Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bryan Wray on February 17, 2011 at 11:08pm

Oh, and I have used triple splitters.  4 times.  That's all it took.  They're horrible.  I suppose there is a time and a place and a reason, but... no... no there isn't, haha.

 

I'll still put it out there that I got the idea from Intelli's Broadway store.  It's just that the Broadway store has done so much positive for me I feel like I have to point out any flaw, and that's one of two.  The second?  Remember the "Chicago Chop" anyone? ;)

 

-bry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keaton Ritchie on February 18, 2011 at 6:46pm

I'll go off topic a bit and ask what exactly your objection to the chicago chop is? So much faster and more consistent barista to barista than most redistribution techniques, I don't see a downside. 

Bryan Wray said:

Oh, and I have used triple splitters.  4 times.  That's all it took.  They're horrible.  I suppose there is a time and a place and a reason, but... no... no there isn't, haha.

 

I'll still put it out there that I got the idea from Intelli's Broadway store.  It's just that the Broadway store has done so much positive for me I feel like I have to point out any flaw, and that's one of two.  The second?  Remember the "Chicago Chop" anyone? ;)

 

-bry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mavin on February 19, 2011 at 2:29pm

bryan thanks for the info.

luis just wanna check with you..was it triple basket or triple portafilters?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bryan Wray on February 21, 2011 at 5:15am

Requires extra tools and extra steps.  You have to reach for the extra tool, grasp the extra tool, use the tool and then return the tool.  It bangs up your portafilter baskets pretty quickly.  It's slower than any hand/finger method I know of.  If the chop is faster than using your hands you need to practice distribution.  I might, might, give it a nod for consistency, but whether distribution is even necessary at all is so up in the air (when tamping properly and consistently) that I don't think it stands as an argument.

 

-bry

Keaton Ritchie said:

I'll go off topic a bit and ask what exactly your objection to the chicago chop is? So much faster and more consistent barista to barista than most redistribution techniques, I don't see a downside. 

Bryan Wray said:

Oh, and I have used triple splitters.  4 times.  That's all it took.  They're horrible.  I suppose there is a time and a place and a reason, but... no... no there isn't, haha.

 

I'll still put it out there that I got the idea from Intelli's Broadway store.  It's just that the Broadway store has done so much positive for me I feel like I have to point out any flaw, and that's one of two.  The second?  Remember the "Chicago Chop" anyone? ;)

 

-bry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by R. Justin Shepherd on February 21, 2011 at 6:25am

Concur. If your dosing is consistent, a couple caring brushes with the finger should do the trick. Heck, I've even pulled plenty of great shots with no step between dosing and tamping... If the amount of coffee is consistent, the first tamp does the distribution, the whack breaks up soft spots and the second tamp and polish finishes it off. A lot easier than learning Stockfleth's move! Although a well-homed hand distribution adds to the performance, I think.

Bryan Wray said:

Requires extra tools and extra steps.  You have to reach for the extra tool, grasp the extra tool, use the tool and then return the tool.  It bangs up your portafilter baskets pretty quickly.  It's slower than any hand/finger method I know of.  If the chop is faster than using your hands you need to practice distribution.  I might, might, give it a nod for consistency, but whether distribution is even necessary at all is so up in the air (when tamping properly and consistently) that I don't think it stands as an argument.

 

-bry

Keaton Ritchie said:

I'll go off topic a bit and ask what exactly your objection to the chicago chop is? So much faster and more consistent barista to barista than most redistribution techniques, I don't see a downside. 

Bryan Wray said:

Oh, and I have used triple splitters.  4 times.  That's all it took.  They're horrible.  I suppose there is a time and a place and a reason, but... no... no there isn't, haha.

 

I'll still put it out there that I got the idea from Intelli's Broadway store.  It's just that the Broadway store has done so much positive for me I feel like I have to point out any flaw, and that's one of two.  The second?  Remember the "Chicago Chop" anyone? ;)

 

-bry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason Haeger on February 21, 2011 at 6:36am

At least, that's what we seem to like to tell ourselves. 

 

I have advised the chop to clients in the past, and will continue to do so when the use of a tool is necessary for consistency and quality control.  Not everyone's finer goes perfectly flat when extended.  I've seen that this is actually less common, and I count myself fortunate for being able to achieve a level distribution by hand. 

 

While I am not a fan of the chop either, it is not for the same reasons.  "cool" goes out the window when we're focusing on the job.  

