http://www.recfoodcooking.com
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote:
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com

It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.

(Honestly, I don't think I've ever grilled shrimp with the shells on,
but I've had them that way, and they were as good as without. Still, I
almost always serve hot shrimp shelled.)

Serene

--
"I tend to come down on the side of autonomy. Once people are grown up,
I believe they have the right to go to hell in the handbasket of their
choosing." -- Pat Kight, on alt.polyamory

Serene Vannoy wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.

It's yours ;-)

>
> (Honestly, I don't think I've ever grilled shrimp with the shells on,
> but I've had them that way, and they were as good as without. Still, I
> almost always serve hot shrimp shelled.)

I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might take
a few minutes extra to remove the shells before serving, but to me it's
worth it.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote on Sat, 15 May 2010 17:23:17 +0200:

> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

Too few reponses yet to see if there is a majority opinion. I'm quite
convinced myself that shell-on is best for cooking with any form of
radiant heat but for any other type of shrimp cooking, I don't want to
dismember the things before eating. I don't mind too much eating an
*occasional* tail but you can keep the rest of the shell for Norfolk
sauce.
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

James Silverton wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote on Sat, 15 May 2010 17:23:17 +0200:
>
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com

> Too few reponses yet to see if there is a majority opinion. I'm quite
> convinced myself that shell-on is best for cooking with any form of
> radiant heat but for any other type of shrimp cooking, I don't want to
> dismember the things before eating. I don't mind too much eating an
> *occasional* tail but you can keep the rest of the shell for Norfolk
> sauce.

Maybe I've read it somewhere, maybe it's because I think meat
tastes better bone in and I'm thinking that it's true with shrimp/shells,
but the fact is, I like my shrimp grilled without the shells. I want the
lemon/etc. sauce on my shrimp, not peeled off with the shells when
I eat them.

nancy

On 2010-05-15 08:36:32 -0700, ChattyCathy said:

> Serene Vannoy wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>
>> It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.
>
> It's yours ;-)
>
>>
>> (Honestly, I don't think I've ever grilled shrimp with the shells on,
>> but I've had them that way, and they were as good as without. Still, I
>> almost always serve hot shrimp shelled.)
>
> I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might take
> a few minutes extra to remove the shells before serving, but to me it's
> worth it.

The best shrimp I've ever had (Itaparica Island off the coast of
Brazil) had their jackets on. They were absolutely unbelievable. Also,
of course, I assume they were plotting their future an hour before we
ate them.

gtr wrote on Sat, 15 May 2010 08:53:06 -0700:

>> Serene Vannoy wrote:
>>
>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>
>>> It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.
>>
>> It's yours ;-)
>>
>>> (Honestly, I don't think I've ever grilled shrimp with the
>>> shells on, but I've had them that way, and they were as good
>>> as without. Still, I almost always serve hot shrimp
>>> shelled.)
>>
>> I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might
>> take a few minutes extra to remove the shells before
>> serving, but to me it's worth it.

I think shell-on for grilling tends to prevent overcooking. The
production of a red color is a very good indicator that the shrimp
inside will be properly cooked. I don't think marinades add too much to
grilled shrimp except that a little is transferred when you take the
shells off with your fingers.

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Nancy Young wrote:


> Maybe I've read it somewhere, maybe it's because I think meat
> tastes better bone in and I'm thinking that it's true with
> shrimp/shells,
> but the fact is, I like my shrimp grilled without the shells. I want
> the lemon/etc. sauce on my shrimp, not peeled off with the shells when
> I eat them.

That's what I thought too, until a Portuguese friend of mine who once
owned (and was also a chef at) a restaurant in Mozambique showed me how
he did it...

