
> haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
>of tastes...
>
>
> songbird
>
>==
>
>I thought a joint of meat was called a 'roast' here? That is what I have
>learned. If I am wrong I am happy to be corrected.
>
>So I am wondering if a post roast could be just cooked in a pot with water
>and other veggies and not actually roasted?

Exactly! Exactly the same as stew. In fact if a joint of meat is
first oven roasted it will make for lousy pot roast, it'll turn out
dry, tough, and stringy. It's far better to brown the roast in the
pot it will be stewed in, and at moderate heat so it doesn't get burnt
and dried out before the braising liquid is added... I much prefer to
braise pot roast in dark beer/ale. Of course one needs the right pot
for pot roast, I use my 15 quart braiser:
https://postimg.cc/image/th0ahxmr1/
https://postimg.cc/image/51s2geijx/
Amazon sells that pot, a very well made professional piece of cookware
and a great price:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...=sr_1_3&sr=8-3
Read the reviews, everyone loved it.
How can I go wrong, I like to think of my 15 quart brazier as a 15
quart brassiere. For stir frying on my gas stove I find that pot much
more efficient than a wok, it has a thick 3 ply bottom and nice
radiiessed corners... I have a wooden spoon that matches the corners.
I can stir fry a large rough chopped cabbage in no time.
The only negative for that pot is having a place to store it and a
sink large enough for washing, I have an over sized sink and room in
my pantry for large cookware. That pot is wonderful for frying, the
high sides prevent spatter... it'll easily fry pieces from two
chickens, eight large burgers, four large porterhouse steaks, easily a
pound of bacon with room to spare.
A very useful piece of cookware and exceptual quality with nicely
riveted handles. Compared to this pot All Clad is All Crap.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 4:41:23 PM UTC-4, Ophelia wrote:
> "songbird" wrote in message ...
>
> Gary wrote:
> ...
> > My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
> > never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
> > and food to make one.
> >
> > That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> > they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
> >
> > Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> > had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
> > cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
> > got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
> > shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
> > were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
> > to look forward to.
>
> oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
> and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
> would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
> a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
> it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
> too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
> give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?
>
> oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
> along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.
>
>
> > I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
> > gravy would make all the difference.
>
> quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.
>
>
> > I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> > the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> > thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>
> not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...
>
>
> > oh well
>
> haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
> of tastes...
>
>
> songbird
>
> ==
>
> I thought a joint of meat was called a 'roast' here? That is what I have
> learned. If I am wrong I am happy to be corrected.
>
> So I am wondering if a post roast could be just cooked in a pot with water
> and other veggies and not actually roasted?

Songbird seems to do her pot roast a little different from everybody else,
or else she braises the veggies along with the meat.

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
....
> Songbird seems to do her pot roast a little different from everybody else,
> or else she braises the veggies along with the meat.

his/he.

and the prep for a pot roast is easy as in i like
to brown the meat with just a little olive oil and
the garlic first before topping it with the vegetables
and then putting it in the oven until done. only
a little water added, but nothing else as we don't
cook with wine. if you put too much water the juice
is too wimpy later and i don't like to waste time to
simmer it to make it into a decent gravy.

the vegetables are scrubbed, but otherwise left
in large chunks (potatoes/onions quartered or halved,
carrots might be cut once or twice). it's a simple
dish. we don't put celery or other spices in there
other than the garlic.


songbird

On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 10:08:04 AM UTC-4, songbird wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> ...
> > Songbird seems to do her pot roast a little different from everybody else,
> > or else she braises the veggies along with the meat.
>
> his/he.

Sorry. I can't see you from here I'll probably get
it wrong again in the future.

> and the prep for a pot roast is easy as in i like
> to brown the meat with just a little olive oil and
> the garlic first before topping it with the vegetables
> and then putting it in the oven until done. only
> a little water added, but nothing else as we don't
> cook with wine. if you put too much water the juice
> is too wimpy later and i don't like to waste time to
> simmer it to make it into a decent gravy.
>
> the vegetables are scrubbed, but otherwise left
> in large chunks (potatoes/onions quartered or halved,
> carrots might be cut once or twice). it's a simple
> dish. we don't put celery or other spices in there
> other than the garlic.
>
>
> songbird

Do you cover it while it's in the oven?

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> songbird wrote:
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> ...
>> > Songbird seems to do her pot roast a little different from everybody else,
>> > or else she braises the veggies along with the meat.
>>
>> his/he.
>
> Sorry. I can't see you from here I'll probably get
> it wrong again in the future.

not really a big issue for me, but i always find
it amusing.


