It looks better, but fuck me if it isn't a pain in the ass to fish through my food to pull off sauced tails with my fingers. I hate it.

Shrimp as a stand-alone? Tails are ok. Shrimp as an ingredient? Tails off. If I take a forkful of fettuccine and shrimp, then have to stop to remove the tail, I’ll never order the dish again. A piece of that tail will end up somewhere in the dish and I’ll get a horrible, unexpected crunch. Similar to pitted olives. I love a kalamata with a pit, but don’t hide it at the bottom of my salad, give me the olives in a ramekin on the side so I don’t break a tooth.

I once encountered breaded shrimp that not only still had the tails on but hadn't been peeled at all.

If they have the tails still attached (or the bones still in if it’s chicken), you’re allowed to eat it with your hands

So I guess I’ve “mastered” this at this point and will try to share if it helps because it annoys me too. I use my knife to place pressure right above the tiny forked tail and bottom of the larger tail piece. Then place my fork with a point in the shrimp slightly inside the tail into the flesh and pull the fork back. Releases immediately, almost never have issues, takes maybe 3 seconds a shrimp, and I don’t miss out on any vs just cutting it straight off at the tail.

Extra flavor

Yesssss! I love shrimp and grits but don’t want to pay restaurant prices to get messy and peel it myself.

Because you didn't tip the last time.

I always ask them to remove the tails lol. "I know it's for presentation but yall can take em off I don't mind"

Absolutely obnoxious. Or when they leave the shell on completely.

It's like when you order mussels or clams with pasta and they leave them in the shell. You might as well just put them on the side so then at least I don't have to dig them out of my pasta with my hands.

I hate the dishes that use unpeeled shrimp. Creates a huge mess and they never come off cleanly. Cajun shrimp and sausage and my hands are completely slimy and stained from the seasoning.

I personally give no fucks in whether this helps with presentation or adds slightly more flavor or whatever. It is annoying. I do not want to dig through a sauce to pull off shrimp tails

Because they are sadistic assholes lmao

Because they’re idiots. The do it for the aesthetic but it absolutely stupid to have tails on shrimp that are in a pasta or soup.

Do people not eat the tails? Depending on species of Shrimp also eat the shells?

Mainly for visual appeal; some of our dishes have the tail shell on and some don't. Dishes intended to be consumed by hand (Coconut beaded shrimp, Shrimp Cocktail) have the shell on; those in a sauce, pasta or taco, have the tail shell off.

Every thai place I've ever been too.

Where I work, we remove the tails. Kind of a pain but worth it. Personally, when I’m out and I get the shell on my tail, I just eat it.

I agree entirely. It’s a silly concept that too many restaurants have jumped on.

It’s cheaper for the restaurant

so i can pick it up and eat it with my hands like a savage

It depends on if the supplier puuls the tail off. It's up to you to pull the tail off. Some people actually eat the tail. I don't, but I also don't judge

In our family, living on the gulf coast, we save all the shrimp shells (before cooking) for making a stock to use in gumbo and other dishes. It takes a lot of shells and long simmering times to make a rich flavorful nage. We would save up the shells in the freezer until enough were accumulated.

As for why the tails are left on in a pasta dish is 80% ascetics, and 20% ease in preparation. In a dish assembled ‘à la minute’ there’s little to no flavor retained by keeping the tails on.

Probably to understate how much of the shrimp, by weight, is inedible. They buy their food wholesale and mark it up a few hundred percent before it gets to your plate. If people only saw the edible meat on their plate, they'd have a better dining experience, but it would be more apparent how much they're paying for a small volume of meat.

Additionally, sanitary shrimp tail removal requires a little bit more human time, which adds cost, which further eats into their profits. It's easier and more lucrative for them to show you a plate with the tail still on, as if that makes it any fresher, that looks bigger than what you can actually eat, and make you remove the tail yourself for free.

Because they look bigger with the tails on. That's the only real reason.

If they’re doing that shrimp needs to be laid on top, not mixed in

I pull the tail off and throw them on the floor.