Shrimp need to have the shells 'split' to remove the vein/poop
sac/whatever, right? He showed me how to take it a small step further
by 'butterflying' them i.e. after removing the vein, snip/slice halfway
into the (tail?) flesh too and flatten them. Once that is done the
marinade etc. still soaks through. Yummy. And if the shrimp are
cooked 'just right' the shells just slip off; if they're overdone
that's when one has a shell-removal-problem. <g>
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On May 15, 8:51 am, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>
> Maybe I've read it somewhere, maybe it's because I think meat
> tastes better bone in and I'm thinking that it's true with shrimp/shells,
> but the fact is, I like my shrimp grilled without the shells. I want the
> lemon/etc. sauce on my shrimp, not peeled off with the shells when
> I eat them.
>
I'm with those who believe the shrimp taste better if cooked shell
on. What I do with a couple of sauce-y shrimp recipes to cope with
the problem you describe is: wrap the shrimp in foil, cook in hot
oven a few minutes until just done, unwrap, let cool a little, peel,
put in sauce before serving just to reheat. I got that approach from
an old Diana Kennedy shrimp in adobo recipe, I believe, and it
works. -aem

James Silverton wrote:

> I think shell-on for grilling tends to prevent overcooking. The
> production of a red color is a very good indicator that the shrimp
> inside will be properly cooked. I don't think marinades add too much to
> grilled shrimp except that a little is transferred when you take the
> shells off with your fingers.

I prefer to cook them with the shell on. I get the larger size that are
already split and deveined. I marinate them with a olive oil, lemon (or
lime) juice, ketchup, hot sauce, lots of crushed garlic, salt pepper,
chopped parsley and Worcestershire sauce. When I do them in the shell I
marinate them longer, but not long enough for the marinade to start
cooking them.

The shell colour change is a good way to tell if they are cooked, along
with the tails curling. You want to take them off before they curl too
much because they will be overcooked.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com

I had to reply MCNL. It never occurred to me to leave the shells on.

aem wrote:
> On May 15, 8:51 am, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>>
>> Maybe I've read it somewhere, maybe it's because I think meat
>> tastes better bone in and I'm thinking that it's true with
>> shrimp/shells, but the fact is, I like my shrimp grilled without the
>> shells. I want the lemon/etc. sauce on my shrimp, not peeled off
>> with the shells when
>> I eat them.
>>
> I'm with those who believe the shrimp taste better if cooked shell
> on. What I do with a couple of sauce-y shrimp recipes to cope with
> the problem you describe is: wrap the shrimp in foil, cook in hot
> oven a few minutes until just done, unwrap, let cool a little, peel,
> put in sauce before serving just to reheat. I got that approach from
> an old Diana Kennedy shrimp in adobo recipe, I believe, and it
> works.

That's a great idea, I'll remember that. I don't eat shrimp very often,
but more in the summer.

nancy

On Sat, 15 May 2010 17:36:32 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

> I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might take
> a few minutes extra to remove the shells before serving, but to me it's
> worth it.

I don't over cook my shrimp, so I can do it w/o the shells. But if
I'm too lazy to take the shells off before cooking them, I just eat
them shells and all because I think you lose a lot of good grilling
flavor when you remove the shells after cooking.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

sf wrote:

> On Sat, 15 May 2010 17:36:32 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>> I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might
>> take a few minutes extra to remove the shells before serving, but to
>> me it's worth it.
>
> I don't over cook my shrimp, so I can do it w/o the shells. But if
> I'm too lazy to take the shells off before cooking them, I just eat
> them shells and all because I think you lose a lot of good grilling
> flavor when you remove the shells after cooking.
>
Do you eat fish bones too? (Not the canned fish ones that can be mushed
with a fork, but those from fresh/frozen fish).
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:09:39 -0400, "Cheryl" >
wrote:
>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
> > http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> I had to reply MCNL. It never occurred to me to leave the shells on.

<laugh!> Where have you been Cheryl? That topic comes up regularly
here.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 15 May 2010 20:16:15 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

> Do you eat fish bones too? (Not the canned fish ones that can be mushed
> with a fork, but those from fresh/frozen fish).

Nope, but I don't like fish in general. Try eating shrimp shells
sometime, you might like it.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

Shrimp may taste better cooked with the shells on but they're a pain to peel
when they're hot. I would rather eat them hot than spend time peeling and
by the time I get to the last ones they're cold.

