I will preface by saying I am a trained baker and chocolatier, and have had previous workplaces approached for Professionals, so I am very critical of normal bake off. That being said, I don't feel that all this year's contestants are as capable as previous years. Kinda feels like the producers have gone more for the personality-hire vibes of the contestants than their actual baking ability, but perhaps that is just the editing and filming choices. But when I look back at previous winners and contestants, I don't feel that they were all fighting for the 'quirky' or 'unique' contestant role, like how I feel this year's are.

Maybe the fact that most contestants over the past 5-ish years have gone on to a book deal, social media side hustle, if not career/influencer status, etc might have something to do with it.

I am not saying the bakers are untalented, or that Bake Off is easy; it must be extremely nerve-racking, BUT I am having a hard time believing that this round of contestants were the best 12 bakers of all applicants, based on baking talent alone.

How have we made it 12 seasons and still have people dumping in extract with impunity?
Paul susses it out every single time.
Every time he tells them to use fresh flavors and not to overwhelm with extract.
I know they watch past seasons, so maybe jot that down?

One baker having a disaster is understandable. Two or three having a bad day is hardly unusual. But when so many contestants are handing in undercooked flatbreads, it starts to make you question the whole challenge. Was the timing unrealistic, were the instructions unclear, or did the bakers simply underestimate it?

In your opinion, does it feel like this season the contestants just don't seem as invested as precious seasons?

I remember past seasons the bakers saying "after my bad critique i stayed up all night practicing XYZ". And this week we had bakers literally saying " I dont know what I'm doing" or joking "yeah I watched a tiktok and thought yup that's good enough". I'm definitely not expecting them to be any more than AMATEUR bakers, but SO many not knowing what a flatbread is, bakes being raw, and it just felt overall like noone knew what they were doing even with their own recipes! One or two people falling flat is expected ((noone will know EVERYTHING)) but the whole tent felt off this week to me.

Do you feel this too? I mean yes its amateur bakers but it IS A COMPETITION! You should at least WANT to be there and put in the effort that comes with it. Otherwise why take a spot of someone else who would.

Harsh critique or reasonable expectation?

Okay, I've seen a lot of comments on posts criticising this week's technical recipe, including it being "vague", "bad", "a failure", "badly written", etc.

I'll say it, the failures this week weren't the fault of the recipe or Paul. The contestants were solely to blame. I do partly agree that the grape and stilton addition was unexpected (though it sounds delicious if the stilton was replaced with cheddar or red Leicester). But that's part of the challenge.

People, the technicals are meant to be challenging. The contestants have always been given the bare minimum of instructions on technicals, on occasion just one or two lines. The instructions are sparse because the whole point is it's a test of their knowledge, experience, skill, and problem solving in baking. This week most were shown to be severely lacking, and I find it quite shocking given how there's always been a bread week.

I love flatbread, so was really excited about the technical. But being allergic to blue cheese, I thought l'd combine it with the signature and do a garlic bread filling. The filling was sauteed, minced garlic, Parmesan cheese, a little softened butter, and a pinch of salt.

As someone who has made flatbread many times, and baking in the comfort of my own home, as well as knowing what| was supposed to be making, it took me exactly 1hr start to finish. used half the time to make the dough (and filling while it rested), and left the last half hour for filling/rolling/cooking. You really do need to fill and roll one, then do the next one while the first one cooks. I can't speak for baking in the tent having never made one before, but cannot imagine not rolling them extremely thin. 🤷🏼‍♀️

The result: They turned out amazing! The bread is soft and chewy, the flavors of the filling came through nicely. There were little crispy bits and air pockets. Simply delicious. I totally recommend making the recipe - even if you don't fill it with anything! It'd be great on its own slathered with butter.

Given the exchanges and comments on my other post about this, I went back and rewatched the technical. There is a shot at around 21:22 to 21:26, of the instructions for the flatbreads.

So, I'm making this post for two reasons. One, if anyone wishes to have a go here's the recipe as given to the contestants (it can also be found with full instructions on the GBBO website). Two, to hopefully show people that it really isn't that different to any previous technicals.

In fact, I think it's actually quite generous compared to other technicals, and It seems people might be reaching to excuse the contestant's lack of ability on this one.

They were given two sheets of A4 paper. One an ingredients list:

Paul's Blue Cheese & Grape FlatbeadsPlease do not confer with any other bakers

Ingredients

For the filling

• 2 tbsp runny honey
• 1 tbsp olive oil
• Red grapes, roasted and sliced
• Blue cheese, crumbled

For the dough

• 500g Strong white flour
• 10g Salt
• 7g Fast action yeast
• 1 tbsp Olive oil (plus extra for frying)
• 320ml Water

The second sheet,

Method:

Circotherm 200C, reduce to 100C

1. Make the dough
2. Rest
3. Shape the flatbreads into rounds, filling with blue cheese and roasted grapes.
4. Fry

am i the only one who watches this show despite not having a sweet tooth? i do know how to bake and occasionally do at home but i don’t really seek out sweets and never crave anything they’re making. do you guys find the show more enjoyable when you watch your favorite desserts being baked?

Was just watching an old one where Mary and Paul went through and did all the technical challenges in a season (6 maybe), and enjoyed it so much. Then i remembered they would also do holiday bakes. I can't remember if Paul and Prue did any but i would love to see Paul and Nigella work together

So simple and delicious!

What are you all making to eat while you watch it?

Yes, I know it’s ages away but I’m excited.
Anyway - maybe a trifle or a chocolate mousse, I’m thinking. But would love some ideas!

First post in this sub and apologies if this question has already been asked, I did a quick scan and couldn’t see it but I’m happy to be redirected if so.

Also… How good is this year’s series? Nigella is just wonderful.

Now that we've seen different technicals this season with some having a new approach, what do you think is generally better: having a recipe to follow without a clear picture of how the end result should look like, or having just a picture/bake(end result) without any recipe to follow?

Obvious preface: I love the show. It's not something to be taken overly seriously. It's cosy viewing and a British institution. That said, I do have some issues, that I think have really come into play this series.

Quality of Bakers

This is nothing against anyone in any of the series in particular - they are all CONSIDERABLY better than me or most other people. But it's a by product of the show's format that, over time, the quality and skills of the contestants will go down - and I think it's very obvious this year.

Say series 1 had the top 12 amateur bakers in the country... That means series 2 can only have the #13-24 in the 'rankings', and so on (plus folks that age up into the the show or move into the country etc. and are added to the pool of available bakers). 17 series and 200+ bakers in, we're going to see a notable decline in quality.
EDIT: Obviously this math is very loose and inaccurate. Just trying to demonstrate why annual competitions like this could struggle after so many years.

Competition Element

I think the above problem is especially clear because the show misunderstands itself and it's purpose. It's leaning too far into the competitive element - when really the show is a feel good bit of light viewing where, hopefully, we're all rooting for everyone the whole time, even through some ups and downs. It's hopecore dressed up as a competition. It's not masterchef.

By focussing too much on the competitive element - making challenges harder and more complicated, while the skillset declines - all the show is doing is turning what should be a cosy, silly show where we root for everyone to succeed and have a laugh, into quite a frustrating watch that only emphasizes the baker's decline in quality.

Judges

Again, LOVE Paul, and I'm enjoying Nigella, but all of the above issues feel like they're starting to weigh on the judging. Paul felt so tired and frustrated last episode, maybe because it was so poor and his speciality, but also because he's 17 series in and less able to get excited as the quality goes down, and difficulty of challenges makes the contestants struggle instead of emphasizing their talents.

How to fix it?

• I think we need to rest the show in it's traditional form for a little while. Maybe borrow from Taskmaster and do a "Champions of Champions" style series for one year, so the quality can go up and we as viewers are watching people we already know and root for.
  • This would also then give time for the pool of potential contestants to grow a bit, and increase in quality.
• Ease up on the competition. The audience week challenge of baking with their family was a fun new twist, and wasn't adding a random degree of difficulty the bakers would struggle with. I think we need more challenges in that style that increase the fun without setting the bakers up to fail. There will still be ups and downs either way, but this way we're enjoying the infectious enthusiasm of lovely, talented people supporting one another and thriving and succeeding, rather than watching lovely people get stressed and break down because the difficulty level is so much higher.

Let me preface this by saying that I don’t dislike Nigella. But. I’ve noticed a distinct shift in the dynamic between the judges this season, and I’ve been struggling to put my finger on exactly why it feels so different.

With Mary and Prue, Paul always seemed to be the more dominant personality, while they provided a natural counterbalance. With Nigella, though, it feels as if both judges are vying to be the dominant voice, rather than complementing one another.

I don’t necessarily think either of them is doing anything wrong, but the dynamic feels less natural to me, almost as though they’re competing for the same role rather than settling into their own.

Has anyone else noticed this, or is it just me?