# Is half windsor somehow less than respectable?



## PeterEliot (Jul 9, 2008)

I'm asking because someone on SF sounded scandalized by the photo of a respected member there wearing a half windsor.

I like half windsor. It's bungle-free and I never have to undo it and retry, and it's my own uncultured opinion that some of the narrower knots look--strangling. I actually rather enjoy the plump knot.

It never occurred to me that the knot may be considered somewhat informal. Well, is it?


----------



## Mannix (Nov 24, 2008)

I use a half windsor, and like it better than a full windsor. The knot turns out better than when I tie a full windsor.


----------



## PeterEliot (Jul 9, 2008)

To tell you the truth... I had this FEAR of ties until I discovered half windsors which felt to me delightfully simple and manageable. I can never get a four-in-hand to look right.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

PeterEliot said:


> I'm asking because someone on SF sounded scandalized by the photo of a respected member there wearing a half windsor.
> 
> I like half windsor. It's bungle-free and I never have to undo it and retry, and it's my own uncultured opinion that some of the narrower knots look--strangling. I actually rather enjoy the plump knot.
> 
> It never occurred to me that the knot may be considered somewhat informal. Well, is it?


Personally, I think tie-knots are are simply a matter of personal preference. I prefer a smaller knot so use the four-in-hand rather that either Windsor. A full Windsor appears too bulky and flashy to me -- more suitable perhaps to a celebratory occasion than business, but that's just me. Also, many Windsor wearers seem to like to wear their knot an inch or so below the shirt collar, where it looks sloppy and unfinished. But this is a matter of taste, I think. Wear whatever you like.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

PeterEliot said:


> To tell you the truth... I had this FEAR of ties until I discovered half windsors which felt to me delightfully simple and manageable. I can never get a four-in-hand to look right.


Your frustration with the four-in-hand may be grounded in that they are "knot" perfectly symmetrical, which is part of the charm actually.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Any tie knot that works with the shirt collar and looks good is appropriate.


----------



## ctt (Dec 24, 2008)

I don't mind the asymmetry of a four-in-hand, but I can never get them to look right either. 

I like a small half-windsor knot. I'm not sure if I tie them too tight, but they always end up being about the same size as a four-in-hand.


----------



## PeterEliot (Jul 9, 2008)

Asymmetry is not an issue with me either. Somehow it always comes out as a _ball_, not a knot.


----------



## PinkPlaidSocks (May 1, 2008)

Wear the knot you think looks best, the one you think works well with the thickness of the tie, the spread of the shirt collar, etc. To hell with anyone who wants to look down on you for it.


----------



## My Pet. A Pantsuit (Dec 25, 2008)

PeterEliot said:


> I'm asking because someone on SF sounded scandalized by the photo of a respected member there wearing a half windsor.


It wouldn't have been a woman who took such offense, would it?

I'm not trying to sound sexist, but it echoes a sentiment I heard recently... not that I need to explain myself here of all places.


----------



## David V (Sep 19, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Any tie knot that works with the shirt collar and looks good is appropriate.


Dead on!

I'm surprised to hear anyone was scandalized by anything over "there".


----------



## nolan50410 (Dec 5, 2006)

I find that a good compromise between the four in hand and the half windsor is the pratt knot, also sometimes called the shelby knot. It's a little smaller then a half windsor, slightly triangular, and perfectly symmetrical.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

I prefer to think of it as twice as respectable as the quarter-windsor! :icon_smile_big:

I use only half-windsor and four-in-hand knots. Which I select depends on the tie, the collar and my mood. Partly the windsor knot does not interest me as I believe it's too much knot for virtually any tie and any collar, and partly because knots mystify me, and the two afore mentioned knots are all that I've mastered.


----------



## bbcrock (Feb 13, 2009)

When I was overweight and walked to client sites all the time the four in hand was the way to go for a soon-to-be-loosened tie. Not an issue now. Many of my ties are too heavy for a full windsor. I inherited many skinny 1960s ties from my father that are too skinny for a four in hand and really require a windsor. But I don't really wear them.


----------



## Prisoner of Zendaline (Dec 8, 2008)

There's a whole history of posts and threads here regarding half/full Windsors. Currently, especially in the eyes of TV/Film wardrobe people, Half Windsors are considered more respectable. They're considered manly/hetero/regular-guy/goodguy/hard-workin' regular joe.

