Flat fronts with cuffs?

[betterhands]

what about pleats with no cuffs? just ordered 2 pair like that, and the sales lady wanted make sure i was sure

any of you guys have pleated pants without cuffs?

 

[rkw5000]

Originally Posted by sweisman

Love the look. Just did it for the first time on some flannels and it looks great.


+1

 

[betterhands]

Originally Posted by betterhands

what about pleats with no cuffs? just ordered 2 pair like that, and the sales lady wanted make sure i was sure

any of you guys have pleated pants without cuffs?
anyone? or am i alone on this one?

 

[Bradford]

Originally Posted by betterhands

what about pleats with no cuffs? just ordered 2 pair like that, and the sales lady wanted make sure i was sure

any of you guys have pleated pants without cuffs?

Only when I accidentally buy a pair that don't have enough material to be cuffed.

 

[jeskali]

i always cuff all of my suit pants. I feel that non-cuffed pants look very pedestrian, like you're a cop or something. feel the same way about wearing black shoes with a dark blue suit.

 

[betterhands]

well i was initially looking for plain front w/out cuffs, but i fell in love with the patterns on 2 pairs of pants that only came pleated. i still went with the no cuffs though and must profess to not really knowing the rule till the salesperson brought it up.

 

[amiestilo]

Originally Posted by spectre

I'm wondering how many of you like the flat front with cuff look.

For me it depends on the fabric weight and type of style you're aiming at, aka: what looks good on you. I have flat fronts (and pleats for that matter) with and without cuffs.

I think this is actually a very valid and interesting (albeit subjective) question and don't understand why it's dismissed so frequently.

 

[GeorgePaul]

Originally Posted by spectre

I'm just wondering if you think they look just as nice, that's all.
I do.

 

[Faded501s]

I think pleats without cuffs is more balanced than than flats with cuffs but I can't tell you why it seems that way to me. Cuffed flat-fronts just seem more "off" than un-cuffed pleats. Then again, the only pants I cuff are suit pants which are always pleated. as are most of my pants.

 

[Gene22]

How critical are all of these "rules" anyway? A lot of what I see here as a newb is people throwing rules back and forth at each other. I would suspect that guidelines would always be great, but to have something set in stone would be pretty limiting.

~ Graham

 

[Faded501s]

^^^ I think you figured it out. The "rules" are really just guidelines. It is understanding why they are rules is what is important so that you can consciously decide how to dress. Many of the rules are based on "tradition" or culture while other (more important IMHO) rules revolve around physique and silhouette.

2 examples:

I was just reading an article or post about pocket squares. It seems that the consensus on this forum, and in most parts, is that a pocket square should compliment (not match) a color in your shirt, tie or jacket. Well this article stated that (the British I believe) look down on this practice and that a PS should be thrown in your pocket randomly; as in reaching into a drawer blindfolded and using whatever you grab, as in "I put no thought into this." So taking all of this into account, if we are in a non-British (if that's who was cited) environment and decide to wear a random "non-complimentary" pocket square anyway...well at least we knew the "rules" and broke them. A lot of it comes down to what your goals and mood are and whether you want to blend/conform or draw attention to yourself. Generally I think most here strive for an element of sprezzatura (a word that even after more than a year here I can't spell without Googling it)

Another example would be a 5' man wearing a 6/2 double breasted suit with a bold window pane. Both of these choices "widen" the body (as opposed to elongating it) and while it can be done, these are not the best choices. A better choice (by conventional wisdom anyway) would be a single breasted suit with pinstripes. These are the rules that are more "set in stone" if one is overly short/tall or thin/wide.

My take on cuffs/no cuffs and pleats/no pleats is this. Pleats make a wide person wider and flat fronts tend to be more slimming. Cuffs tend to "even out" pleats, especially as most pleated pants are also tapered. Flat-fronts are generally not as tapered (looking anyway) and don't need to be "evened out" and therefore do not need cuffs. Cuffs break the vertical line which is not good for shorter men. The "purpose" of cuffs (outside of stylistic preferences) is to weigh the pant leg down so that it drapes properly and doesn't flail around while walking. I'm pretty slim but have a very arched back and my gut sticks out. Flat-fronts look kind of odd to me on my body so I avoid them. I'm on the shorter side so avoid cuffs except when in a suit (cuffs seem more formal to me and a suit without cuffed pants seems too casual).

But again, I think you hit the nail on the head...everyone has their opinion and it's not that any particular one is "right" or "wrong" but what works for you in your particular situation and mood.

 

[Sublime_Law]

I don't cuff my flat front pants but some people do, I think cuffs are truly a personal preference. The new GQ talks about the comeback of cuffs

 

[mylesmyles]

the question should not be if you cuff your flat fronts or not (i do), but the size of the cuff.

I've been going with 1 5/8 inches, which i feel is substantive without being too wide.

 

[Gene22]

Originally Posted by Faded501s

Many of the rules are based on "tradition" or culture while other (more important IMHO) rules revolve around physique and silhouette.
That's precisely what I mean, the more important ones should be about how a cut or a collar will look on someone. Not what some pompous dandy did a century and a half ago and is now the only thing accepted as a rule. ~ Graham

 

[tazmaniac]

Bo'sun: Still the guns and stow 'em, Signal the men, set the flags and make good to clear port.
Elizabeth: Wait! You have to take me to shore. According to the Code of the Order of the Brethren...
Barbossa: First, your return to shore was not part of our negotiations nor our agreement so I must do nothing. And secondly, you must be a pirate for the pirate's code to apply and you're not. And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner .