Tamping - A gentle guide (kind of)

System

One of the more difficult parts of the coffee making process. The actual process is easy enough to learn, but it is at this point that most people fail.
The interesting thing about the tamp, is that is irrelevant if the dose and grind are in perfect rainbow warrior power cosmic alignment. If you fail to tamp correctly. It just dont come out that good...
Now you'll get a good coffee most likely, but you might not and thats why correct technique is so important.
In my mind, there are 3 main factors in tamping (Assuming all other factors machine temps, grind, dose, etc. Are at thier optimum)

And I'll say before I begin. Stop bloody collapsing the grind by tapping the group handle on the bench before you tamp. This "WILL" assist in creating an uneven puck. Plus, if your a bench tapper/scraper (a foolish process), you wil NEVER get the same result twice except in a parallel universe. If you dont understand why, take a basic physics class and you'll probably get it. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but its just not a consistant method of dosing.

Ok.

Firtly, positioning
Stand facing the bench (practice without coffee for this bit) about 1 normal step away, your hand with the handle by your side. Place the group handle with the pourers against the edge of the bench, directly in front of where it was comfortably hanging by your side. Also its important to hold the tamp correctly. Ideally, the top of the tamp will be pushing up into the fleshy bit at the base of your thumb. Your thumb running strait down the stem to the base, and your first, second and third fingers wrapped around the stem. If the tamp isn't designed in a way that this is possible, then as close as possible.
Now turn your hips 45 degrees to the bench, with the tamp hand make a 90 degree angle at your elbow and put the tamp over the handle so that the tips of your thumbs are facing each other. You should be leaning slightly over your group handle. It will feel natural, and your face will most likely be toward the floor. The important thing about your arm is that it is directly veritcal to the handle. This will ensure an even tamp.

Now we have our stance worked out. The tamp.
You'll need coffee now...
So assuming the stance, in one clean and clear motion. Lean "NOT PUSH", on the coffee. Lift your leg and use your body weight to do the work. Whats important here, is to feel the pressure trasfer into the back of your shouder (scapula). If you feel tension in your hand or forearm, it means you are gripping the tamp and pushing with your arm. Avoid this, mostly because the tamp will be inconsistant, but may also lead to RSI or Carpul Tunnel. The important thing to do here is to keep your arm at 90 degrees the whole time. Now after tamping down, as you lift do a twist to polish the top. Now, give the group head a decent whack or two with the "back" end of the tamp (if you use the side or front of the tamp you'll damage the integrity of the tamping surface and coffee will get caught in the grooves, you dont really want that). Repeat the process, but put just a little more of your weight on the puck (remembering not to push) and focus more on the polishing of the top this time, that or do a third light tamp mostly for the polish.

Thirdly, and not so much an action, is that all of these actions should feel natural. At any time you get sore, or the action hurts somehow. Go back over the method set out above and work out what your doing wrong. Essentially I've set out an ergonomic tamping method.

A bit of back story of me. I have studied dance, physical therapy, concious body work and oseopathy. I have been professionally making coffee for 8 years and have been teaching for 2 years.

DoubleRistretto

most of this sounds fine ca, but you haven't really explained why you believe 'collapsing' the grinds by tapping leads to inconsistency - not sure you're correct on this. dR

Unknown

i'll speak about it soon

Unknown

Tamping's a tricky section of the process to get into, because I think this is the part where there are the most differences between schools of thought - more so than milk, coffee storage, grinding, etc etc. Just like there are many arguments for and against collapsing, there are a lot of people who don't agree with tapping/knocking the group handle for those stray grinds around the edges. The main argument put forward is that this disturbs the integrity of your puck as a whole. I'm of the opinion that if you choose to collapse, then you should collapse exactly the same every single way; keeping this in mind, whatever you're doing - collapsing, knocking, levelling - doing the same thing every single time no matter what rhythm you follow is what will lead to greater consistency. There's a growing number of people who don't tamp at all. If anyone here follows that doctrine I'd love to hear the main reasoning and arguments for it. For the record, my tamping goes like this: dose with a fine grind into 21g (heaped on top), collapse twice, level, tamp, knock, tamp, polish (and a quick flick to lose any strays).