Men portraying powerbrokers/villains/effete/evil financiers/cads/mafiosi are given Full Windsors. Full Windsors take more tie length. For that reason, smaller men and men with short torsos naturally prefer that knot, because their ties will hang to the preferred point relative to the belt buckle.

Tall men, and those with long torsos, are more attractive and thus get much more respect than little men and those of us who have short torsos. These lucky big guys end up preferring Half-Windsors, because the knot gives enough length to reach their belt buckles. That's where the association came from. It's not fair, but it *is*.

There are other factors to consider, though. Some ties _(all my old Fendis)_ won't tie a big enough knot without the Full Windsor. Some ties _(heavy wools and knits come to mind)_ tie too large a knot with the Full Windsor. Too, the size of the knot should not overpower the size of the shirt collar, and possibly the jacket's lapels.

Personally, I don't give a fig about the associations _(most of the Full Windsor associations *do* apply to me, anyway)_, and mostly use the Full Windsor. But if you're a sports-lovin' regular guy who always wears an undershirt, never wears low-rise briefs or a Speedo, and wouldn't be caught dead in a double-breasted jacket or a spread-collar shirt, the Half-Windsor is for you.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Excluding wide collars and full-windsors; I am in the column that thinks it's the quality of the tie that orphans the half-windsor. 

A great tie looks better in a FiH, IMHO. A good tie sometimes needs a half-windsor knot to look "right" for various reasons.

I actually did blind-tests with my Wife. I would show her a tie both ways and see which one she liked. 

It ended up I had a bunch of ties that we decided looked better in a half-windsor then a FiH. There were obvious consistencies in brand, type, and quality. 

I gave all those ties to the AmVets last year. 

I don't even have really expensive taste in ties. About 75% are Brooks, 20% are Paul Stuart and 5% are Robert Talbott. 

None are six, seven, double-four, whatever-fold.


----------



## AndrewRogers (Dec 21, 2008)

You just can't beat the four-in-hand knot. Don't try to fight it.


----------



## ctt (Dec 24, 2008)

I will have to try the Pratt/Shelby knot. Next step is to learn how to get the dimple in the right location.


----------



## JerseyJohn (Oct 26, 2007)

I usually use a full Windsor, regardless of what others think of it. But if I want a smaller knot, I go for the half Windsor.


----------



## Mr D (Feb 26, 2009)

Half Windsor for me. I'm well over 6 foot and find it suits me best.


----------



## dingbat (Jul 24, 2008)

Pratt/Shelby for me, followed by FIH/Half Windsor depending on thickness of the tie's material. I only very, very rarely donn the Full Windsor.


----------



## kkollwitz (Oct 31, 2005)

"I use only half-windsor and four-in-hand knots."

Same here.


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

Reverse half Windsor for me.


----------



## Srynerson (Aug 26, 2005)

I most wear half windsors, only wearing the Pratt/Shelby with button-down or tab collars and full windors for certain ties when paired with spread collars. (I never do FiH knots.) I'm surprised to hear that anyone would think the half windsor was informal. If I mention to people outside this forum that I wear a half windsor the reaction tends to be as though I announced that I was going yachting or something.


----------



## ykurtz (Mar 7, 2007)

Half windsors work for my medium spread collars pretty well. I use it when I'm going for an exceptionally formal look, e.g. one of my off-white ties in a navy suit. My only non-chalance in that look is usually my pocket square, as everything else is very 'buttoned down'. 

For anything with less spread, i.e. point collar, I'll use a four-in-hand, which is about 90% of the time.

I find the prevalance of large knots fairly annoying, as it's either worn with the wrong collar, or by someone with a fairly small head. A tie knot should not call inordinate attention to itself. So it needs to be properly proportioned to the overall look. Most people seem blind to how out of whack they look when their tiny head appears in view with a knot nearly 25% the size of their face. In my experience the best dressed men have a total look and only later do details surface. Lesser dressers usually have something not quite right, which is then possibly forgiven later given everything else.

The part should not overwhelm the whole. But that's my aesthetic.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Srynerson said:


> I most wear half windsors, only wearing the Pratt/Shelby with button-down or tab collars and full windors for certain ties when paired with spread collars. (I never do FiH knots.) I'm surprised to hear that anyone would think the half windsor was informal. If I mention to people outside this forum that I wear a half windsor the reaction tends to be as though I announced that I was going yachting or something.


