Let me guess, you need more?
It's not about needs, it's about preferences
>>21758361Yes, I do need more.And I don't care for the suggestion that type of post makes. It's like you're saying "You should not need more. This is sufficient."And that's simply false. So just to clarify, OP: No more "Let me guess, you need more?" posts. Thanks for your cooperation. MGMT
Less.
>>21758361Yes anon, I do. Your spaghetti and other long noodles are a textural nightmare without a tall pot you can submerge them in all at once.
>>21758377Only whimsical children prefer spaghetti over macaroni
>>21758382Only retarded cooklets think every type of pasta is appropriate for every type of sauce.
>>21758361Yeah, not making a big batch of stock with that pathetic tiny saucepan
>>21758371same
>>21758361I need differentSwitch out the useless flat one for a stockpot and we're solid
>>21758361yes , i need the 170 pieces Le Creuset set available at Costco
Yes, give me a dutch oven I'll be satisfied for the rest of my life.
>>21758361I'd also like a 1qt pot as well, please.
>>21758361Yeah a stock pot, dumbass. And replace one of the two on the right with a mid-sized pot because those are redundant in most of their uses.
>>21758361As a bare minimum:-10 inch stainless frying pan (that All-Clad is goated)-medium size stainless saute pan (11 inch/3 quart like in your photo is good)-medium size stainless sauce pan (7-8 inches/2.5-3.5 quarts like in your photo is good middle ground, but having two in different sizes is better)-12 inch stainless frying pan (and/or 14 inch for large batches)-8-9 inch carbon steel frying pan for eggs (tinned copper also good nonstick material for an egg pan)-small butter warmer, like 1 cup capacity at most -two large stainless stocks pots, ranging from 12-24 quarts (you need at least two so you can cook stock in one pot and then strain it into the other one)-5-8 quart Dutch oven/rondeau/low-wide pot for larger capacity stews than you can do in the saute pan-carbon steel wok or large cast iron skillet-large roasting pan-various size baking sheets, bread pans, other bakeware, etc.
>>21758361Need a beeg pot for my chilis and pastas
>>21758361Yes, I need a stock pot.
>>21758361i don't need more. i have more.
>>21758377Use the wide pan.
>>21759583The water will evaporate off of it and the pasta will burn and stick together. Cooklet detected.
>>21759610Anon... please, you aren't even trying that hard to rage bait.
>>21759652It's not rage bait. Cooking long pasta in a skillet is fucking retarded.
>>21759667Who said skillet? Use pic related pan. And even so, you can definitely use a wide large skillet to cook pasta, just keep an eye on it and stir frequently.
>>21759667What's retarded is using a fucking gallon of water to cook pasta. You want to use as little water as possible so it's extremely starchy to emulsify your sauce with. Those wide shallow pans are perfect for making spaghetti. Take it from white man James Alt if you don't believe me:https://www.seriouseats.com/how-to-cook-pasta-salt-water-boiling-tips-the-food-lab
>>21759688>>21759701I've never seen retards so eager to defend retardery. My god.
>>21759732You can't even explain why it's retarded. The pot is plenty wide enough to fit the spaghetti all at once. It's plenty deep enough to hold enough water to cover the spaghetti. You don't want too much water anyway as has been established. So what's retarded about it? Might be time to stop and consider that maybe you are the retard, retard.
A crock pot would be nice.
>>21759736And it boils faster. Tall potters are on suicide watch.
>>21759803It also turns out you don't even need to boil the water first. Just put the pasta in, turn on the heat, and it'll be done shortly after it comes to a boil.
>>21759736>>21759803I already explained. I know you're retarded, but I thought you had at least some reading comprehension. Your water will boil off and your pasta will clump together. I'm sorry you enjoy clumped pasta, that's not normal. Get better soon, and don't invite anyone over for dinner.
>>21759844>Your water will boil offNo it won't.>your pasta will clump togetherNo it won't. Try it for yourself, stupid. Or just keep doing it your wrong way. I don't really care.
>>21759844It takes like max 9 minutes to boil pasta. How fucking long are you boiling pasta?
>>21759851>doing it wrongGod you're so fucking stupid.
>>21759852Just say you've never boiled fettuccine or buccatini.