Unknown

Ok, the reason I am so apposed to collapsing the coffee before tamping, is that, it doesn't matter how cosistantly you think you tap the handle down on the bench/grinder. I assure you, that you will rarely apply the same amount of down force on the coffee. More so, if you are a visual doser, or dose - tap - dose - scrape. It is virtually impossible to control your dose. It may only be out by a 1/4g. but that makes a huge difference. Now I dont expect anyone to follow my method just because I'm right...hehe!   But what I'm saying is, try it my way. And rather than free dosing, adjust your dosing chambers in the grinder so that they dose the amount you like (I know, single group, double group dosing is a bit uneven at times, you dont have to say. Set it to your double group) and use my method for 1 day. If you find its not ultimately more consistant. Then you can call me an idiot. My point is that your suggesting I'm wrong without attempting the method. The smart move would be to understand it before you ridicule it. I didn't start out this way, its taken me the last 4 years to understand dose grind tamp consistancy. And thats what I now teach. And if you come back saying grind on demand cause there is a bit of wastage. if your busy, this really shouldn't apply. but if you free dose and scrape, you are definately wasting at least as much.

Unknown

I'll just add to the last bit, when you get stupidly busy. my method, without any doubt in my mind, will speed you up so much its not funny. Also can you explain to me why La Mazocco would spend tens of thousands if not more, on developing the swift grinder. I dont know anyone who doesnt respect that gangs stuff. I dont mean to be coming off aggresive if thats how it seems. The tamping issue is very important to me, as consistency is by far the most important, but sadly least adhered to part of the coffee industry. and I'm not saying just on the baristas side. Read "imported coffee and freshness" In the trade page forum. Elightening

Unknown

so I hope that cleared up my reasons for everyone

Unknown

I assume that since I didn't disagree with you, your explanation was mostly meant for DoubleRistretto. I will, however, comment on the Swift; having used it for half a year, I find that it helps very much with getting takeaways out at speed - I would churn through 10 flat whites in about 2 minutes. The general consensus though is that its shots are - yes, consistent - but a consistent 7/10, at best 8/10. I can't remember exactly what the explanation Scottie Callaghan gave me was, but the shot is only consistent up to a certain point, and the lack of controllable variables means that you will never get an excellent shot from the Swift. I know that many high-end cafes here use it solely for takeaways, reasoning being that there is enough milk in a takeaway to dampen the quality hit you take when using the Swift.

askthecoffeeguy

hmm... I dose, collapse, and sweep all of the time, using the metal forks provided on my Compak WBC grinder and I reckon that my technique has pretty good consistency. Ultimately I think its about maintaining consistency and getting as much coffee into the basket as possible, to get the most out of the shot!

Unknown

A condecending hmmm. Read the post 4 above yours, before you comment on my idea. As I have clearly stated, I'm not suggesting that I am the word of god, just intelligent enough to think before I act/speak. And why is your equipment relevant to the argument, WBC grinder, wow, I use an FB80 and a Robur, high quality bean and a Lamazocco tamper. Method is the topic, not your fork and spoon. I love debate...hehe. Angries up the blood...in a good way. Have you got jet lag coffeeguy, you seem a little tired ; ) Just want to add, when you said get as much coffee in to the porterfilter to get the best out of the shot. That in my exprience isnt really the case. I'm not actually disagreeing. What I've noticed, by applying that approach, the coffee tends to try to force its way out, sometimes (not always, or even often) the water flows down the side of the puck, because its the easiest path to travel. Now Again I'm not saying your wrong, just commenting on my experience.

Unknown

I wasn't addressing that to you spilly. Essentially what I am trying to get accross, is that its hard to achieve consistency. Especially when you add the MOST falible component to a mechanical process, "Human Judgement". The reason I push my method so hard is that it works. Its the fastest most cosistant method I know of. The use of the swift reference was to illustrate that a piece of technowledgy was designed specifically to address the issues of dose and tamp consiatancy. irrelavent if the tool works a well as thier idea....its the idea that is the important factor.

Unknown

I'd like to clarify in regard to grind on demand (above). I definately mean - do grind on demand. But use the dosers to control your dose. not flicky flicky. Thats all

askthecoffeeguy

yeah I confirm that I was jet lagged when I posted but I still stand by the sentiment as far as up-dosing and collapsing of the grind is concerned - and I reckon that if your technique is good with great consistency then you are on to a winner! Still, ask ten baristi how they make coffee and you will get different answers btw debate is good - bring it on! helps to flesh out some answers! Pat

Unknown

was kinda looking forward to a fight. Like I've said, my method is purely about speed and consistancy. If you are happy in your own style its not for me to say. Its all about the joy in the end. Also I think its the kind of espresso your after. My technique creates a very smooth full bodied result. Thats not everybodies Idea of the best result.