>> and the prep for a pot roast is easy as in i like
>> to brown the meat with just a little olive oil and
>> the garlic first before topping it with the vegetables
>> and then putting it in the oven until done. only
>> a little water added, but nothing else as we don't
>> cook with wine. if you put too much water the juice
>> is too wimpy later and i don't like to waste time to
>> simmer it to make it into a decent gravy.
>>
>> the vegetables are scrubbed, but otherwise left
>> in large chunks (potatoes/onions quartered or halved,
>> carrots might be cut once or twice). it's a simple
>> dish. we don't put celery or other spices in there
>> other than the garlic.
>
> Do you cover it while it's in the oven?

yes, a roasting pan (quite big), otherwise it gets
way too dried out.


songbird

Ophelia wrote:

>
>
> "songbird" wrote in message ...
>
> Gary wrote:
> ...
> > My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
> > never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
> > and food to make one.
> >
> > That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> > they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
> >
> > Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> > had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
> > cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
> > got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
> > shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
> > were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
> > to look forward to.
>
> oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
> and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
> would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
> a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
> it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
> too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
> give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?
>
> oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
> along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.
>
>
> > I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
> > gravy would make all the difference.
>
> quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.
>
>
> > I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> > the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> > thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
>
> not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...
>
>
> > oh well
>
> haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
> of tastes...
>
>
> songbird
>
> ==
>
> I thought a joint of meat was called a 'roast' here? That is what I
> have learned. If I am wrong I am happy to be corrected.
>
> So I am wondering if a post roast could be just cooked in a pot with
> water and other veggies and not actually roasted?

Lots of different recipes Ophelia and you are right, basically a 'pot
roast' here is a fairly sizable hunk of solid boneless meat. Cooked in
a 'pot' (lidded container) in the oven (most of the time, plenty of
variations to it though!)

Don and I do the 3 most common types. Oven (lidded pot), stove top,
crockpot. We do not pre-roast any vegetables.

We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the PBS
series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.

On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 4:06:05 PM UTC-4, cshenk wrote:
> Ophelia wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > "songbird" wrote in message ...
> >
> > Gary wrote:
> > ...
> > > My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance. I've
> > > never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste my time
> > > and food to make one.
> > >
> > > That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> > > they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> > > had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid after
> > > cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there. All I
> > > got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat was
> > > shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and carrots
> > > were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables. Never a meal
> > > to look forward to.
> >
> > oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
> > and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
> > would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
> > a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
> > it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
> > too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
> > give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?
> >
> > oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
> > along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.
> >
> >
> > > I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into a
> > > gravy would make all the difference.
> >
> > quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.
> >
> >
> > > I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> > > the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> > > thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
> >
> > not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...
> >
> >
> > > oh well
> >
> > haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
> > of tastes...
> >
> >
> > songbird
> >
> > ==
> >
> > I thought a joint of meat was called a 'roast' here? That is what I
> > have learned. If I am wrong I am happy to be corrected.
> >
> > So I am wondering if a post roast could be just cooked in a pot with
> > water and other veggies and not actually roasted?
>
> Lots of different recipes Ophelia and you are right, basically a 'pot
> roast' here is a fairly sizable hunk of solid boneless meat.

Might have a bone. I favor the classic 7-bone chuck roast:

<https://www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com/cuts/cut/2478/7-bone-chuck-roast>

Cindy Hamilton

On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
>
> We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the PBS
> series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
> something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
>
>
I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in it.
They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before plunking
it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses clatter about.

On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:23:38 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

>On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
>>
>> We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the PBS
>> series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
>> something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
>>
>>
>I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
>men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in it.
>They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before plunking
>it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses clatter about.

To my knowledge a "joint of meat" always refered to a large penis...
an enormous bone refers to a large erection.

wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:23:38 -0700 (PDT), "
> > wrote:
>
>> On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
>>>
>>> We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the PBS
>>> series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
>>> something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
>>>
>>>
>> I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
>> men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in it.
>> They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before plunking
>> it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses clatter about.
>
> To my knowledge a "joint of meat" always refered to a large penis...
> an enormous bone refers to a large erection.
>

More of yoose faggot posts, Popeye?

Yoose just can't help turning anything into a sex fantasy, can yoose?

Yoose a low down, sorry SOB.

On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 19:39:52 -0500, Hank Rogers >
wrote:

wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:23:38 -0700 (PDT), "
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the PBS
>>>> series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
>>>> something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
>>> men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in it.
>>> They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before plunking
>>> it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses clatter about.
>>
>> To my knowledge a "joint of meat" always refered to a large penis...
>> an enormous bone refers to a large erection.
>>
>
>More of yoose faggot posts, Popeye?
>
>Yoose just can't help turning anything into a sex fantasy, can yoose?
>
>Yoose a low down, sorry SOB.

You're just jealous because you never get laid... not even by some
ugli faggot.

wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 19:39:52 -0500, Hank Rogers >
> wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:23:38 -0700 (PDT), "
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the PBS
>>>>> series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
>>>>> something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
>>>> men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in it.
>>>> They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before plunking
>>>> it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses clatter about.
>>>
>>> To my knowledge a "joint of meat" always refered to a large penis...
>>> an enormous bone refers to a large erection.
>>>
>>
>> More of yoose faggot posts, Popeye?
>>
>> Yoose just can't help turning anything into a sex fantasy, can yoose?
>>
>> Yoose a low down, sorry SOB.
>
> You're just jealous because you never get laid... not even by some
> ugli faggot.
>

Popeye, I bet yoose humped yoose own mammy when yoose was 10 years old.

Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 4:06:05 PM UTC-4, cshenk wrote:
> > Ophelia wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "songbird" wrote in message ...
> > >
> > > Gary wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > My teasing here of pot roasts truly comes from my ignorance.
> > > > I've never had a good one so I've never been tempted to waste
> > > > my time and food to make one.
> > > >
> > > > That said..... over time I've seen many pot roast pics here and
> > > > they all look so good. BTW, your's looked very good too.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, I've spotted the main problem with all the ones I've
> > > > had.....neither Mom or 'The wife' ever thickened the liquid
> > > > after cooking. I know there's a good bit of beef flavor there.
> > > > All I got was a spoonful of the water on the plate. The meat
> > > > was shreddable and bland, those large cuts of potatoes and
> > > > carrots were...blah. No butter offered for the vegetables.
> > > > Never a meal to look forward to.
> > >
> > > oh geeze, if you've not roasted the onions, potatoes
> > > and carrots enough to get some brown on them then that
> > > would be very blah indeed. to me the main reason for
> > > a pot roast is the roasting of the veggies along with
> > > it. the beef flavor in the juice/gravy is very important
> > > too. we usually add some mushrooms to go with it and
> > > give it a bit more substance. do you like mushrooms?
> > >
> > > oh, and garlic, we like our garlic in there to cook
> > > along with it and that also gets a bit carmelized.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I suspect that flavorful water, thickened a bit and turned into
> > > > a gravy would make all the difference.
> > >
> > > quite a bit if you're not roasting the veggies enough.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I do absolutely love my homemade beef stew and isn't that about
> > > > the same thing just smaller pieces of everything? And I do
> > > > thicken a bit with flour before or cornstarch at the end.
> > >
> > > not at all IMO. the key word of pot roast is ROAST...
> > >
> > >
> > > > oh well
> > >
> > > haha, yep, like most things here, it's just a matter
> > > of tastes...
> > >
> > >
> > > songbird
> > >
> > > ==
> > >
> > > I thought a joint of meat was called a 'roast' here? That is
> > > what I have learned. If I am wrong I am happy to be corrected.
> > >
> > > So I am wondering if a post roast could be just cooked in a pot
> > > with water and other veggies and not actually roasted?
> >
> > Lots of different recipes Ophelia and you are right, basically a
> > 'pot roast' here is a fairly sizable hunk of solid boneless meat.
>
> Might have a bone. I favor the classic 7-bone chuck roast:
>
>
<https://www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com/cuts/cut/2478/7-bone-chuck-roast>
>
> Cindy Hamilton

Interesting! I've only seen boneless for this.

wrote:

> On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
> >
> > We don't use the term 'joint of meat'. It reminds me more of the
> > PBS series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
> > something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
> >
> >
> I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
> men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in
> it. They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before
> plunking it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses
> clatter about.

Snicker, same thoughts! I don't think I've ever heard a North American
use the term outside of rarified stock making conversations? Might be
I've lived in the wrong spots.

On 8/10/2018 7:51 PM, wrote:
> To my knowledge a "joint of meat" always refered to a large penis...
> an enormous bone refers to a large erection.
>
Your faggot brother taught you that, right?

On 8/10/2018 9:33 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 19:39:52 -0500, Hank Rogers >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:23:38 -0700 (PDT), "
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't use the term 'joint of meat'.Â* It reminds me more of the PBS
>>>>>> series 'King Henry the VIII' and him eating an obvious leg of
>>>>>> something. Leg of Mutton I think it was in that scene.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I know, hahahaaaa!Â* When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
>>>>> men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone
>>>>> in it.
>>>>> They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before plunking
>>>>> it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses clatter
>>>>> about.
>>>>
>>>> To my knowledge a "joint of meat" always refered to a large penis...
>>>> an enormous bone refers to a large erection.
>>>>
>>>
>>> More of yoose faggot posts, Popeye?
>>>
>>> Yoose just can't help turning anything into a sex fantasy, can yoose?
>>>
>>> Yoose a low down, sorry SOB.
>>
>> You're just jealous because you never get laid... not even by some
>> ugli faggot.
>>
>
> Popeye, I bet yoose humped yoose own mammy when yoose was 10 years old.
>
>
His pappy turned the whole family into cock suckers.

In article >, cshenk
> wrote:

> wrote:

> > I know, hahahaaaa! When I hear a 'joint of meat' I think of two stout
> > men laboring to bring in a huge slab of meat with an enormous bone in
> > it. They're barely able to lift the platter onto the table before
> > plunking it down with a great thud and dishes and cups and glasses
> > clatter about.
>
> Snicker, same thoughts! I don't think I've ever heard a North American
> use the term outside of rarified stock making conversations? Might be
> I've lived in the wrong spots.

My mom, who would be one hundred and ten this year, referred to chicken
thighs as second joints. I asked her why once. She told me that ladies
didn't refer to thighs, ever. My, how times have changed.

[ObFood] Two boneless but full skin chicken breast halves and bone-in
wings covered with McCormicks Original Buffalo Wing seasoning mix and
baked at 375F for 45 minutes. I slit the meat side of the breasts
deeply to pack in more mix.
These were served with unremarkable sides.

leo