>>21759858Listen, I used to be like you. I thought you had to use a shitload of water. Then I found out you don't. You on the other hand are inventing things that you think will happen that actually won't, without even trying it for yourself. Just burying your head in the sand. You're more than welcome to do that, but that's no way to go through life in my opinion.
>>21759862Why would I be saying what happens if I hadn't tried it? Think hard.You go right ahead and enjoy your nasty clumped pasta. I'll continue making it the right way.
>>21759864Oh, it's a skill issue then. Enjoy your poorly emulsified sauce, if you even know what that is.
>>21759867You can suck my emulsified sauce off my nuts just like your mother did last night.
>>21759876My mother is a saint. I leave you with some pasta that I made with a supposedly impossible method. Does this look unboiled or clumped together to you?
>>21759889Your mother worships my cock. She's a saint for my dick. Ask her about itYour sauce looks like ketchup, and that pasta looks very overcooked. Once again, you go ahead and do it wrong, I'm going to continue to do it right. You will never change the way I think or the way I cook. Take your life hacks back to R*ddit. I bet they'll like it.
>>21759861Stop.
>>21759906You're embarrassing yourself.
>>21759908>>21759912Sorry for embarrassing you. I didn't mean to out you for your lack of experience in the kitchen. You can always try making it yourself. Practice makes perfect.
>>21759844>Your water will boil off and your pasta will clump together.This is just stupid
>>21759931I guess it's fine if you like your pasta in cake-form. I can't change what you like anon. That's fine.
I hate it here
>>21758361I have two (2) 10-piece sets of All-CladsYou definitely need a larger pot in that setIt's also good to have several sizes of LODGE skillets for EGGIES and searing STEAKS
Holy fuck are you retards actually talking about boiling pasta in the saute pan?! Ay dios mio man, Liam 'n' me? We're gonna fuck you you up
Last I checked, it wasn't called the Bill of Needs, commie faggot.
>>21760067Same fag.
>>21760116Absolutely not. You're just wrong and other people know it. You cry "samefag" when you're walled in.
>>21760116>reply to one (1) post>yell samefagdumb gay retard
>>21760116That isn't what samefagging is
>>21760067>insufferable redditor quoting insufferable reddit movieKill yourself.
>>21760162Kek cry pussy cooklet nopot
>>21760162Are you poor? Get a big pot.
>>21760139>>21760131>>21760125>more same fagging.
>>21760339Only the first one is me
>>21760339You look so dumb right now dude.
>>21759844NTA but my spaghetti never clumps at all and I use short pots for as much 3/4 of a pound. I just keep a close eye on it and stir a lot with skinny tongs. It's a complete lie that spaghetti clumps unless its cooked in a tall pot.
>>21760339I'll samefag now because I just noticed something funny. What kind of pots do you think your picrel uses for spaghetti?
>>21760352A short pot is a little different than using something like a shallow sauce pan or a frying pan. I've been in that same boat before. Pastas like angel hair were always a little unevenly cooked. It's just done so fast. It would be al dente on the half that didn't get to go in the water first, close to overcooked on the other.
>>21759861>bucatini6 minutes is al dente for bucatini, they have the hole through them for a reasonyou wouldn't know that, though, would you?
>>21760368I never had that problem. Angel hair cooks so fast that it pretty much instantly folds in half into the water of a short pan. Then all it takes is frequent or constant stirring for a couple minutes.
>>21760384Why the fuck would I mention it if I didn't know what it's like to cook? That's a pretty specific pasta to mention, and it does take longer to cook than a lot of other long pastas. Are you dumb?Can you even name two sauces it's good to pair with without googling an answer? I won't believe you regardless of what you say, I've already decided you're a hopeless retard.
>>21760398amatriciana and carbonara, jackass, and it takes less time to cook than other long pastas that's the whole point of the shapejust stop replying
>>21760394That's what I did too. You might like yours more done than I do.>>21760399Have you ever tried making a sauce out of button cell batteries and then eating a lot of it?
>>21760401tongue my asshole faggot
>>21760402holy shit you're so mad about pasta
>>21760339Legit one of the dumbest posters of this board.
my sides
Holy crap the state of this thread
>>21760401No. I hate overcooked pasta. You're probably not stirring enough or cooking too long.
>>21760416What vessel do you think is the best vessel for cooking long pastas, anon?>>21760418It's been a long time. We all start as cooklets. That was probably the issue.