Ms P

Ms wrote on Sat, 15 May 2010 14:04:56 -0500:


> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy

> Shrimp may taste better cooked with the shells on but they're a pain
> to peel when they're hot. I would rather eat them hot than spend time
> peeling and by the time I get to the last ones
> they're cold.

It does not take long for the shrimp to cool to allow use of fingers but
it really is not difficult for one person to shell their serving with a
knife and fork. Four large ("Jumbo" or whatever) shrimp is enough for
one.
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Sat, 15 May 2010 08:28:14 -0700, Serene Vannoy wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.
>
> (Honestly, I don't think I've ever grilled shrimp with the shells on,
> but I've had them that way, and they were as good as without. Still, I
> almost always serve hot shrimp shelled.)

Unless it's shrimp cocktail/boiled shrimp, a diner should not be
expected to shell shrimp at the table.

But they are better with the shell on. With smaller shrimp above
40, I often eat the shell if cooked right. It's common in Asian
cooking to eat the shells (and even the heads).

-sw

On Sat, 15 May 2010 11:51:58 -0400, Nancy Young wrote:

> Maybe I've read it somewhere, maybe it's because I think meat
> tastes better bone in and I'm thinking that it's true with shrimp/shells,
> but the fact is, I like my shrimp grilled without the shells. I want the
> lemon/etc. sauce on my shrimp, not peeled off with the shells when
> I eat them.

I remember once at the Santa Cruz pier, we were served fried shrimp
with the shell on. These were large 18-21ct count shrimp. We took
it back to the counter and the fry cook looked at them and said
that's how they're supposed to be. We were dumbfounded.

We peeled them and ate them, then saw a manager looking guy come in
(it was between lunch and dinner) and we showed him the fried
shells, told him what the fry cook told us, and we explained to him
that, "We're not this stupid".

Minutes later the fry cook hastily and purposely walked out in his
street clothes and the manager comped the meals and gave us another
pitcher of beer.

It was Scontriano's Dolphin Restaurant (AKA "The Restaurant at The
End of the Pier")

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
news
> On Sat, 15 May 2010 08:28:14 -0700, Serene Vannoy wrote:
>
> But they are better with the shell on. With smaller shrimp above
> 40, I often eat the shell if cooked right. It's common in Asian
> cooking to eat the shells (and even the heads).


I tried shrimp with the shells on once in a Chinese restaurant and I didn't
like them that way.

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:

> http://www.recfoodcooking.com

I always remove the shells from shrimp before cooking them, regardless
of how I cook them. It's a pain in the ass to remove the shells after
cooking and it makes for messy and inconvenient eating.

I tried, just once, cooking shrimp in the shells per advice I got here
and found no difference in flavor and the texture was tougher because
they took longer to cook in the shells.

Never again. <g>

The secret to delicious shelled shrimp is to simply not overcook them
which is easy to do.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
"James Silverton" > wrote:

> gtr wrote on Sat, 15 May 2010 08:53:06 -0700:
>
> >> Serene Vannoy wrote:
> >>
> >>> ChattyCathy wrote:
> >>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> >>>
> >>> It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.
> >>
> >> It's yours ;-)
> >>
> >>> (Honestly, I don't think I've ever grilled shrimp with the
> >>> shells on, but I've had them that way, and they were as good
> >>> as without. Still, I almost always serve hot shrimp
> >>> shelled.)
> >>
> >> I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might
> >> take a few minutes extra to remove the shells before
> >> serving, but to me it's worth it.
>
> I think shell-on for grilling tends to prevent overcooking. The
> production of a red color is a very good indicator that the shrimp
> inside will be properly cooked. I don't think marinades add too much to
> grilled shrimp except that a little is transferred when you take the
> shells off with your fingers.

Shrimp turn pink/red just fine without the damned shells in the way. <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sat, 15 May 2010 17:36:32 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
> > I'm one of the 'keep the shells on while cooking' people; it might take
> > a few minutes extra to remove the shells before serving, but to me it's
> > worth it.
>
> I don't over cook my shrimp, so I can do it w/o the shells. But if
> I'm too lazy to take the shells off before cooking them, I just eat
> them shells and all because I think you lose a lot of good grilling
> flavor when you remove the shells after cooking.

