Shrimp: tails or no tails

Tails or no tails?


  • Total voters
    44

Raiderboost

2023 Victory Cup Participant
Albatross 2024 Club
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
8,783
Reaction score
12,264
Location
Georgetown, Tx
Handicap
5.5
Decided to star this thread after getting the Shrimp Alfredo tonight at my club for takeout.

If you are getting a shrimp entree in which it is a component such as Shrimp Alfredo, Shrimp and Grits, Scampi, etc, do you want the tails attached or not?

Not talking about Grilled or jumbo shrimp that are the stand alone feature of the dish or side to a steak or something.
 
As you’ve described, take ‘em off.

Grilled, they stay on.

Shrimp tempura, I eat the whole thing.
 
I'm easy. If they are in a dish though, and not the main thing, I think it's better they have the tail off. Doesnt' bother me though if they are left on.
 
No tail for a component of the dish.

If the shrimp is the main course then it stays.
 
Got to be off in my mind. I find it annoying to have to remove the tails to eat my meal. I know the shells add flavor but remove them before cooking so leave them in the dish while cooking and remove before serving.
 
I don’t want the tails on if I am in a restaurant unless they are grilled
 
No tail for a component of the dish.

If the shrimp is the main course then it stays.
This is where I’m at. The Shrimp in the Shrimp Alfredo had them on. It’s not a huge deal but it’s just easier when they aren’t on with a dish like that. I also got shrimp fried rice somewhere a few weeks back and they were on those. That first bite was weird feeling the crunchy tail.
 
Last edited:
Deveined is all I care about.
 
In the dish? No tails.

Grilled, on a skewer? No tails.

Separate portion, not prepared with sauce? Tail on.

Jumbo, wrapped in bacon, stuffed with crab meat? Leave the tail on so I have something to hold on to 😂
 
If they're a component in a dish, get that ish off of there. I don't want to be picking them out and getting sauce and other stuff all over my fingers to pick off the tails that should've been removed in the first place.

And don't even get me started on peel and eat shrimp. Just like crab legs, the return on effort isn't worth it.
 
If they are in a dish I am expected to eat with cutlery then no. Hands yes. voted no based on the question though. But absolutely whole shrimp head and all when it can be done.
 
The only time I want a tail on a shrimp is when I need it to be a handle.
 
At least your not eating them!
 
Tails on or removed in a dish doesn't really bother me; what does bother me is them not being de-veined. Nothing worse then eating a pound of steamed shrimp and I have to clean out the poop track.
 
I'd say that I prefer tails off if it's a component to the dish, but it doesn't bother me to have to remove them.
 
Seems like everyone is in agreement here. That might be a first for a poll haha.
 
Depends on the dish. In your case, definitely no tails. Breaded & fried, with tails. Boiled, with tails. All depends 😉
 
If they're in a dish at all, off.
 
I just call it lazy by the restaurant to not remove the tails on dishes, like shrimp and grits. A chef in Charleston SC told me, we leave them on for a pretty presentation. I said well it might look pretty but the customers eating the dish already know what a shrimp looks like and its just a nuisance to have to cut up a shrimp to remove the tail in a dish. (n) I also noted, that this dish is supposed to have shrimp larger than 16/20 ( bigger the better) (y)and with a tail removed the shrimp' left in the dish is now rather small and hidden in the grits or any other dish :(.

Fried shrimp or peel and eat sure leave the tails on, but normally these are your larger shrimp
 
Last edited:
I don't like shrimp... :oops:
Prepare Season 7 GIF by Game of Thrones
 
Back
Top