# Shorts -- how short?



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

I'm wondering what everyone's preferences are for shorts. Aside from how tall you might be, the basic categories would be at the knee (10-11"), slightly above the knee (9"), and mid-thigh (6").

What do you prefer?

Also, what part of the country do you live in? (Regional tastes vary.)

In southern CA the trend has been longer, even below the knee, but slightly above the knee is just as common. Mid-thigh was common 20 years ago but sticks out like a sore thumb now. I'm happy with at the knee or slightly above. My biggest peeve is that most shorts aren't tapered/tailored enough -- the leg opening is too wide and floppy.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

I like between a 5" - 7" inseam, and a little slim. I live in Greenwich, CT.


----------



## Tiger (Apr 11, 2010)

Himself said:


> I'm wondering what everyone's preferences are for shorts. Aside from how tall you might be...


This is not an "aside" - it is crucial! Height and in particular leg/torso length play a vital role in determining the inseam length of one's shorts. I'm short (not quite 5'8") and my legs are quite short (inseam around 28"), so shorts with an inseam of 8" or 9" fall below my knees, not above them. 6" shorts fit me the same way 8" shorts fit many others. 7" would probably be a bit better, but they're difficult to find. Certainly, I could have longer shorts altered, but for the minor improvement in very casual attire, it's generally not worth the time or expense. There's the issue of balance, too - 8" or 9" shorts really distort my "torso to leg" proportion; makes me look clownish.

Like Trip, I prefer shorts that are a bit trimmer, and I live in New York City.


----------



## hookem12387 (Dec 29, 2009)

I like mine to fall above my knee (not just above the knee cap, but just above the actual knee, so a bit higher). But I'm on a 3 year expedition to the Pole, so I'm not wearing shorts much these days.

Edit: This is actually exactly how I wear my shorts:


----------



## brozek (Sep 24, 2006)

At the end of last summer, I donated all of my shorts that weren't Patagonia stand-up shorts with a 5" inseam. I'm 6'2", so they're at the upper end of mid-thigh on me.


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

brozek said:


> At the end of last summer, I donated all of my shorts that weren't Patagonia stand-up shorts with a 5" inseam. I'm 6'2", so they're at the upper end of mid-thigh on me.


Stand-Up shorts are great, but I've felt weird in shorts that short since the 80s. I wish they'd make longer ones. They do have 7" now. 6'0" here.


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

From the PDF version of *The Encyclopedia of Men's Clothes*, Shorts Chapter:

Shorts look best when they are mid thigh to just above the knee. 

_By Occasion:_

The shorter the short the more appropriate it is for causal events or sports vs. dressier social occasions.

Bermuda shorts which come to just above the knee can actually be dressy (even worn with a sport jacket). Bermudas are not a good length on shorter men, who may want to consider the Jamaica short which is 2 to 3 inches higher. 

_By Body Style: _

*The Shorts Effect *-- Shorts provide a horizontal line at the knee that can make you look shorter. Great for tall guys, but short men should be aware of this effect.


Tall guys would do well in longer boxer style trunks.

Shorter men look best in trunks with shorter legs.

Thin men should steer clear of very short or very wide legs.


----------



## Marley (Apr 4, 2008)

I am 6'-0", live in the Desert Southwest and I like my shorts just above the knee.

In sizing shorts, it is imperative that you determine both the rise and the inseam measurement. I have had 9" inseam shorts that were almost down to my knee and then others that were ~3" higher. To just buy shorts by the inseam measurement alone is risking a poor fit (IMHO).

Marley


----------



## ExecAccess (Jan 1, 2010)

Bearing in mind I am in Australia where board shorts rule these days.....at the knee or just above.

I remember being horrified when we first came of Oz and you would see male bank tellers and office workers wearing mid thigh shorts with long grey socks and shoes. Soooo not a good look.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

I generally think shorter shorts on men are invariably a bad idea.

I prefer 8-9", and live in the Midwest, although I'm from the South.


----------



## jwooten (Dec 19, 2010)

brozek said:


> At the end of last summer, I donated all of my shorts that weren't Patagonia stand-up shorts with a 5" inseam. I'm 6'2", so they're at the upper end of mid-thigh on me.


Yeah, I'm around 6' 3" myself and it may be the southern college town I live in, but anything longer than a 6" inseam feels weird. The Original Patagonia Standup at 5" inseam is a go to favorite. Definitely upper end of mid-thigh. I don't quite understand why the Standup short is not a trad staple fits the durability and patina effect requirements, IMO.


----------



## straw sandals (Apr 14, 2010)

All my shorts are from Bermuda, where my family lived for many years (and where I was born). My understanding of the cut of Bermudas is a bit more specific than the Encyclopedia version quoted above. They should fall two inches above the knee, which I think is pretty perfect; longer shorts look a bit too casual to my eye, and shorter shorts are too short for polite company when sitting down. Even though I live in Connecticut, I still like to sport my Bermudas with a dress shirt and blazer.


----------



## Uncle Bill (May 4, 2010)

I prefer my shorts to hit just above the knee and I live in Greater Toronto in central Canada.


----------



## 10gallonhat (Dec 13, 2009)

I like about an 8". Hits right above the knee.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

LL Bean used to do something similar to the Patagonia Stand Up, which I was unaware of. The Bean version had elastic on the waist, though, and a little nylon belt.

I like the look of those Patagonias.

I'm in the short leg brigade at 29 inches, so I like about a seven- or eight-inch inseam on shorts. I don't think I could do the Patagonia five-inch — looks like photos of the NBA ca. 1980.