LOL that's so true!

I was once asked to teach my cousin how to knot his tie properly.

Being almost twice his age I made the mistake of asking for clarification since I figured maybe "the kids" liked bigger or smaller knots (as I see so many Full-Windsors on young men lately) and they said, "there's more than one way?" 

Fortunately, I saved some small dignity in that his young girlfriend said, "make it look like yours." :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Felix Krull (Dec 20, 2008)

First, there is no tie too thick for a full windsor. I tie them with 7 and 9 folds often. Second, I only wear the full windsor and to answer your question, yes, I think the half-windsor is less sophisticated than the full windsor. The half looks exactly as its name implies like a halfway tied knot. Of course, as with anything style related to each his own but all things being equal the full windsor is a more elegant looking knot. In my opinion, which is clearly not shared by many who have posted here, the four-in-hand is a school boy's knot and shouldn't be worn for business or formal events.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

PeterEliot said:


> I'm asking because someone on SF sounded scandalized by the photo of a respected member there wearing a half windsor.
> 
> I like half windsor. It's bungle-free and I never have to undo it and retry, and it's my own uncultured opinion that some of the narrower knots look--strangling. I actually rather enjoy the plump knot.
> 
> It never occurred to me that the knot may be considered somewhat informal. Well, is it?


No. I'm not really surprised though. Most of the guys there prefer the "skinny look" so I guess they would prefer a narrow tie worn with a narrow knot.



PeterEliot said:


> To tell you the truth... I had this FEAR of ties until I discovered half windsors which felt to me delightfully simple and manageable. I can never get a four-in-hand to look right.


Practice, practice, practice.



Mike Petrik said:


> Personally, I think tie-knots are are simply a matter of personal preference. I prefer a smaller knot so use the four-in-hand rather that either Windsor. A full Windsor appears too bulky and flashy to me -- more suitable perhaps to a celebratory occasion than business, but that's just me. Also, many Windsor wearers seem to like to wear their knot an inch or so below the shirt collar, where it looks sloppy and unfinished. But this is a matter of taste, I think. Wear whatever you like.


Funny, the thing that I don't about the full Windsor is that it just draws so much attention away from the face. Unless you're heavy and/or are using an unlined tie, it's not a good look to me.

Contrariwise, most of the men I've seen wear it here are thin or in good shape and wear the worst collar for it -- narrow or medium spread -- as if it's the only tie knot they learned growing up. The baseball-sized knot then looks as if it's barely escaping the points.



Mike Petrik said:


> Your frustration with the four-in-hand may be grounded in that they are "knot" perfectly symmetrical, which is part of the charm actually.


I agree.



forsbergacct2000 said:


> Any tie knot that works with the shirt collar and looks good is appropriate.


Best advice ever.



PeterEliot said:


> Asymmetry is not an issue with me either. Somehow it always comes out as a _ball_, not a knot.


Again, practice. Make sure you're giving yourself enough slack when looping the knot. Most of all, take your time. Don't rush it.

Dimpling the long end when looping the last bit also makes it easier, though Edward VIII often wore his ties without the dimple. The "Windsor knots" are named after his peerage title but he actually wore thick, wide ties with a four in hand knot.





Srynerson said:


> I most wear half windsors, only wearing the Pratt/Shelby with button-down or tab collars and full windors for certain ties when paired with spread collars. (I never do FiH knots.) I'm surprised to hear that anyone would think the half windsor was informal. If I mention to people outside this forum that I wear a half windsor the reaction tends to be as though I announced that I was going yachting or something.


I'm surprised they know what a half-Windsor is! I find a lot of guys I know have only learned one knot from their mother or father and don't know what it's called.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Obviously a wider knot looks better with a wider collar and since I've never been a fan of spread collars I've never been a fan of Windsor knots, half or otherwise. I've always preferred a point collar, or a buttondown, with a smaller knot such as the four in hand. To me it's just a matter of personal preference.

As for the asymmetrical shape of the four in hand, I agree that this is a big part of why I like this knot.

Cruiser


----------



## TheEarl (Jul 19, 2008)

I prefer the shelby or full-windsor (when shelby just won't cooperate). I can never get a half-windsor to look right... somehow holdfast makes em look spectacular.


----------



## sleats (Oct 27, 2008)

Windsor knots seem to be the preserve of footballers not wanting to generalise or anything!!!