<shudder> How can anyone eat shrimp shells? Sorry, but that texture
would be a total turnoff. I can't even stand it if I missed a piece of
shell when I was cleaning them and it ends up in my mouth.

But, to each her own! Wertz eats them with the shell on too... ;-/
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
"l, not -l" > wrote:

> On 15-May-2010, Serene Vannoy > wrote:
>
> > ChattyCathy wrote:
> > > http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> >
> > It's kitchen-cleaning day, so I'll take the mop.
>
> Tomorrow is kitchen cleaning day here; no mops though. iRobot Scooba cleans
> my kitchen and utility room floors. Maybe I'll eat shrimp while it does its
> thing. ;-)

Does the Scooba do a good job? I've considered getting one.
If nothing else, it'd amuse the cats. <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

On Sat, 15 May 2010 20:26:56 -0400, Cheryl wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> news
>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 08:28:14 -0700, Serene Vannoy wrote:
>>
>> But they are better with the shell on. With smaller shrimp above
>> 40, I often eat the shell if cooked right. It's common in Asian
>> cooking to eat the shells (and even the heads).
>
> I tried shrimp with the shells on once in a Chinese restaurant and I didn't
> like them that way.

It really depends on how they're cooked and how big they are. Salt
and pepper whole shrimp (with heads), dusted with cornstarch then
stir-fried in a lot of oil (deep fried, basically) until they are
really crispy are da bomb.

-sw

Omelet wrote:

> In article >,
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> I always remove the shells from shrimp before cooking them, regardless
> of how I cook them. It's a pain in the ass to remove the shells after
> cooking and it makes for messy and inconvenient eating.
>
> I tried, just once, cooking shrimp in the shells per advice I got here
> and found no difference in flavor and the texture was tougher because
> they took longer to cook in the shells.
>
> Never again. <g>

Each to their own. <g>

>
> The secret to delicious shelled shrimp is to simply not overcook them
> which is easy to do.

Same goes for shrimp in their shells. As I said in another post, if you
cook them "just right" the shells almost fall off by themselves when
done and the shrimp don't have time to "get cold" before eating as some
people have mentioned being a problem for them.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Sqwertz wrote:


> I remember once at the Santa Cruz pier, we were served fried shrimp
> with the shell on. These were large 18-21ct count shrimp. We took
> it back to the counter and the fry cook looked at them and said
> that's how they're supposed to be. We were dumbfounded.
>
> We peeled them and ate them, then saw a manager looking guy come in
> (it was between lunch and dinner) and we showed him the fried
> shells, told him what the fry cook told us, and we explained to him
> that, "We're not this stupid".
>
> Minutes later the fry cook hastily and purposely walked out in his
> street clothes and the manager comped the meals and gave us another
> pitcher of beer.

How odd. Did you not know in advance that they were going to be
cooked/served in the shells? i.e. did the menu/wait staff not make that
clear when you ordered them or something? How did they taste, BTW?
Good, bad or ugly?

FWIW, in my neck of the wood it's accepted as the "norm" to shell shrimp
yourself if you order them cooked/served that way. The wait staff
always supply baskets (or whatever) for the shells, plus finger bowls
and/or those wet-wipes for the "clean-up" afterwards if you choose to
use your fingers to do the shelling. I've also seen plenty of people
manage just fine shelling shrimp with a knife and fork.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:


> > Never again. <g>
>
> Each to their own. <g>

Absolootly! ;-)
>
> >
> > The secret to delicious shelled shrimp is to simply not overcook them
> > which is easy to do.
>
> Same goes for shrimp in their shells. As I said in another post, if you
> cook them "just right" the shells almost fall off by themselves when
> done and the shrimp don't have time to "get cold" before eating as some
> people have mentioned being a problem for them.