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

^ca 1980, and before: I will maintain to the death that NBA will never regain the mystique it once had until they drop the long, baggy shorts and cut down on the tattoos. (yes, am an old fart).


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

Probably 7-9" for me.

(And the NBA is back, as entertaining as the 80's, tatoos notwithstanding).


----------



## Bandit44 (Oct 1, 2010)

I'm 6'6" and like my shorts to hit just above the knee.


----------



## YoungTrad (Jan 29, 2010)

Im 5'8 and normally wear 5-6' inseam on my shorts. Very short legs so they fall lower mid thigh. I live in Ky. Most of us like to consider ourselves from the south.


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

Patrick06790 said:


> - looks like photos of the NBA ca. 1980.


Here's Wilt - amazingly that is a 12" inseam


----------



## 10gallonhat (Dec 13, 2009)

Cardinals5 said:


> Here's Wilt - amazingly that is a *12" inseam*


LOL ...


----------



## Cowtown (Aug 10, 2006)

I like between 7 to 9.


----------



## inq89 (Dec 3, 2008)

I'm 6'1" so 9 inch inseams hit just above my knee, which is how I wear my patterned shorts (seersucker, plaid, etc.) Khaki shorts I have it tailored to 8 inch inseams which shows the start of my thigh. Good thing I work out legs


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

9-11" for me. I'm 6'1. Regarding Andy's advice, I'm thinking of tapering my shorts a little bit since most of them look quite wide on my lanky figure.


----------



## WarrenB (Apr 15, 2009)

My go to for shorts are J. Crew 7" Essential Shorts. I am 5'8" and wear a 30" inseam. They hit about 2" above my knee. I do however wear shorts around the 5-6" range often (Patagonia baggies, Columbia Half-Moons). Some of my more colorful and GTH shorts approach 9", they are hard to find in shorter inseams. I prefer the look of the 6-7", but all look fine to me, just depends on what I'm wearing and where I am wearing it. I'm from Kentucky.


----------



## 4dgt90 (Dec 2, 2009)

5-6". I'm 5'8" in Texas.


----------



## David J. Cooper (Apr 26, 2010)

I'm almost 6'5" but my inseam length is only 32 so I wear my shorts a little shorter then some, about 7". Of course when I wear Jorts I go for the nuthugger look.

The tattoo culture seems to be strong in the NBA and other then Deshawn Stevenson's Abe Lincoln neck tattoo, it's OK with me. The only one suffering from tattoo problems in sports seems to be Jim Tressel.


----------



## brozek (Sep 24, 2006)

I wasn't necessarily _seeking out_ photos to illustrate short inseams on a tall guy, but I was showing my daughter pictures of last summer's camping trip to Maine, and I thought of this thread (the first picture is even taken just outside the flagship store in Freeport). I'm 6'2" and these are Patagonia stand-up shorts with a 5" inseam. Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, I donated all of my shorts that weren't 5" stand-ups at the end of last summer, and after seeing the pictures again, I'm still glad I did.


----------



## 4dgt90 (Dec 2, 2009)

brozek said:


> I wasn't necessarily _seeking out_ photos to illustrate short inseams on a tall guy, but I was showing my daughter pictures of last summer's camping trip to Maine, and I thought of this thread (the first picture is even taken just outside the flagship store in Freeport). I'm 6'2" and these are Patagonia stand-up shorts with a 5" inseam. Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, I donated all of my shorts that weren't 5" stand-ups at the end of last summer, and after seeing the pictures again, I'm still glad I did.


+1 for standups, but why are you wearing a layered sweater with pretty much the shortest shorts you can buy??


----------



## brozek (Sep 24, 2006)

tdecast said:


> +1 for standups, but why are you wearing a layered sweater with pretty much the shortest shorts you can buy??


It was a_ very _medium-cold August in Maine last year.


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

One of my best friends had a saying, few years back when we had the same summer job, that "man thighs were the final frontier." Basically the idea is, that all other skin has been so over exposed in our culture, male thighs are the only thing that are even slightly controversial anymore. I gotta say I still agree. I think of it most times I put shorts on, I like mine to end just above the knee, only causing minor controversy.


----------



## Charles Saturn (May 27, 2010)

^^^ In total agreement, seeing my man thighs makes me cringe.


----------



## rupertoooo (May 6, 2011)

6' 3" 175 thin athletic build. I definitely prefer a short at the knee or just above, usually a 9" inseam will do.


----------



## maximar (Jan 11, 2010)

Anything but this length.


----------



## bd79cc (Dec 20, 2006)

AlanC said:


> I generally think shorter shorts on men are invariably a bad idea.
> 
> I prefer 8-9", and live in the Midwest, although I'm from the South.


I agree with the bad idea part. I like shorts length at or just above the knee, with a good taper at the legs, since many shorts-wearing males I've seen don't sit like girls! Of course, this preference doesn't include specialized shorts like Speedos and running shorts. I'm from San Antonio TX.


----------



## Spencer (May 13, 2005)

I'm 6' and live in SC. I prefer 5-6" inseams on shorts (if i can find them). I'll wear shorts just above the knee if I'm attending a "dressy " casual event or playing golf at a conservative place like Pinehurst. Anything below the knee is for rappers and body builders.

20-25 years ago i prefered 3" inseamed rugby shorts. then my opinion was if you had great thighs show them(I did-still do). back then long shorts wore worn by 'roid usin' bodybuilders who only worked on their upperbodies.


----------