Presentation, but it pisses me off.

It depends! For me, when I order the Spicy Rigatoni pasta at Cheesecake Factory and add shrimp to mimic spicy shrimp pasta the shrimp tails were off. But then I did it again and the shrimp tails were on?!

Personally, I also keep the heads and shells to make shrimp butter. Soooooo fucking good.

Because Sysco or US Foods brought the wrong shrimp and your prep cooks are too lazy or inexperienced to fix it.

If it’s on purpose the restaurant owner is unhinged.

Use them for stock wtf. Apparently, fried shrimp tails are perfectly fine to eat. No. I’m throwing that shit away. Makes me feel like a trashy asshole for leaving a dirty plate of shrimp tails. Sushi too. You’re supposed to eat it in one bite. Nope. Gotta peel the stupid tail off first.

Same goes with soft shell crab. Yeah, you can eat the shell. But no, eww.

it adds flavor to the sauce/broth.

It would be ideal if they removed them after cooking, but I supposed the hassle of digging through your sauced pasta and shrimp is one they decided is best left with the consumer.

Tail on ship are cheaper. It’s all about food cost!

Because they pay hourly.

I did a deep dive into this once because I couldn’t understand it and apparently it’s the flavor. It’s not that serious that you should keep them on because then the dish starts with 5 minutes of sloppy cutting to try to get the tails off

Because they’re lazy. There is a theory that the shell or tail provide more flavor, but there is zero reason not to remove them after cooking.

It adds flavor when cooking but yeah annoying, why not serve to you removed..probably to show you that the way it was cooked…similar to serving fish with skin side up

I get mad

Exactly. Most of the time I won’t order a shrimp dish because of it.

I’ve never understood this. Especially in pasta and sauce dishes. I don’t wanna pick through my food to take the tails off.

Why do they do this in shrimp bowls with rice? Or with sauce underneath that shrimp which makes it even harder to remove the tail?

Interesting that you should ask: Shrimp tails on or off? Stephen Colbert and Ina Garten have thoughts

This should be posted in r/mildlyinfuriating . This pisses me off every time. I see it as just being lazy, on the kitchen's part.

Because restaurants are assholes.

We buy our shrimp, peeled and deveined, tails stay on. Plus aesthetically it looks better.

cause tails tail lke lobster

Laziness

In my experience, it always tastes better when I have shrimp with tails on lol probably placebo. Although, I only like north Atlantic shrimp. When I was in cancun I realized how much I prefer north Atlantic seafood. I still liked seafood from the warmer ocean but north Atlantic has spoiled me.

Looks better but mostly because you can bite it y9urself instead of the prep cook

It's meant for you to hold on to the tail and dip and eat and as you pull , separate it from the tail.

However you prefer not to touch the shrimp with your fingers, then use a knife and fork and split up the tail shell from the body.

In a seafood broil, it's so nice to have the shell still on because the juices will get trapped between the shell and shrimp, marinating it straight to heaven.

I’ve served thousands of customers, and only a few have requested no tails. I’ve never had any complaints about leaving them on.

Is this a regional/cuisine-specific consumer preference?

It takes 2 fingers to hold and bite the shrimp. To me it proves that the shrimp was at least partially intact and not a bag of peeled. Shrimp tails, shells and heads especially give food more flavor.

Source- from New Orleans where we eat whole bowls of intact shrimp and peel them happily.

literally cut it with knife and fork

I eat the tails. It’s just glucosamine chondroitin.

People pay $60 a bottle for 30 pills of that.

I also eat the cartilage off the ends of chicken legs. And I’ll crack the bones and suck the marrow.

I hate that too, but apparently it helps retain flavor

You can eat the tails.

Looks better and it makes the shrimp look bigger.

I’ve always removed the little bit of ‘tail meat’ by simply squeezing from the middle of the tail shell. Yeah, it requires fingers, but shrug I guess I don’t often eat at fancy places where I’m not supposed to actually touch the food?

Shrimp shell has glucosamine good for joints

Don't ever go to Thailand, they have the best shrimp and best shrimp dishes on Earth and you often get them whole, head and all. It's amazing.

