Nowadays, pretty much every loaf I make is based mostly on the bread making processes laid out by Jeffrey Hamelman in his book, Bread - i.e. mixing, bulk fermentation with up to several stretch & folds, pre-shaping, final shaping, final fermentation, and baking. I’ve always had wonderful results.

When I started baking bread about 13 years go, I used a more “traditional” method of mixing, kneading for 10 minutes or so, let the dough double in size, deflate it, maybe let it double again, deflate, into a bread mold, let it almost double again, and then into the oven. I say “traditional”, because those were the methods familiar to my parents and grandparents. I also had great result with this. Great tasting bread (especially with SF styles), good crumb, though certainly nothing with huge uniform holes in the crumb.

My question is: Are there any defenders left of the older method that I just described? Or, is it pretty much universally agreed upon that the newer processes are superior?

If anyone believes the “traditional” way (as I described it) is underrated, I would love to hear why.

Thanks!