I dunno. I find shelling cooked shrimp as I eat them to be messy at the
table I guess. Even mom complained when the Shrimp Scampi at Red
Lobster still had the shells on. I just don't see the point.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:

> FWIW, in my neck of the wood it's accepted as the "norm" to shell shrimp
> yourself if you order them cooked/served that way. The wait staff
> always supply baskets (or whatever) for the shells, plus finger bowls
> and/or those wet-wipes for the "clean-up" afterwards if you choose to
> use your fingers to do the shelling. I've also seen plenty of people
> manage just fine shelling shrimp with a knife and fork.

Our local Chinese restaurant shells the shrimp prior to battering and
deep frying them, but the steamed shrimp on the cold salad bar are "peel
and eat" and served whole, heads on.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
>
>
>> I remember once at the Santa Cruz pier, we were served fried shrimp
>> with the shell on. These were large 18-21ct count shrimp. We took
>> it back to the counter and the fry cook looked at them and said
>> that's how they're supposed to be. We were dumbfounded.

> How odd. Did you not know in advance that they were going to be
> cooked/served in the shells? i.e. did the menu/wait staff not make
> that clear when you ordered them or something? How did they taste,
> BTW? Good, bad or ugly?

Fried shrimp is battered. The problem is, how are you supposed to
eat battered and fried shrimp if the shell is still on. Most people
don't eat the shells. Fried shrimp is not expected to come with the
shell. Here. Heh.

nancy

On Sun, 16 May 2010 07:24:30 -0400, "Nancy Young"
> wrote:

>ChattyCathy wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I remember once at the Santa Cruz pier, we were served fried shrimp
>>> with the shell on. These were large 18-21ct count shrimp. We took
>>> it back to the counter and the fry cook looked at them and said
>>> that's how they're supposed to be. We were dumbfounded.
>
>> How odd. Did you not know in advance that they were going to be
>> cooked/served in the shells? i.e. did the menu/wait staff not make
>> that clear when you ordered them or something? How did they taste,
>> BTW? Good, bad or ugly?
>
>Fried shrimp is battered. The problem is, how are you supposed to
>eat battered and fried shrimp if the shell is still on. Most people
>don't eat the shells. Fried shrimp is not expected to come with the
>shell. Here. Heh.
>
>nancy

Deep fried shrimp should only have the tail... the breading/batter
takes the place of the shell by holding in the moisture... but mostly
breading/batter is to give the illusion of more shrimp.... I never
order breaded/battered shrimp.

People who remove the shells from shrimp before cooking are simply
wasting their money.

On Sun, 16 May 2010 10:32:12 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> I remember once at the Santa Cruz pier, we were served fried shrimp
>> with the shell on. These were large 18-21ct count shrimp. We took
>> it back to the counter and the fry cook looked at them and said
>> that's how they're supposed to be. We were dumbfounded.
>>
>> We peeled them and ate them, then saw a manager looking guy come in
>> (it was between lunch and dinner) and we showed him the fried
>> shells, told him what the fry cook told us, and we explained to him
>> that, "We're not this stupid".
>>
>> Minutes later the fry cook hastily and purposely walked out in his
>> street clothes and the manager comped the meals and gave us another
>> pitcher of beer.
>
> How odd. Did you not know in advance that they were going to be
> cooked/served in the shells? i.e. did the menu/wait staff not make that
> clear when you ordered them or something?

Of course not. When you order fried shrimp, you are to expect
either butterflied (no shell), or shelled and whole. The only shell
left on should be the tail and one rung, if at all.

> How did they taste, BTW?

You had to take off the breading to take off the shell, so they
tasted like unfried shrimp.

> FWIW, in my neck of the wood it's accepted as the "norm" to shell shrimp
> yourself if you order them cooked/served that way. The wait staff
> always supply baskets (or whatever) for the shells, plus finger bowls
> and/or those wet-wipes for the "clean-up" afterwards if you choose to
> use your fingers to do the shelling. I've also seen plenty of people
> manage just fine shelling shrimp with a knife and fork.

That's fine, too. But there is no sense breading and frying shrimp
if the shell needs to be taken off afterwards. Like I said earlier,
it acceptable to serve shrimp cocktail or boiled shrimp like that
(even better is the new EZ Peel shrimp), but not breaded and fried.