psaigh

First off, let me say thanks for all of your current post.  I have really enjoyed reading them on the whole.  And your explanation of correct tamping procedure with regard to RSI is fantastic.  It's often hard to find a decent explanation for this online, i think you really explained the body mechanics quite well. However, the general tamping technique i simply can't agree with. to start  "Now after tamping down, as you lift do a twist to polish the top Care to elaborate why this is important at this stage?  The polish is important to ensure no coffee hugs the base of the tamp, and ensures a level surface when the water come's into contact with the coffee.  However when you are going to tamp again, this step (while i don't see anything innately wrong with it) seems redundant. Now, give the group head a decent whack or two with the "back" end of the tamp This action definitely fractures the puck, leading to an increased chance of channeling within the extraction.  Now you could argue that the second tamp will re-form the puck, however clean, vertical fracture lines won't be diminished by a vertical tamp.  My own research has confirmed this (for me anyway).  Also, even if you argued that there was a 0% chance of fracturing the puck, i still fail to see the significance of this movement anyway.  The total amount of grounds potentially caught within the grooves of the portafilter equates to less than 0.5%.  Any flavour difference (be it positive or negative) caused by not tamping these granules would not be noticeable in the cup (for evidence of this, just look at the Swift grinder, which leaves bulk amounts of coffee untamped at the ridges).  So again, the action seems, to me, to be redundant (NB: I used to thwack the pf with my tamp for years, but have dropped this habbit over the last 2 years  and much prefer the results) Repeat the process, but put just a little more of your weight on the puck  I'm sorry, i fail to see the point in varying the weight?  The coffee is about to be hit by 9bars of atmospheric pressure (over 500pounds), whether the first tamp is soft and the 2nd tamp is hard, or the same, or vice versa is still going to have little difference compared the weight of the water it's about to receive. Now on to the issue of collapsing.  Now for arguments sake, i'm taking  about this with reference to dosered grinder (operating without a timer), and obviously grinding on demand (not letting the whole chamber fill up).  Current gen grinder like the rober-e, and various (decent quality) timer'd grinder dose the same, no matter how many or few time'ss you collapse. i find dosing without collapsing to be hugely inconstant.  Every time you pull back on the dosing lever the amount of coffee in eeach chamber is slightly different.  When it falls, and thereby reacts to the conditions of gravity, as the total mass falling is different with every click, so too then is the total volume of coffee when the basket looks full.  Collapsing, even just once, helps mitigate these differences by knocking out a lot of the air suspending the coffee. When i first toyed with the idea of collapsing, i measured at least 100 different doses all using the same method (by weighing the pf with the coffee) and it was much easier to dose to a consistent level (assuming that roughly the same amount of thwack was used each time) than without collapsing. And I'll re-iterate the importance of collapsing consistently(ie/ if you tap down once, always tap just once.  if you tap down 4 times, always tap down 4 times). My current method of dosing and tamping (and i'm sure within 6months this will have changed) is turn on grinder, click 3 times every second until the basket 3/4 filled, turn off the grinder, collapse*, click out remaining coffee to a mound (if there is not enough, i briefly turn the grinder back on and then off until enough ground coffee has bee produced), collapse once, level off straight, tamp once,  finishing with a 1/4 turn (while still applying pressure), polish.

Unknown

I dont necessarily think the handle needs a whack. But I'm not sure it creates vrtical line of failure either. When you hit the side of a cirlce, force isn't applied in a strait line. It is distributed around the circle edge and into the middle. With the energy of centripital force pushing on the puck, I just dont see how it fractures it virtically. Unless the puck breaks. I should have elabourated of the different pressures with the tamps. The first tamp is the guide tamp, and second the Full tamp. Now I use a little less wieght on the first tamp because I want a consistant result, and I just dont get that if I tamp the heaviest at first. One major point. your body wieght will only allow you to tamp (using my method) at a certain weight. Unless you Fluctuate 10kg every day. You wont budge me on the collapsing thing. And I have to say that your explanation wasn't at all enlighteneing. Again TRY THE METHOD.

Unknown

As far as the polish goes. do I really need to explian....really

Unknown

learned some interesting info today that """may""" support no tapping on the group handle. But I'm not yet convinced. A bit about the mechanics of collapsing as well. But its still a crap idea, if you know your dose correctly. Why adjust it manually, it seems insane. I did a little training (me the student) and it was grind on demand, collapse, scrape. All interesting and relevant, but the explanation given when I queried about dose consistency was far from convincing.

Unknown

Correct me if I'm wrong caspresso, I'm just trying to figure out your method. You basically set a certain grammage on your doser, so you dose a little like this, for instance: grind, 3 clicks, tamp, knock, tamp, polish?