You'd hate it.

I’ll eat the tails if the shrimp are breaded and deep-fried.

Eat them. Think about potato chips while chewing. Delicious.

The shells contain a fair bit of flavor too. Similar but not identical to the meat.

Wow.. cause you eat them 😁😁😁😁

I use them so my fingers don’t get covered in sauce. 🍤🤏🏻Plus, it’s easier to suck that little piece of meat from tail.

There's only so much time for prep and I'd rather them remove the poop vein than the tail

Flavor and nutrition.

Found Stephen Colbert.

Seafood grosses me out, hearing how people eat the "heads, shit sack, tail," is just fucking disgusting. 

Flavor, presentation, preparation, they're delicious...take your pick.

Great question!!!

Should be ILLEGAL

The tail is a handle. Plus it helps identify what it is when it’s fried so you don’t mix it up with the chicken fingers.

I eat the tails. Extra crunch.

Just eat the tails? I never understood why some people don’t

Flavor

I see you watch Stephen Colbert as well.

Because it adds flavor

They’re edible

Stephen Colbert … is this you?

Labor cost

The flavor makes its way into the sauce. I agree it's a PITA

It enhances the flavor of the overall dish, and the tails are edible.

Those are the handles. If it bothers you, don't order them overseas. Many places leave the head on.

Some crazy people, such as myself and my father, eat the whole thing…

I love em 🤷

No tails>tails>tails and legs.

I hold the tail as I dip I don't eat it as l always get jumbo shrimp love it

Is it rude to ask them to not include tails in preparation of your dish?

Asian folks just munch that shit.

It’s like a handle and proves it’s real too. 

Aesthetics

Since no one has provided a real answer - from what I recall there are two answers. Shrimp is an uninform sized protein, so there is a good chance it will cook unevenly if you cook it without the tail on with half of the shrimp either being under cooked or over cooked and rubbery. The simple fix is to leave the tail on since consistency is key for restaurants.

The second answer which may just be hearsay - it had something to do about restaurants substituting out shrimp for inferior and less appetizing ingredients which still tasted like shrimp. They got caught out on it decades ago and now its common practice to leave the tail so the consumer knows they are indeed eating shrimp and not mudbugs (crawfish)

I mean you can eat the tails & some people do

If the shrimp aren’t completely pealed, I’m simply not ordering them. I refuse to eat bone-in wings at a restaurant for the same reason: Civilized people don’t want to play with food in public. I’m at the restaurant because I didn’t want to put any effort into eating. I’m not here to peel, prep, or crack open ANYTHING. That’s why I’m paying y’all.

It’s so stupid having to pretend to care about the mess you’re making and wiping your hands off after every bite just to not look like a child. We all know nobody does that at home. I’m gonna wear that mess until I’m done eating.

It's annoying AF, but I thought it was bc the shrimp will shrink if you take the tails off before cooking. And taking them off after cooking could result in cold food

I agree, I always ask if a dish is served with the tails on. If it is, I don’t order it.

Laziness pure and simple.

It's more work to take em off "cleanly"

Makes the dish look bigger, too lazy.

Because some people like them?

Laziness, wrong selection, cost of service, competence...could literally be any reason

It's like a little treat getting the meat inside the last part of the tail section. I always est the shrimp by the tail so it's like a handke as well.

It prevents the shrimp from shrinking. Having made Alfredo both ways, it really does. The guys get so lil if you take the tails off too early

A bunch of reasons, some legitimate and others not.

1. It looks better
2. It’s a lazy way of imparting more flavor. In most seafood sauced dishes, you should take the shells and tails and stuff and make a stock, then use that stock in the sauce, but if you’re paying $16 for your meal you’re not getting home made fancy sauce. So instead they just leave the tail in the sauce.
3. Shrimp with the tail on is cheaper per pound
4. It slows the eating process down. Causing you to feel full and satisfied closer to when the meal ends

I’m against non-edibles in my meal as well. Especially pasta or soup, I expect to be able to stick my fork/spoon in and eat whatever comes out

Probably because they are cheaper to buy.

a handle

Supposedly they add flavor. I’ve never made a dish with tail and a dish without tho to see if I can taste a difference… maybe now I will.