----------



## Sator (Jan 13, 2006)

Felix Krull said:


> First, there is no tie too thick for a full windsor. I tie them with 7 and 9 folds often. Second, I only wear the full windsor and to answer your question, yes, I think the half-windsor is less sophisticated than the full windsor. The half looks exactly as its name implies like a halfway tied knot. Of course, as with anything style related to each his own but all things being equal the full windsor is a more elegant looking knot. In my opinion, which is clearly not shared by many who have posted here, the four-in-hand is a school boy's knot and shouldn't be worn for business or formal events.


----------



## sleats (Oct 27, 2008)

Sator said:


>


Sator....... Quite.

point well made even with out words!


----------



## Felix Krull (Dec 20, 2008)

Sator said:


>


My point exactly, a full windsor would have looked far better for Chuck. A spread collar like he's wearing screams for a full windsor. Royalty or no, the least the man could do would be to form a dimple. Granted the rest of him looks great, but that tiny little knot only makes his already-inflated head look all the bigger.

As for the somber looking bloke in the b&w, maybe if he'd learned to tie a better tie he'd have reason to smile.


----------



## Sator (Jan 13, 2006)

sleats said:


> Sator....... Quite.
> 
> point well made even with out words!


Windsors: more for the cad than the dandy? :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## whistle_blower71 (May 26, 2006)

Sator said:


> Windsors: more for the cad than the dandy? :icon_smile_wink:


Ha ha. Well put. :icon_smile:

*W_B*


----------



## JibranK (May 28, 2007)

Felix Krull said:


> My point exactly, a full windsor would have looked far better for Chuck. A spread collar like he's wearing screams for a full windsor. Royalty or no, the least the man could do would be to form a dimple. Granted the rest of him looks great, but that tiny little knot only makes his already-inflated head look all the bigger.
> 
> As for the somber looking bloke in the b&w, maybe if he'd learned to tie a better tie he'd have reason to smile.


I sincerely hope you recognise who that 'somber looking bloke' is.


----------



## Infrasonic (May 18, 2007)

JibranK said:


> I sincerely hope you recognise who that 'somber looking bloke' is.


Eden I recognise him....


----------



## Sator (Jan 13, 2006)

Yes, who's that chap wearing the Anthony Eden hat?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Felix Krull said:


> My point exactly, a full windsor would have looked far better for Chuck. A spread collar like he's wearing screams for a full windsor. Royalty or no, the least the man could do would be to form a dimple. Granted the rest of him looks great, but that tiny little knot only makes his already-inflated head look all the bigger.
> 
> As for the somber looking bloke in the b&w, maybe if he'd learned to tie a better tie he'd have reason to smile.


What, may I ask, is wrong with his tie knot? Because it's not a full Windsor?

I think you will find that a Windsor knot does not compliment everyone's face or body type as well as you may think, to say nothing of collar and lapel shapes worn. I have seen thin men with long faces, some of who post on these type of clothing forums, wearing full Windsors that looked absolutely terrible in them and looked far better in a half-Windsor or four in hand. I'm also not sure where you get the idea that half-Windsors are half-finished. Would you say as much to this gent? :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Sator (Jan 13, 2006)

Jovan said:


> Would you say as much to this gent? :icon_smile_big:


How about: trust me I'm wearing a full windsor knot


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Bond did always say that a full Windsor was the mark of a cad. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## JibranK (May 28, 2007)

Infrasonic said:


> Eden I recognise him....


I was addressing the new poster who seems keen on attacking those of us who wear other than the 'Windsor' knot.


----------



## Felix Krull (Dec 20, 2008)

Jovan said:


> What, may I ask, is wrong with his tie knot? Because it's not a full Windsor?
> 
> I think you will find that a Windsor knot does not compliment everyone's face or body type as well as you may think, to say nothing of collar and lapel shapes worn. I have seen thin men with long faces, some of who post on these type of clothing forums, wearing full Windsors that looked absolutely terrible in them and looked far better in a half-Windsor or four in hand. I'm also not sure where you get the idea that half-Windsors are half-finished. Would you say as much to this gent? :icon_smile_big:


I would but the gent you refer to is a figment of someone's imagination. Nevermind the fact that the skinny tie he's wearing is vintage 60s which is a whole other conversation.

The point is that I see far too many men who cannot tie a symmetrical knot, nor dimple their tie and both look far more befitting a cad than anyone else. A proper tie knot should be triangular, symmetrical, and dimpled. It just so happens that when done correctly a windsor easily manifolds all of these attributes together excellently.