Unknown

Personally, I collapse because I use 21gs and the particular coffee I use is at its best when the volume is what is in the group handle after a mound-style dose, two collapses and a level. I believe what psaigh is explaining re: collapsing is the school of thought I also subscribe to, though our execution may be different; dosing to a mound and then collapsing (with the same amount of collapses every time) will mean that you always have the handle filled to the absolute maximum, then a similar amount of air/space forced out/filled up, then leveled to a similar final dosage every time. I have found, for me at least, that no matter what grinder I'm using, if I rely on the clicker to dose me an exact volume, too many variables come into play. The grinds might be lying unevenly inside the chamber, I might not want to grind enough coffee to have it all sitting properly, etc. I think finding fault with the variable strength in your collapsing taps is in many ways just like finding faults in the clicker/lever and how fast and strong you pull it.

Unknown

yes method assumption is correct. And fair to say very quick. A lot faster than manual dosing and grind distributing. I know that ideally distribution and a 100 different things are great. But speed is also relevant in this industry, and not just quality. I love the art of coffee in all its complexity, theres just a certain point where theory and actuality dont sit side by side. The other dilemma I have with manual dosing ie; dose - tap - dose - tap - distribute -

Unknown

I'd like to suggest that we move this argument to "Dose and grind cosistency - your view" I know I suggested the dose tap consistency thing on this topic. but we're getting away from the initial subject. Good tamping method Thanks Caspresso

psaigh

whenever i employ a new technique i try and quantify it as much as possible.  I weighted literally hundreds of shots until i was convinced of it's repeatability. And as for the time taken, the dosing stage takes .9 of a second longer than the time it takes to grind the coffee (ei/robur takes 3.2sec, dosing takes 4.1sec, k10 takes 5sec, dosing takes 5.9seconds) And i'm sorry, but i really don't see the point of the initial polish, though your explanation of the different tamping weights does make great sense. Also, i was wondering  if you're familiar with scott rao's book, "the professional barista handbook"?

Unknown

fun back and forth with you psaigh. I didn't think you meant the first polish. I agree, its probably not terribly important, but I do think it will help create a more consistant top. I could be wrong, but I dont think its necessarily of an detriment to the puck. I know your not suggesting that though. One thing though, I think its good to just repeat things the same way, makes you more consistant, even if it has no impact on the result. I think when your going fast, the vertical lift technique on the first tamp makes you cocentrate on using two actions in the same process. Not a terrible thing, just maybe a little mind consuming and therfore time consuming. The grind times wont be affected by any method. what I'm saying is that the method is slow. If you dose in one process then the rest of the added actions will slow you down. But you dont dose in one process do you. You dose - tap - dose - tap - disrtibute - srape - tamp - tamp - clean - extract. Is that right I'll look for that manual you mentioned, I'll just say though. Good theory does not a good method make. It is only the practical truth that proves itself relevant.

admin

Just getting back to the tamping/collapsing thing; personally, I have collapsed for years, and haven't found it a problem. I'm not a pro [although i make a pretty mean shot] but I would have thought the main thing, whaever you do, is consistency - guess we're all agreed on that! -A

Unknown

Its not that I think its a problem. 1/2g variables aren't gonna blow up the coffee machine. Its the precision of it that I question. Especially because there are so many high level baristi that say its consistant, but the process cant be precise, there is simply too much potential for inconsistency. Where do these ideas get tested, and is there any indisputeable evidence for its effectabililty. 1/2g variables are not a reasonable variation in the sense of consistency though. Because that is simply not consistant. And 1/2g variables have been explained away as ok to me in the past.....WHAT???

psaigh

d You dose - tap - dose - tap - disrtibute - srape - tamp - tamp - clean - extract.

Written like that it does sound like a lot of  work, however in practice a lot of the work is done while the grinder is grinding.  The rest is completed in under 1second. And I  totally agree with your comment "Good theory does not a good method make", especially when translating that to the cafe setting.  At the end of the day, there our countless  different dosing and tamping methods.  I think it's great for a thread like this to pop up which offers a few conflicting points of view, so as that someone reading and wanting to learn more has the opportunity try the different methods and do what works best for them.

Unknown

Definately. I'm learning heaps about peoples ideas, its great

Unknown

I only collapse once, at the end of dosing. I think that people who read Scottie Callaghan's article a while ago somewhere followed his methods of dosing halfway, collapsing, then dosing to the top and collapsing, but personally I've found this just invites trouble unless you're at an incredibly similar level every time when you're 'halfway'.

Unknown

And here you have struck upon my point. You cannot dose correctly using the method stated by Scottie Callaghan. I still don't agree with any tapping. but at least doing it at the end you may have a little hope at consistency. I think, as I've said in the "grind and dose consistency" topic. Using methods such as stockfleths or the like, really require dose consistency to be efficacious. And a method which employs variables is not consistent.

Unknown

no-one can get halfway, then collapse every time, exactly the same. close I'm sure but not the same. I challenge everyone to measure their dosing