I was just looking at the cover of the November 30, 2008 issue of Wine Spectator. To me, that piece of lamb looks really, really rare. I usually order my rack of lamb medium rare, and at home I usually cook it to medium as per my wife's preference. But that one looks like it was barely seared on the fat side.
Pregnant ladies beware, if that lamb comes from a Toxoplasmosis endemic region!
In the article, the recipe calls for cooking the lamb to an internal temperature of 140F. When I cook mine to 140, it tends to be only pink in the center. Maybe I need a new thermometer?
I know it is cooked, but when I first received the magazine, I thought it did look like it was raw. The crust isn't too pronounced, and I think that is what makes it look uncooked.
Posts: 1602 | Location: NC | Registered: May 01, 2007
Originally posted by Keeno: I know it is cooked, but when I first received the magazine, I thought it did look like it was raw. The crust isn't too pronounced, and I think that is what makes it look uncooked.
Looks like rack of wild boar: always pink. Personally I like a nice crust on the outside and pink, but warm, in centre. I roast my racks in the oven at 450* for 12-15min max. Rest for 5min. Carve.
Posts: 222 | Location: St. John's, Newfoundland | Registered: Mar 04, 2006
I was tempted to make a lame attempt at humour at NFLD's expense but it's so nice to see someone here from the Rock that I'll refrain. I've been twice and loved the place each time. Besides, Ottawa gets (and deserves!) enough grief from the rest of Canada, no reason to add to the charge sheet!
------------------- Go Bruins!! Go Tigers!! Go Pistons!! Go Lions!!
Most food is photographed cool or even cold. Could be that they just put a heavy sear on it and then shot the cover. I too thought it looked pretty underdone.
