"SF Approved" Items You Can't Get Behind

Originally Posted by UrbanComposition

Click to expand...

But I only have Maker's Mark in the house

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

Originally Posted by Cary Grant

Click to expand...

I just got an odd PM from Fritzl- wondering if he's a) on the sauce or b) account hacked?

Oh noes! I hope he is OK - the last thing we need is another bris-like descent into madness.

OM NOM NOM NOM

Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH

Click to expand...

Loafers. I HATE loafers.

+10000! I've never understood the massive loafer love on both SF and AAAC. There are very few loafers that look even vaguely elegant and all but the absolute best are outshined by even a vaguely decent oxford or monkstrap.

Other items I can't get behind:

Split-toed shoes
Sack jackets
Wearing shoes without socks
Calling suspenders "braces" (they don't "brace" your pants, they "suspend" them)
Shell cordovan shoes
Ventless jackets
Chukka boots
Chunky Central European shoes
Virtually all manifestations of sprezzatura
The four-in-hand knot (I mean, really, why do you want to make yourself look like a real estate agent/car salesman/high-end restaurant waiter/police detective/other person who is required to wear a tie as part of a uniform?)

Originally Posted by Srynerson

Click to expand...

The four-in-hand knot (I mean, really, why do you want to make yourself look like a real estate agent/car salesman/high-end restaurant waiter/police detective/other person who is required to wear a tie as part of a uniform?)

Please post photos to substantiate this.

Originally Posted by SpooPoker

Click to expand...

Please post photos to substantiate this.

I'm not sure what your point is, but here we go:


Real estate agents (appears 3 out of 4 men are wearing FiH)




Car salesmen (appears 3 out of 5 men wearing ties are wearing FiH):

http://cascade.porschedealer.com/about_us/team.php


Waiters (I'll agree that waiters are more likely to wear bowties than neckties, but when they do wear neckties....):

http://www.cheapaprons.com/c-35-formal-wear.aspx (The only true long-bladed neckties this company offers for waiter uniforms are pre-tied FiH)


Police Detectives:




Other Person Required To Wear A Tie (this company specifically markets pre-tied FiH ties for "front desk uniform neckwear":

http://www.waitstuff.com/uniform-nec...ight-ties.html

Originally Posted by gladhands

Click to expand...

Nut rubbing

You look down upon one of the grandest SF traditions ?

You can find pictures of all tie knots that look like crap. Ultra tiny knots from ****** thin ties are also disgusting. Then again ****** thin ties are disgusting. But, in my eyes, FIH and Double FIH knots are the only ways to go. Huge knots are disgusting. I'm never a fan of windsor or double windsor unless it's tied very tight with a collar that complements it. Most of the time, non-FIH knots are the square toed shoes of the tie world.

I can't get behind getting my shirts made MTM.

OTR slim fitting shirts from different makers fit me well enough, plus 80% of the time, the shirts stay beneath my SC or suit jacket.

BTW, does anyone know what shirt brands offer tall/large collar shirts? I find them best for tie-less look with a suit or SC.

Originally Posted by musicguy

Click to expand...

You can find pictures of all tie knots that look like crap. Ultra tiny knots from ****** thin ties are also disgusting. Then again ****** thin ties are disgusting. But, in my eyes, FIH and Double FIH knots are the only ways to go. Huge knots are disgusting. I'm never a fan of windsor or double windsor unless it's tied very tight with a collar that complements it. Most of the time, non-FIH knots are the square toed shoes of the tie world.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Srynerson

Click to expand...

+10000! The four-in-hand knot (I mean, really, why do you want to make yourself look like a real estate agent/car salesman/high-end restaurant waiter/police detective/other person who is required to wear a tie as part of a uniform?)
You realise the four-in-hand is the original tie-knot? What you meant to ask was, why would anyone want to follow the path of every men's style icon of the 20th century by wearing the knot that they wore... Grant, Astaire, Duke of Windsor, etc etc... The necktie of today is actually called the 'Four-in-hand'. That's the correct taxonomical label of the item to distinguish it from bow ties and cravats. So, you see, the four-in-hand knot is the original and correct knot to tie, and that's why it has the name. The 'windsor' was a misguided attempt on the part of a vulgar public to ape the thick four-in-hand knots that the Duke of Windsor tied. The incorrectly-name windsor (was never used by the Duke of Windsor) and its variants are the signature of nouveau-riche vulgarity, American footballers, and megalomaniacs such as Arnold Schwartzenegger, Hugo Chavez, and Vladimir Putin.

Most of the time, non-FIH knots are the square toed shoes of the tie world.

Click to expand...

that.

Originally Posted by musicguy

Click to expand...

You can find pictures of all tie knots that look like crap. Ultra tiny knots from ****** thin ties are also disgusting. Then again ****** thin ties are disgusting. But, in my eyes, FIH and Double FIH knots are the only ways to go. Huge knots are disgusting. I'm never a fan of windsor or double windsor unless it's tied very tight with a collar that complements it. Most of the time, non-FIH knots are the square toed shoes of the tie world.


(A) I was specifically asked to provide pictures, so I did.

(B) The entire thrust of this thread is about people's subjective opinions of style (see the title, "'"SF Approved" Items You Can't Get Behind'").

(C) I usually wear a half-Windsor, but when I need a smaller knot (e.g., for for a button-down collar), I go with a Pratt/Shelby. I've even been asked by at least a half-dozen people (including two women who wanted to know about it for purposes of telling their husbands) to show them how to tie a Pratt/Shelby because they specifically admired its appearance relative to the FiH.

Don't get the vitriol for use of the word 'braces' it's just a cultural thing, just another example of two people separated by a common language. I'm English and we call them braces. Suspenders are what lasses use to hold their stockings up (US = garters) hence the reluctance of any Englishman to announce 'I'm wearing suspenders under my suit today'. In England garters are elastic bands that cub scouts use to keep their socks up.

Originally Posted by Will C.

Click to expand...

You realise the four-in-hand is the original tie-knot?

Yes, I knew that, so what? IIRC, monk straps predate the modern balmoral design, but there is plenty of hate for monk straps on SF.

What you meant to ask was, why would anyone want to follow the path of every men's style icon of the 20th century by wearing the knot that they wore... Grant, Astaire, Duke of Windsor, etc etc...

Click to expand...

The mere fact that you can point to generally stylish men (but see, e.g., Astaire's tendency to wear absurdly high-rise pants) who have worn it does not redeem it, in my 100% subjective view (which is the whole point of this thread, as you may recall), against the weight of day-to-day exposure. When I go to my office each day, it is rather obvious that men who wear ties because they enjoy them (i.e., they wear ties most days out of the week) are tying half-windsors or full windsors. Men who go open collared for weeks at a time and then only put on a tie when it's time to meet a new client or go to court uniformly favor FiH, in my experience.