Look, you are missing some mechanics of a "decoction mash".
I appreciate the information, but I do understand the steps of a traditional decoction. Read my original post describing the Simplified Decoction -- I go through the motivation for modifying the traditional technique:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/simplified-decoction-296152/
it is not a decoction mash, per se, because of what you are missing from the traditional process.
I suppose if you consider any deviation from traditional technique grounds for losing the naming rights, then we can't call it a decoction. Let's just call it a "Simplified Decoction", or if you prefer, a "Notcoction".
alpha-amylase enzymes to break down long chain dextrins and native starches to smaller constituents
Sachharification still occurs in the Notcoction.
the boiling of the thick decoction bursts open the cell walls in the malt so that more starches and long chain dextrins are available when reintroduced to the mash for further break-down. (This reason and the above reason are why decoction mashes have greater efficiency.)
This also happens in the Notcoction. You have the option of returning the boiled portion of grains back to the unboiled portion of the wort in the Notcoction, to saccharify the extra starches you've released from cell walls. That is what I've done every time I've tried it so far. But, because I am beginning with well-modified malts, I should be able to skip this step without significant detriment to clarity or flavor. I expect the loss in efficiency to be on the order of 5%. But if efficiency is why you do a decoction, that means that your time is worth (efficiency boost*$cost of malt bill) / (time spent decocting). For a 5 or 10 gallon batch, that's below minimum wage!
You may not care about either, but they are characteristic of a true decoction and by skipping these steps you are changing the characteristic by-products of a decoction mash schedule.
I care about flavor development, and the Notcoction is optimized to produce Maillard flavors and reduce time.
just because you boil grains (or do a reduction boil on a Scotch Ale for example) doesn't make it a decoction because you are skipping over reintroduction to enzymatic activity at each step that is characteristic of a decoction mash...
Flavors are developed in a decoction when the short-chain sugars that result from saccharification are heated to boiling with the concentrated amines found in the grist. The Notcoction involves 1) saccharification to produce sugars, followed by 2) boiling of those sugars with the grist.
As soon as you boil those grains and skip an additional rest, you are lautering, in effect.
Exactly! Once you develop Maillard products, you're done, and it's time to lauter. That's the whole point. You develop decoction flavors straighaway, without wasting your time on using the boiled fractions of the grist to take the main mash through steps.
Even if you're already planning to do a step mash, though, the Notcoction will save you time -- instead of saccharifying each decoction separately, you can take the entire grist through a step mash, and then develop Maillard products with the reducing sugars that result.
So, just to avoid further confusion, here is a schematic of traditional and simplified decoctions:
Traditional:
0) Mash in the entire grist
1) Remove a fraction and protein rest and saccharify it
2) Boil the fraction
3) Return the fraction to the main mash. If the main mash is still at saccharification temperatures, saccharify whatever starches you've released by boiling. If you're on a mash-out decoction, then those solubilized starches will not be converted.
4) Go to 1) 0-2 more times.
5) Lauter
Simplified
0) Mash in the entire grist
1) Saccharify the entire grist
2) Boil fractions of the grist to produce your desired Maillard products
3) Return boiled fractions to the main mash if you believe your malt was not well-modified and there was significant starch solubilized by the boil. This will convert all the solubilized starches (If there were any to begin with)
4) Lauter
If it still seems confusing, check out this thread describing it in greater detail:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/simplified-decoction-296152/