Should Chefs Leave Shrimp Tails Intact? Al Roker and Stephen Colbert Weigh In

A debate over shrimp tails has captured the attention of food lovers and television viewers alike, 

thanks to a lively exchange between TODAY co-host Al Roker and The Late Show host Stephen Colbert. 

The discussion, which took place on February 20 during Roker’s appearance on The Late Show, 

centered around whether shrimp tails should be left on or removed when preparing dishes.

While promoting his new cookbook, Al Roker’s Recipes to Live By, which he co-authored with his daughter Courtney Roker Laga, 

Roker found himself at the center of Colbert’s culinary critique. As the two TV personalities chatted about food, cooking techniques, and even green screens, Colbert couldn’t resist pointing out what he saw as a glaring issue in Roker’s recipes—shrimp with the tails left intact.

Colbert Calls Out Shrimp Tails in Roker’s Recipes

As the conversation unfolded, Colbert expressed his admiration for Roker’s cookbook, calling it “a beautiful book.” However, he quickly shifted gears to address what he saw as a shrimp-related faux pas.

“Here’s my problem. Take a look at this,” Colbert said, flipping to a page featuring a shrimp tikka masala recipe. “Shrimp tikka masala. Delicious recipe. Look at those shrimp. Look at that. They still have the tails on the shrimp. What the hell, Al Roker?”

Roker, amused by the critique, grabbed his book and acknowledged that shrimp tails were indeed present in several of his recipes. Holding up the cover of the book, he noted, “In the front, I’ve got tails on these shrimp too!”

Colbert continued his argument by referencing another dish in the book—shrimp and grits—where the tails were also left on. “What the hell is going on?” he asked. “Am I supposed to roll up my sleeves, put on a poncho, and de-tail the shrimp myself?”

The Great Shrimp Tail Debate

Colbert’s passionate stance on the issue didn’t stop there. He compared leaving shrimp tails on to something far less appetizing. “They’re like toenail clippings,” he said, making his case for why he believes chefs should remove them before serving a dish. “Al, what, would you leave a hoof on a burger?”

Roker, however, defended his choice, explaining that the shrimp tail serves a functional purpose in certain dishes. “It’s like a little handle,” he argued, implying that diners can easily hold onto the tail while eating.

The lighthearted debate concluded with both men playfully brandishing their cookbooks at each other, signaling an amusing, albeit unresolved, draw.

Culinary Perspectives on Shrimp Tails

The question of whether to leave shrimp tails on or remove them has long been a topic of discussion in the culinary world. Some chefs prefer to leave the tails on for presentation purposes, as they add a visually appealing element to a dish. Additionally, shrimp tails can enhance flavor when cooking, particularly in broths, soups, or sauces, where they contribute a rich, seafood-infused depth.

On the other hand, critics of this practice, like Colbert, argue that tails create an inconvenience for diners, who are forced to remove them mid-meal. Some also find them unnecessary in dishes where shrimp are meant to be eaten with a fork and knife rather than picked up by hand.

A Matter of Personal Preference

Ultimately, whether shrimp tails should be left intact comes down to personal preference and the specific dish being prepared. Some diners appreciate the aesthetic and functional aspects of keeping the tails on, while others find it an unnecessary hassle.

While Roker and Colbert’s debate may not have definitively settled the matter, it certainly sparked a lively discussion among food enthusiasts. Whether you’re Team Tail-On or firmly in the Tail-Off camp, one thing remains clear—shrimp is delicious, no matter how it’s served.

Follow us to see more useful information, as well as to give us more motivation to update more useful information for you.