Is Pot Roast Always Chuck?

[eternal]

I ended up with an 1/8 of a cow and a lot of roasts marked "Pot Roast". Is this all just check with a different name? I've also got a bunch of ground beef, that I was just assuming was chuck as well. Safe assumptions?

[rotuts]

no.

if the division was fair, 'pot roast' is simply a tough cut that you better cook slow and moist: tradisional 'pot roast'

probably a lot of it comes from the leg. they are simply telling you its tough.

might be good for Sous Vide though. leg is not very tasty.

those butchers are not generally good cooks, but there are many exceptions.

on the 'ground' who knows. there is 'ground round' etc. chuck is the best for grinding as it has a lot of flavor, it used to be 'tough' and has tasty fat.

Edited November 18, 2011 by rotuts (log)

[Norm Matthews]

One usually thinks of chuck or round for pot roasts. The chuck comes from the shoulder and there are several cuts (and names) for shoulder roasts besides chuck but those -in my opinion- make the best pot roasts. The round also has several cuts. They all come from the other end and are pot roasted but generally don't have as much fat so aren't as taste-y, again in my opinion.

Ground can come from any part of the cow. It may be chuck or round or shank or brisket or flank or a combination of several. What is more important is how lean or fat is it?

[Blether]

Pot roast in our family, growing up, was either silverside (bottom round in the US ?), brisket or topside.

I'd add that ground may also contain head meat, meat scraped from bones, odd cut off bits &c.. If you're a commercial outfit making mince for sausages or kebabs, say, then add ears, eyes, tail, tendon &c.

[Margaret Pilgrim]

Your post is an important one. Whenever one agrees to a portion of an animal, it is important to ascertain what precise "parts" will one get.

Pot roast, as rotuts writes and as the name suggests, is simply any animal part that normally is braised rather than dry roasted, i.e. any tough piece. I usually slow roast these with cooking juice to cover and under a round of parchment paper (aka paper lid) at a very low temperature, 275 to 300 for at least 3 hours. Outcome = tender as love. Enjoy!

[Blether]

Mmm... to me it's not pot roast if it's not mimicking the traditinal roast's way of being cut into slices from the block. And Margaret, I'm sorry but - to me - pot roasting uses shallower liquid, replenished as necessary to prevent drying out. Pot roasting also requires a browning step.

(None of which is to suggest that what you describe sounds less than wonderful).

Edited November 19, 2011 by Blether (log)

[Margaret Pilgrim]

Mmm... to me it's not pot roast if it's not mimicking the traditinal roast's way of being cut into slices from the block. And Margaret, I'm sorry but - to me - pot roasting uses shallower liquid, replenished as necessary to prevent drying out. Pot roasting also requires a browning step.

(None of which is to suggest that what you describe sounds less than wonderful).

Of course, classic pot roasts were substantial chunks of meat as you describe. And I certainly go along with browning. And depending on the cut, with shallow liquid, which also begs the configuration of the pot. But the main point is that it is a wet process. And that shank and brisket may well find their way into your cocotte unless you have a different understanding with the seller. And they may well turn out mouth-watering if not what we grew up understanding "pot roast".

[Raoul Duke]

Slow cooking that chuck roast, and shredding it, for use in enchiladas' and tacos always works for us.

[phatj]

I was under the impression that to benefit from low-and-slow cooking such as pot roasting, a cut should contain a lot of connective tissue (that makes it tough with normal cooking methods) and a lot of fat, which helps keep the meat moist during long cooking. Chuck meets both criteria, but I didn't think round meets either. I was surprised to hear from someone recently that they made a very good pot roast with bottom round. I had always thought of round as a cut best suited to roasting rare, slicing thin and serving with a flavorful sauce.

Can anybody set me straight here?

[Margaret Pilgrim]

Eye of round has always been a classic, although I wouldn't choose it since it is, in my opinion and as you warn, too lean.