That Million Dollar Baby BakeOff Winner

Here's a review of the winning recipe:

Definitely Not A Winning Recipe

March 28, 2006

By GREG MORAGO, Hartford Courant Staff Writer

What were the judges thinking?

That's what came to mind when I read the winning recipe for the 42nd annual Pillsbury Bake-Off. This recipe - a rather mundane-sounding dish called "Baked Chicken and Spinach Stuffing" - was worth $1 million? That's what Anna Ginsberg of Austin, Texas, was awarded for concocting a simple baked chicken breast and stuffing made with frozen waffles.

The judges, presumably people who knew about food, flavors and cooking, chose this recipe above all others in the recent competition. I read the runners-up, and some of those didn't sound so swell either. Pineapple-black bean enchiladas? Just the thought has me running to the bathroom.

But rather than berate Ginsberg or consider the judges off their rockers (there could have been something in the water in Kissimmee, Fla.), I decided to test the recipe for myself.

My instincts, I'm sorry to report, were correct. I found the recipe amateurish and the flavors only slightly palatable.

A simple scan of the recipe could have told home cooks what they were in for. The recipe contained two overriding flavors - maple and sage - that just don't scream "gotta have it." Nor are they terrifically harmonious. They are flavors I typically buttociate with breakfast and fall weather, not tastes that speak of suppertime (this was, after all, a dinner entrŽe) or spring (the season we've just entered). The recipe also called for poultry seasoning, one of those "cheater" amalgams that, like pumpkin pie spice, apple pie spice or "Italian" seasoning, are instantly recognizable and tend to bully out any other flavors in a dish.

There were other problems. I had to go to two stores to find the Pillsbury Dunkables type of frozen waffles with their syrup cups. The recipe calls for fresh sage, which isn't something every supermarket carries. Finding none in two stores, I did what any home cook would do: I improvised, substituting a pinch of dried sage leaves for the half-teaspoon of fresh leaves. I also found it odd that the recipe called for bone-in, skin-on chicken breasts, which I happen to like but aren't practical for most busy cooks (husbands or kids don't have the patience for bone-in meals unless it's food you can eat with your hands, like fried chicken or ribs).

Yes, I know the recipe was entered in the "Cooking for Two" category, but even as a couples meal, I found it a tough sell.

Why? It simply didn't taste good. We're talking about a baked chicken breast glazed with maple syrup and peach preserves served with a stuffing of toaster waffles mixed with chopped frozen spinach flavored with poultry seasoning. (Skeptics, see accompanying recipe.)

This was clearly not a winner. I took the entrŽe to a dinner party, where I made everyone taste a bite. They all said the chicken was moist. Well, that was more an effort on the bird's part than the awkward flavors Ginsberg heaped on the dish.

My experience with this dish taught me two things. One, there's no accounting for taste. Two, I'm entering the contest next year. With all due respect to the Pillsbury judges and Ginsberg, I know I can do better than this, and I'm not talking about pineapple and black bean enchiladas.