Chocolate Chip Cookies (NYT 7/09/08)
Last week the NYT published a chocolate chip cookie recipe that the claim is the ultimate in amazing chocolate chip cookies. According to them, the 2 key tricks is resting the dough in the refrigerator for 36 hours before baking and making them enormous (large golfball size scoops of dough producing 6" cookies). The size is supposed to yield cookies with a crunchy outer rim, chewy inner ring and soft center. They also advise serving them warm.
For all sorts of reasons having to do with my being on a diet that's actually working and preferring to feed my 6 year old normal sized sweets, I'd rather make standard sized cookies than 6" cookies.
This leads me to 2 questions:
1. Has anyone made them and are they, in fact, the most fabulous thing ever to happen to a chocolate chip cookie?
2. Has anyone made them in a normal cookie size and how did that work out?
There was a long discussion about these cookies on the Food Media and news board (http://www.chowhound.com/topics/537165). The consensus was that they are indeed fabulous. So, always hoping to improve on my current "best" recipe, I tried them. I made the dough on Tues, baked them today. I didn't want to have huge cookies, as I wanted to "share the love" with as many guinea pigs as I could, so I made them regular cookie size. I baked them for 10 minutes instead of the recommended time and they were beautiful. Believe it or not, I didn't try even one, as I also am on a diet that is working so hence the aforementioned guinea pigs. Whether they are the best cc cookies they had ever tasted I don't know, but they were vewy vewy popular. They look delicious. Tomorrow I will be bringing some to a client, who will actually get to taste both my standard "best cc cookie recipe" and these.
The use of very high quality chocolate, I am sure, impacts the overall taste, as does the shape of the "chips" - which as the recipe recommends are not chips at all, but disks - so the chocolate is kind of in layers... oozier.
Hope that helped
we made them and they were amazing:
1) we couldn't find the recommended chips, so we went with a mix of some Dagoba 70% Dark Chocolate disks (too dark to use alone) and some Guittard semi-sweet large/flat chips that still fit the recommendation for shape. We also used slightly less than the recommended amount of chocolate, which is quite a bit.
2) We used cake flour as specified, but regular flour in place of the bread flour.
3) We made 5-6 inch cookies (5 per sheet)
4) I think the cooking time was 19:30 minutes (very much in line with specified)
5) We let cool on the rack for about five minutes, not the 10-15 I think the recipe specified and they were cool enough to eat.
6) We made one sheet three days in a row. The recipe has a typo I think in how many cookies are supposed to be- you can make 18 from this recipe. The color of the cookies did indeed get darker each time. The difference between 18 hours aging for the dough and 42 was noticeable. I think 66 hours was a little long, but the cookies still were fine.
They were really wonderful- I think even getting right up to overdone might even improve them- they might get some toastier notes. We cooked them completely through and they were still chewy in an honest way (not just because they weren't cooked).