R. Justin Shepherd said:

Concur. If your dosing is consistent, a couple caring brushes with the finger should do the trick. Heck, I've even pulled plenty of great shots with no step between dosing and tamping... If the amount of coffee is consistent, the first tamp does the distribution, the whack breaks up soft spots and the second tamp and polish finishes it off. A lot easier than learning Stockfleth's move! Although a well-homed hand distribution adds to the performance, I think.

Bryan Wray said:

Requires extra tools and extra steps.  You have to reach for the extra tool, grasp the extra tool, use the tool and then return the tool.  It bangs up your portafilter baskets pretty quickly.  It's slower than any hand/finger method I know of.  If the chop is faster than using your hands you need to practice distribution.  I might, might, give it a nod for consistency, but whether distribution is even necessary at all is so up in the air (when tamping properly and consistently) that I don't think it stands as an argument.

 

-bry

Keaton Ritchie said:

I'll go off topic a bit and ask what exactly your objection to the chicago chop is? So much faster and more consistent barista to barista than most redistribution techniques, I don't see a downside. 

Bryan Wray said:

Oh, and I have used triple splitters.  4 times.  That's all it took.  They're horrible.  I suppose there is a time and a place and a reason, but... no... no there isn't, haha.

 

I'll still put it out there that I got the idea from Intelli's Broadway store.  It's just that the Broadway store has done so much positive for me I feel like I have to point out any flaw, and that's one of two.  The second?  Remember the "Chicago Chop" anyone? ;)

 

-bry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keaton Ritchie on February 21, 2011 at 7:59am

The first time someone put a knife in my hand to "chop" I was as fast to redistribute as I had become after a year of practicing other techniques. Trying to get two baristas working the same grinder to redistribute manually as consistently as they would chop seems nearly impossible, which is why it's appropriate in many contexts. 

I have a Robur E and an Anfim sitting on the bar, both of which provide a grind quality that gets us nearly flawless shots in terms of distribution by tamping straight down into a neat little mound- sometimes I'd prefer to be leveling manually or chopping when the timers act up but that's another discussion.  

 

Also, Justin, are you really still "whacking" the portafilter? I thought the general consensus was that doing so did more to compromise the puck than anything else- which is certainly my experience. Dropping the habit also sped things up for me quite a bit when working the bar. I also recently lent a tamper to a barista who did the whacking thing, with the base. ughhh, chipped all over. 

Jason Haeger said:

At least, that's what we seem to like to tell ourselves. 

 

I have advised the chop to clients in the past, and will continue to do so when the use of a tool is necessary for consistency and quality control.  Not everyone's finer goes perfectly flat when extended.  I've seen that this is actually less common, and I count myself fortunate for being able to achieve a level distribution by hand. 

 

While I am not a fan of the chop either, it is not for the same reasons.  "cool" goes out the window when we're focusing on the job.  

R. Justin Shepherd said:

Concur. If your dosing is consistent, a couple caring brushes with the finger should do the trick. Heck, I've even pulled plenty of great shots with no step between dosing and tamping... If the amount of coffee is consistent, the first tamp does the distribution, the whack breaks up soft spots and the second tamp and polish finishes it off. A lot easier than learning Stockfleth's move! Although a well-homed hand distribution adds to the performance, I think.

Bryan Wray said:

Requires extra tools and extra steps.  You have to reach for the extra tool, grasp the extra tool, use the tool and then return the tool.  It bangs up your portafilter baskets pretty quickly.  It's slower than any hand/finger method I know of.  If the chop is faster than using your hands you need to practice distribution.  I might, might, give it a nod for consistency, but whether distribution is even necessary at all is so up in the air (when tamping properly and consistently) that I don't think it stands as an argument.

 

-bry

Keaton Ritchie said:

I'll go off topic a bit and ask what exactly your objection to the chicago chop is? So much faster and more consistent barista to barista than most redistribution techniques, I don't see a downside. 

Bryan Wray said:

Oh, and I have used triple splitters.  4 times.  That's all it took.  They're horrible.  I suppose there is a time and a place and a reason, but... no... no there isn't, haha.

 

I'll still put it out there that I got the idea from Intelli's Broadway store.  It's just that the Broadway store has done so much positive for me I feel like I have to point out any flaw, and that's one of two.  The second?  Remember the "Chicago Chop" anyone? ;)

 

-bry

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by R. Justin Shepherd on February 21, 2011 at 2:43pm

Funny you mention the whack... A guy I have utmost respect for taught me that, but I just learned this morning, before reading this, about the move away from whacking. And yes, it does seem a lot more efficient, less violent and generally easier on me (and, soon, my baristas).

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page