Why do they have to “smash” a burger? Why do they have to “char” everything from lettuce to broccoli? It’s recipe violence.
Maximum Maillard reaction by making it thin and crusty, allowing for peak browning without overcooking or undercooking the meat. It’s not to everyone’s taste, but I for one appreciate them for a change. They really are flavorful, the trade-off is the thinner texture. They’ve been a thing now for a number of years, but it’s a reasonable trend and there are plenty of non-smash burgers to be had in most major urban areas. So no skin off my nose - there is room for variants.
This one I’m less fond of, though I get it. A touch of char adds a strong contrasting flavor that some people love. Doesn’t do much for me, but I also don’t hate it. I mean I prefer it to that kinda sad ‘raw food restaurant’ trend that was going around in the 1990’s.
But hey - just different preferences 
. Embrace the diversity!
Eh. I’d rather have a big thick burger patty than a “smashed” one any day.
In the case of smashburgers, I have to agree. They’re like hamburgers, only dry.
Yeah, don’t be smashing all that juicy goodness out of my burger.
mmm
It’s trendy at the moment.
Give it a year or two and it will be something else.
I dunno. A correctly made smash burger should be cooked just long enough to sear the surface and crisp the edges, and then be eaten more or less immediately. The smash occurs (for me anyway) just as it goes into the pan, but only then otherwise you do squeeze all the juices out. No significant resting or carryover will overcook it.
Frankly I like making them 'cuz they’re fast and I’m impatient.
Lots of cheap greasy diner type places made thin smashed burgers when I was a kid in the 60s. They just called them burgers. They were cheap and kids and the after the bar crowd loved them.
I didn’t realize “smashed” was a thing, but burgers are something I like well-browned. I find it kind of gross to be choking on greasy juice. Plus, something just feels wrong about biting into a patty that’s too soft to resist.
As to the verbiage, there’s an age-old advertising maxim that goes “sell the sizzle, not the steak.” In a world where there’s really not much that differentiates most commodities, perception makes a difference.
I’ve always been opposite—9 times out of ten I will prefer to have thin patties to pub burgers. My preferred patty has always been about 1/6 of a pound. Of course, as a double. On the rare occasion I have a pub burger, it needs to be medium rare. Not medium or higher.
Yeah, it’s the name that’s newish but the style has been around forever. (The burger chain using the name goes back almost 20 years. I don’t remember hearing the term “smash burgers” until around the 2000s myself—but I feel like I knew the term before the chain, but don’t trust my memory.)
It’s kind of like how in the Chicago area our style of thin crust pizza is now called “tavern style” when it was just “pizza” or “thin crust pizza” before.
Yep- the procedure is supposed to be to have a ball of meat of appropriate size, then you put it on a screaming hot griddle or pan and immediately smash it flat into a circular burger patty.
Then you just let it cook on that side until it’s well browned, flip it over (you usually have to scrape it up) , and cook it just enough on the opposite side to actually make sure nothing’s raw.
You don’t actually press any juice out- it’s just that initial flattening of the cold meat ball that is ‘smashing’, and the whole point there is to get maximum meat-to-griddle contact for effective browning.
It’s a valid burger style; one of my favorites in fact, and I like them a lot like @pulykamell- two of them with cheese.
Here’s an article that describes both the why and the how:
I forget which cooking show I was watching but it explained that the first style of burger introduced to America was smashed on a griddle.
Yeah, that would not at all surprise me.
I’m the other way, Ground meat needs to be cooked! If I get a burger “medium” it’s getting sent back. Which is odd, because I want my steak mooing and I love tartare. But ground meat has to be well. Not overcooked to charcoal, but no pink.
But is there anyone who doesn’t like smashed potatoes?
Best Smashed Potatoes Recipe Best Smashed Potatoes Recipe
Yeah, but you also like your yolks cooked hard, so I’m not surprised 
Health wise that is a good idea, ground meat is generally more risky that a solid steak.
I think the attraction of a “smash” burger is that it is NOT from a preformed patty.
Moving on to the “charred” veggie options. I think it’s again, a lot of marketing covering over an existing trend.
I often do broccoli for example in the air fryer, spritzed with olive oil and a dash of salt, until just a few bits of char appear. But it’s just another hot, fast cooking method. I could do the same in my wok or skillet.
The differentiation seems to be about hot-fast cooking, vs. the previous norm of wet cooking, especially boiled (which kills the flavors IMH) or steamed which at cheaper places became little different than boiled texture and taste wise.
Hot and fast can create sweeter flavors, and since many Americans don’t appreciate their veggies, it’s a totally worthwhile way to encourage us. Quality quick steamed is great as well. But “charred” sounds dramatic, and different from steamed/boiled.
I roast broccoli all the time in this manner (most vegetables these days, come to think of it) and I leave them in until they’re thoroughly soft, usually a bit crispy on the edges, but not charred. All the sweet without the ash. Again a touch of Maillard reaction, but I don’t love actual full-on black char (though I’ll live with it without qualms as long as it is just a touch). The last bit of really carbonized stuff I liked I think was setting roasting marshmallows on fire when I was ten or twelve and I suspect I wouldn’t like that much now.