Most men wear a FIH because its the simplest, not because it looks superior to any other.


----------



## JibranK (May 28, 2007)

Why exactly must a knot be symmetrical? Pray tell, as the rest of the wardrobe is not symmetrical.


----------



## Sator (Jan 13, 2006)

Jovan said:


> Bond did always say that a full Windsor was the mark of a cad. :icon_smile_big:


What Ian Fleming (who really did exist) wrote was that Bond never trusted a man wearing a windsor knot.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I was half-joking of course, trying to lighten up our conversation a bit, but I saw it as an example of a half-Windsor worn pretty well and embodying the same attributes you give to its bigger brother.

Anyways, as I pointed out in posts before (which I'm not sure if you're ignoring on purpose or not) a four in hand goes better with some body types and collars than others. That is _clearly_ a case where the four in hand is used because it looks better _in that situation_. Nobody here has said one knot is inherently superior in every way. Even I said earlier that Windsors can occasionally look good depending on the guy or the tie used. For instance, you wouldn't wear a Windsor, much less even a half-Windsor, when wearing regular point collars or button downs. The points are close together, hence they need a smaller knot so they won't be overwhelmed. Not all guys have face shapes that look best in spread collars, which a Windsor clearly needs. Hence, contrary to your prescription, they should probably use something else.

I'm not knocking your tastes. I'm saying they aren't applicable in every situation, that's all. 

Sator: I swear I read an excerpt where Bond said or thought that, but maybe it was an article where the author paraphrased -- badly.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

JibranK said:


> Why exactly must a knot be symmetrical? Pray tell, as the rest of the wardrobe is not symmetrical.


Well stated.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Jovan said:


> Would you say as much to this gent? :icon_smile_big:


You expect me to wear a full-windsor?

No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Sator (Jan 13, 2006)

ksinc said:


> You expect me to wear a full-windsor?
> 
> No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Oh, you guys. :devil:


----------



## dingbat (Jul 24, 2008)

This has got a bit silly. As we are all of different shapes, sizes and colourings, so too will our preferences be different for the various collars and tie knots that will put us to our best advantage. It follows that there can be no "right" answer, and trying to decide on a "one for all" solution is an impossibility.


----------



## Felix Krull (Dec 20, 2008)

JibranK said:


> Why exactly must a knot be symmetrical? Pray tell, as the rest of the wardrobe is not symmetrical.


I believe you meant to say outfit or ensemble and not wardrobe--as a wardrobe refers to a collection--but that is a minor quibble. Are you implying that the left side of your suit is longer than the right side, or one side is decidedly unbalanced against another? If so, I recommend you get a new tailor. A tie serves as a center point for an outfit and visually draws the various elements together. A symmetrical knot appoints a measure of balance and form to a suit while also coalescing the shirt and suit into a neatly done whole. Ties that are asymmetrical often look sloppy and can lend a sloppy appearance to an otherwise fine suit.

As to the point about Fleming, again, why should I bother to place stock into the words of a fictional character? Even if Fleming was using the character of Bond as a proxy for his own beliefs, his success as an author does not provide any inherent validity to that opinion.

Needless to say we agree to disagree.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

In this age, it's nice to see that someone would have bothered to put a tie on in the first place. 

To me, there are good situations and bad situations for every type of knot. That is why I posted to the effect that any knot that looks good with the shirt collar and looks good in general is a good knot.

Right now, I think that a lot of people use full windsors to make knots that look too large for my taste, but I have seen plenty of full windsors that look great, too. There was a short period in my weight loss, when I still needed to wear the longer ties, but I had to tie a full windsor to keep them from being too long. The knots looked good, at least to me.

Now, I am wearing regular length ties, but a full windsor would use up too much of the tie, so I use the four-in-hand or the half windsor depending on the tie, shirt collar and what I feel like at the moment. Hopefully I achieve a knot that looks nice. That is the bottom line, at least to me.


----------



## Pipps (Dec 20, 2005)

I am in full agreement with forsbergacct2000's points.

Indeed, perhaps few people realise how difficult it is for the sub-6ft gentleman who is also rather slim.

A 58" tie will frequently require a knot more elaborate than a simple four in hand to keep ensure that the resulting tied length looks anything remotely sensible. In these situations, a full Windsor, can often be the only option. Although when tied tightly and precisely I would argue that it often cannot be spotted as a full Windsor to the eye.