-sw

On Sun, 16 May 2010 05:30:24 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

>I dunno. I find shelling cooked shrimp as I eat them to be messy at the
>table I guess. Even mom complained when the Shrimp Scampi at Red
>Lobster still had the shells on. I just don't see the point.

Agreed. If I'm eating out, I *expect* shrimp to be shelled. Why
would I pay them to not shell shrimp? Preparation is part of the
reason I eat out.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf > wrote:

>On Sun, 16 May 2010 05:30:24 -0500, Omelet >

>> I dunno. I find shelling cooked shrimp as I eat them to
>> be messy at the table I guess. Even mom complained when the
>> Shrimp Scampi at Red Lobster still had the shells on. I just
>> don't see the point.

>Agreed. If I'm eating out, I *expect* shrimp to be shelled. Why
>would I pay them to not shell shrimp? Preparation is part of the
>reason I eat out.

I would say the reason is that crustaceans like crab, lobster
and shrimp cook best in their shells, and if the restaurant
shelled them after cooking they would not be warm anymore when
they arrived at your table, or would be reheated.

It does not take more than a couple seconds for a diner to shell a
shrimp using knife and fork; however I didn't always know this.
For years I avoided them thinking it was too much hassle.

Steve

Sqwertz wrote:

> On Sun, 16 May 2010 10:32:12 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> How did they taste, BTW?
>
> You had to take off the breading to take off the shell, so they
> tasted like unfried shrimp.

Ah, didn't realize that they were "breaded" deep fried shrimp. Now I
geddit.


--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sun, 16 May 2010 16:38:32 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 16 May 2010 10:32:12 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>>> How did they taste, BTW?
>>
>> You had to take off the breading to take off the shell, so they
>> tasted like unfried shrimp.
>
>Ah, didn't realize that they were "breaded" deep fried shrimp. Now I
>geddit.

I've never seen unshelled breaded shrimp served at any eatery... at
most they leave the tail on.

On Sun, 16 May 2010 06:50:39 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Sun, 16 May 2010 05:30:24 -0500, Omelet >
>wrote:
>
>>I dunno. I find shelling cooked shrimp as I eat them to be messy at the
>>table I guess. Even mom complained when the Shrimp Scampi at Red
>>Lobster still had the shells on. I just don't see the point.
>
>Agreed. If I'm eating out, I *expect* shrimp to be shelled. Why
>would I pay them to not shell shrimp? Preparation is part of the
>reason I eat out.

Shelled they are not properly prepared. I wouldn't want to pay
restaurant prices for shelled shrimp, means they are cheapo precooked
frozen shrimp.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sun, 16 May 2010 05:30:24 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> >I dunno. I find shelling cooked shrimp as I eat them to be messy at the
> >table I guess. Even mom complained when the Shrimp Scampi at Red
> >Lobster still had the shells on. I just don't see the point.
>
> Agreed. If I'm eating out, I *expect* shrimp to be shelled. Why
> would I pay them to not shell shrimp? Preparation is part of the
> reason I eat out.

Indeed! :-)
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> sf > wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 16 May 2010 05:30:24 -0500, Omelet >
>
> >> I dunno. I find shelling cooked shrimp as I eat them to
> >> be messy at the table I guess. Even mom complained when the
> >> Shrimp Scampi at Red Lobster still had the shells on. I just
> >> don't see the point.
>
> >Agreed. If I'm eating out, I *expect* shrimp to be shelled. Why
> >would I pay them to not shell shrimp? Preparation is part of the
> >reason I eat out.
>
> I would say the reason is that crustaceans like crab, lobster
> and shrimp cook best in their shells, and if the restaurant
> shelled them after cooking they would not be warm anymore when
> they arrived at your table, or would be reheated.
>
> It does not take more than a couple seconds for a diner to shell a
> shrimp using knife and fork; however I didn't always know this.
> For years I avoided them thinking it was too much hassle.
>
> Steve

Ok, so how the hell do you peel a shrimp with a knife and fork?
Sounds like it'd be cold before I could eat it!

I've tried cooking them shell on and shell off, and I see absolutely no
difference in flavor and texture.

But, I am a statistic of one. <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine