I've always only ever experienced chicken breast even if I opted for thigh, but a conversation I had tonight begged me ask the question.

I am trying to ascertain from those members fortunate to have eaten truly old school, if the chicken they were served was presented on the bone or indeed chunks pulled from a small whole chicken.

I shall be going back to finish the conversation and hopefully get more information, i'll report back in due course. But for now, I look forward to your replies.

Cheers,

Malc.

From memory (it's a long time ago) I can certainly remember being served a whole chicken on the bone (not just for me!) which was broken up at the table and for other dishes being given a choice of breast or thigh on the bone.

That's going back 30-40 years which I assume you'd call 'old school'. But that was in one of the better Indian restaurants of the time.

Quote from: Axe on March 13, 2013, 09:59 PM
I am trying to ascertain from those members fortunate to have eaten truly old school, if the chicken they were served was presented on the bone or indeed chunks pulled from a small whole chicken.

As the resident geriatric [1], I can report with 100% confidence that when I started eating curries at the Maharajah of Chislehurst and elsewhere in the late 60's, chicken was offered as a 2 x 2 permutation :  off the bone (extra cost), breast (extra cost).  Thus the default was leg, on the bone.  Clearly this was still occurring in the early 70s, because I am certain that by then the extra cost was 50p (decimalised currency being introduced in 1971).

** Phil.
--------
[1] Worst senior moment to date : actually forgetting I was playing in a doubles table tennis match while the ball was in play.  My partner had coped with the previous three balls without needing my assistance, and when the ball came over the net in my direction on the fourth point I just watched it sail past without any thought that I might actually be taking part in the game. 

That is interesting and certainly follows suit with what we discussed. I hope others are able to add to this topic as the more input I get the better equipped i'll be be, when I continue the conversation.

Will hopefully be able to report back with more info soon, all I can say for now is that it throws an interesting light on old school practices.

Off the bone was posh and expensive. 
As a very young kid i would stick with prawns. Couldn't handle bone or gristle in me curry when i was young.

Quote from: DalPuri on March 14, 2013, 04:01 PM
Off the bone was posh and expensive. 

I agree. I can certainly remember being given the choice of on or off the bone, off the bone being more expensive.

A takeaway near me (takeaway only it wasn't a sit down restaurant) that I used to use for the simple reason that their food was probably the best of a bad bunch in the area used to use what I considered a rather dodgy practice of extorting more money for chicken breast which was clearly a hang-back from the old days.

Whenever I ordered a dish with chicken tikka in it, I was always asked if I wanted breast meat only at 50p extra. I'm sure most people simply said yes please, but I always shook my head and said no, I'll have it as it comes, (I think I even said I prefer dark meat once just to wind them up and let them know I was onto their scam) knowing full well they never used anything but breast for chicken tikka and sure enough the dish itself confirmed that.

I don't mind take-away's charging extra money for breast if it's genuine, but I don't like being ripped off for no reason. I've never heard of any restaurant ever using dark chicken meat for tikka.

Has anyone else come across this or ever known a BIR to use dark chicken meat for chicken tikka?

Quote from: spiceyokooko on March 14, 2013, 05:00 PM
Has anyone else come across this or ever known a BIR to use dark chicken meat for chicken tikka?

Possibly, if it was stripped from Tandoori quarters but cant say for certain.

edit: actually yes,(sort of) but it was Butter chicken in India stripped from Tandoori quarters.

Quote from: DalPuri on March 14, 2013, 05:05 PMedit: actually yes,(sort of) but it was Butter chicken in India stripped from Tandoori quarters.

Perhaps I should have asked...in standard English BIR restaurants/takeaways!

I can well understand a chicken quarter being used in say Murgh Makhani, particularly so if in India itself, but I've never heard of a standard English BIR ever using dark chicken meat in pre-marinated chicken tikka.

My earliest memories of this is that back in the late 70's I remember clearly that my parents would always order a chicken bhuna breast. The curry would arrive with a whole breast and what is now called a goujon in the sauce. The meat had clearly been taken of a whole cooked chicken. I guess whole birds is all they used to use. I remember going to pick up a curry with my dad when I was a nipper and seeing a plastic pallet full of whole chickens lying next to the kitchen door.

Quote from: Axe on March 14, 2013, 03:30 PMWill hopefully be able to report back with more info soon, all I can say for now is that it throws an interesting light on old school practices.

I'm looking forward to hearing your conclusions on this as I'm as keen as anyone to try and replicate the flavours of yesteryear.