For these reasons, I have used a full Windsor once or twice before. Although I must admit that I prefer a Cavendish. I just like to be different!


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

Felix Krull said:


> I believe you meant to say outfit or ensemble and not wardrobe--as a wardrobe refers to a collection--but that is a minor quibble. Are you implying that the left side of your suit is longer than the right side, or one side is decidedly unbalanced against another? If so, I recommend you get a new tailor. A tie serves as a center point for an outfit and visually draws the various elements together. A symmetrical knot appoints a measure of balance and form to a suit while also coalescing the shirt and suit into a neatly done whole. Ties that are asymmetrical often look sloppy and can lend a sloppy appearance to an otherwise fine suit.
> 
> As to the point about Fleming, again, why should I bother to place stock into the words of a fictional character? Even if Fleming was using the character of Bond as a proxy for his own beliefs, his success as an author does not provide any inherent validity to that opinion.
> 
> Needless to say we agree to disagree.


Indeed, Felix, we do as well. I refuse to wear pocket squares on both sides of my suit coat. Furthermore, I submit it would look ridiculous in part precisely because it would be symmetrical. Symmetry has its place, but it is not remotely a requirement for a neck tie.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Mr. Pipps said:


> I am in full agreement with forsbergacct2000's points.
> 
> Indeed, perhaps few people realise how difficult it is for the sub-6ft gentleman who is also rather slim.
> 
> ...


I can't recommend vintage ('60s or earlier) ties or RL Rugby's short unlined ties enough. Both are perfect for smaller men, as they are 50-53" long.


----------



## David Reeves (Dec 19, 2008)

ugghh I really dislike large knots they are so football player.

I like my knot like my outfits neat and sharp as a laser.


----------



## Prisoner of Zendaline (Dec 8, 2008)

Srynerson said:


> I most wear half windsors, only wearing the Pratt/Shelby with button-down or tab collars and full windors for certain ties when paired with spread collars. (I never do FiH knots.) I'm surprised to hear that anyone would think the half windsor was informal. If I mention to people outside this forum that I wear a half windsor the reaction tends to be as though I announced that I was going yachting or something.


Half Windsor is 'informal' because it is asymmetrical. And actually, asymmetry *is *considered to be a characteristic of informality. Something just occurred to me. Maybe men with symmetrical faces _(which are consistently rated as more attractive and trustworthy)_ can afford to wear Half-Windsors, while those of us with uneven faces compensate with the more symmetrical Full Windsor. I imagine that the same factors that made us misshapen also helped make us small....all contributing to the cumulative subconscious association of Full Windsors for little Napoleons, and Half Windsors for the big, strapping, regular guys everybody naturally likes and respects.

Funny, but Full Windsors _were_ the thing with spread collars. Then , I heard someone on Ugly Betty dish Daniel Mead for "the fashion faux-pas of wearing a Full Windsor with a spread collar shirt". After that, everyone in the _(real life)_ media had Half Windsors with their spread collars.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

Prisoner of Zendaline said:


> Half Windsor is 'informal' because it is asymmetrical. And actually, asymmetry *is *considered to be a characteristic of informality. Something just occurred to me. Maybe men with symmetrical faces _(which are consistently rated as more attractive and trustworthy)_ can afford to wear Half-Windsors, while those of us with uneven faces compensate with the more symmetrical Full Windsor.


The half windsor knot _is_ symmetrical, just like the full windsor.


----------



## OCULUS NY (Oct 16, 2008)

Just to date myself, I always thought that the half-W became popular with button-down collars; or looked at another way: the collar did all the billowing and the knot was like the stamen in the flower. With a straight and especially a spread collar, you're going to have to fill the void with something.

I'll note that standard BB reggi stripes always seem to do well with the snugged up half-W. On the other hand, Hermes and some other big French brands always want to tie loose billowy knots, no matter the tie width and even tie lining. Anyone have an Hermes catalog to see how they tie them (if ever shown...)?


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

OCULUS NY said:


> With a straight and especially a spread collar, you're going to have to fill the void with something.


I don't understand why people think that a big collar needs needs to be filled with a big knot. I think Prince Charles does a great job at pairing a small knot with a wide spread collar. It was a more common look back in times when narrow ties were in fashion.


----------