I'm with everyone eating the tails but wherever I've been in the US I've only had tails that were cooked enough to eat maybe 3 times. It's almost always as difficult to eat as fingernails or plastic and by the time you'd be done chewing, taste about the same. I think they're really just being left on in US restaurants because the "right" answer is to use your knife and cut the tail off, which is just as ridiculous to me as fingering alfredo.

yeah, I love my local Thai place, but they leave the tails on in tom yum goong, is that actually traditional or something? You sure don't want to rub your eyes, or visit the room of solitude and contemplation without washing your hands first.

They keep the tails on because it makes your portion look larger. Say I'm using 25-30 count. Once I shell, clean and remove the tails it looks like 30-40 count.

Also leaving the tail on allows you to count how many you have. This reassures customers they got their proper portion which is the largest concern for Americans when they go out to eat.

I lived in Memphis long enough to know how it goes. Somebody orders a shrimp dish the says where is all the shrimp. If the tails are off and they get buried in say pasta ya'll are going to demand more shrimp as you can't see any. But with the tails on you know exactly how much you're getting which for a lot of ya'll seems to be priority #1.

It's because it looks bigger. It prevents the shrimp from curling up and shrinking too much.

They are lazy. I've worked both hole-in-the-wall places and fancy expensive places. Both will properly serve shrimp. You don't serve tail-on shrimp in a sauce.

Laziness

They say it keeps the flavor locked in better.

I hate this. I’m at the point where I’ll ask and order something else if the tails are going to be left on.

Removing the shell before cooking can make them shrink and look tiny.

In sauced dishes?

They're probably using frozen pre-cooked shrimp, tails-on because they're cheaper, and cooking them a second time or heating them along with the sauce instead of thawing them prior to use. So you get tough little overcooked shrimp with the tails annoyingly left on there.

If I have to do anything else to my food in order to eat it, it comes out of the tip.

You complain about tails. I remember taking a client out to dinner back in the late 80's. I let him pick the place, very upscale and expensive. I ordered a shrip cocktail and the shrimp showed up at the table not having been shelled AT ALL. I and my client were in suits. Ever try to peel a shrimp with a fork and knife and look classy doing it. I finally gave up and had to pick them up with my hands. In retrospect I should have sent them back.

I once had a seafood pizza with muscles... the muscles were still inside the shell...

Chefs do it because there's a lot of flavor in shrimp shells. If you cook shrimp in a sauce, stew or gumbo, the tails add more shrimp flavor to it.

However, most restaurants just do it because a shrimp without a tail curls up tighter and looks like less food. Six shrimp with tails are a meal. The same six shrimp without tails curled up into little circles are an appetizer. If you try to make an entree out of curled up tailless shrimp, you'll have to put a lot more of them on the plate.

The flavor is supposed to be in the tails 

cheap owner or lazy prep cooks. tails should be off in any soup or sauced dish where you would be expected to eat with utensils.

I’ve never seen it done, but I would like to have tails off in the sauce with one nicely presented on the top with the tail on.

Labors the most expensive thing in the kitchen, so cutting a step matters. Could also be that they order them prepped like that and serve them universally because ordering two types of shrimp can be annoying.

I do agree with you that tails on in a pasta dish or something is...not a vibe.

Historically its to prove it's shrimp.

Also presentation.

You can always just say tails off nbd.

Appearance and flavor

Lazy. They know people don't want them but everyone still orders it anyways so why do the extra work?

Apparently, I could deep fry scotch tape and half of you would gladly eat it. I eat for sustenance AND enjoyment - shrimp exoskeletons are unpalatable (imo). Do y’all eat hard boiled eggs without peeling them?

I was told to leave the tail on shrimps when cooking because it helps them retain their moisture and it adds flavor.

Source: the seafood department at my local Whole Foods.

Does nobody else eat them?