# Watches & Attire - Rules & Counsel



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

I was just reading the very interesting thread 
*U.S. Attitudes/ Sales Regarding Swiss Watches*

and I noticed how it got hijacked within seconds to that undying (and seemingly unkillable) issue of what to wear with what; who's free do dress like whom; whom to bonk, what to eat/drink/say while wearing a Timex, Rolex, Spandex etc.

It's all a bit "theological" this issue: not exhausted, not well understood, but I think we're all decided - for all practical purposes - on the question of whether we are indeed free to do dress any way we like, just as we are decided on whether all the dancing angels on the head of a pin can use a chronograph properly while working the tachymeter...

The answer to both is: YES! So let's not debate that.

I am getting a bit tired of how so many threads get hijacked to discuss the issue of individualism, freedom, blah blah blah in this manner. I think a separate forum would give this potentially (and actually, if done right) interesting subject a measure of importance and dignity that it deserves. Many here might also profit from/through discussions that could be more focused and germane.

I, for one, think the idea of wearing a suit with a G-shock opens up myriad of intellectually challenging directions. Questions concerning hierarchy, order, rebellion, individualism, conformity, decency, modernity, tradition, etc are all there... wrapped in the wrapper of "taste" and "personal style".


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Great idea- i would second that!


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I knew you'd think so Camb66! 

Now, how does one go about doing that? Starting a new sub-forum, I mean.


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

let the masses speak.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Anybody here ever heard of The Cafe? :-s


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Actually, such a sub-forum could be the most intellectually lively in terms of content. I mean, how much joy/profit is there in just talking about :"What do you think of this/that?", "What options I have for under $500?", "Do you pee with your watch on?" etc.

It is a fact that almost nobody in these woods really wears/loves a watch to tell the time. We love them for a lot of different reasons, and the question of looking "good", "cool", "right", and/or "proper" figures in hugely into the equation.

And given the character of our time, the importance, or more accurately, the magnitude of influence of visual presentation is tantamount to perhaps the most philosophically relevant topic today. What are brands, after all, if not the codes of symbolization by which we become programmed to think that we prefer A over B?... usually groundlessly. In that sense, this social programming that occurs by way brands and their hierarchy, is one that touches also on issues such as 'madness', 'insanity', 'schizophrenia' that is immanent to our economic system.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Ray MacDonald said:


> Anybody here ever heard of The Cafe? :-s


Yes, but given that there is a separate sub-forum for Pens, and more people seem to digress on threads to talk SPECIFICALLY about attire, rather than pens, I am merely saying: why not have a separate sub-forum for a topic that seems to get a lot people's goats, AND is in fact a very relevant topic to watch wearing? After all we DO wear our watches, and are mindful of how we appear to others.

I'll buy you a beer if you can direct me to thread where people started out talking about a strictly watch-related topic, and then flipped to talk ad nauseum about what to WRITE WITH: what pen to write to whom, when, what color ink, etc.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

It's not my call. Contact Ernie if you want.
PM: Watchuseek Admin
[email protected]


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

As usual, I am against ANOTHER sub-forum. WUS has now so many subforums, that I have lost contact with several WUS friends, because of time inability to read them all.


----------



## Spit161 (Oct 9, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Ray MacDonald said:


> Anybody here ever heard of The Cafe? :-s


My thoughts exactly, Ray.

cheers.


----------



## Ernie Romers (Apr 27, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I agree with Ray. No need for another sub forum, The Cafe is the right place.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

"Most philosophically relevant topic today" may be a wee bit of a stretch; nonetheless, I appreciate your fervor and agree that sartorial questions arise quite frequently and do have some import for the traditionally minded among us. However, the subject comes up in such a wide spectrum of threads that containment may be beyond the grasp of mere mortals.

That said, I have two closing remarks. First, dive watches should never, under any circumstances not necessitating a license to kill, be worn with suits. And second, to use a fountain pen properly, it must - _at a minimum_ - match your watch, belt, and shoes and preferably highlight the tones in your tie and pocket square. You _are_ wearing a pocket square, are you not?


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Chronopolis, I assume this in an effort to preserve my posts for posterity, since they are gold like usual.

However, much like Nikki Whelan, there's no such thing as being stretched too thin -- so, the odd sartorial argument makes for excellent roadkill.



TylerDurden said:


> "Most philosophically relevant topic today" may be a wee bit of a stretch; nonetheless, I appreciate your fervor and agree that sartorial questions arise quite frequently and do have some import for the traditionally minded among us. However, the subject comes up in such a wide spectrum of threads that containment may be beyond the grasp of mere mortals.
> 
> That said, I have two closing remarks. First, dive watches should never, under any circumstances not necessitating a license to kill, be worn with suits. And second, to use a fountain pen properly, it must - _at a minimum_ - match your watch, belt, and shoes and preferably highlight the tones in your tie and pocket square. You _are_ wearing a pocket square, are you not?


Dear sir, as much as I admire your enthusiasm, your tie should never, ever, under any circumstance match your pocket square. Unless you're trying to look like a Men's Wearhouse ad. And unless, of course, by tones, you merely meant the odd dot or two. In which case, you've my sincerest apologies.

The trick is to get a pen in your dominant metal (and said metal should match your watch, your wedding band, glasses, and preferably, umbrella). ;-) Of course, other gentlemen often carry two pens, navy and gray, to match the two wonderful colors lounge suits should ideally be.


----------



## mike120 (Aug 1, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Yeah.... I agree no more sub forums. Can we now vote on no more "what not to wear" threads? ;-)


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> And unless, of course, by tones, you merely meant the odd dot or two. In which case, you've my sincerest apologies.
> 
> The trick is to get a pen in your dominant metal (and said metal should match your watch, your wedding band, glasses, and preferably, umbrella). ;-) Of course, other gentlemen often carry two pens, navy and gray, to match the two wonderful colors lounge suits should ideally be.


Actually, this is exactly what I meant by tones; thank you for clarifying that, I would hate to have led some poor soul astray. Oh, and apology accepted.

Also, thank you for the bit of advise on properly coordinating the oft-forgotten umbrella. Seriously, it had not occurred to me, at least in so far as the predominant metal used, to pair the umbrella in this fashion. Unfortunately, now I need to explain to my wife why I need a new umbrella and a navy fountain pen...

As a side note, Chronopolis, it looks like you may owe Ray a beer for the first thread to wander off track and into the realm of fountain pens.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I would have thought that more people would have been concerned with the full outfit rather than just the watch. After all...accessorizing with a watch does show some inclination towards being aware of completing the "full outfit".

Unfortunately people feel like their freedom is being taken away when told what watch should be worn with what and it appears that indeed as long as it is a watch...any watch...it's ok to wear with anything. For every post trying to provide the correct sartorial advice...there are ten others clamoring about freedom and individual expression.

However there are a lot of members who like to wear the appropriate timepiece with regards to the outfit...and there are guys out there who really would like to know what watch to wear with what (if not they wouldn't ask in the first place). It's only fair that they do get the proper advice and have a place to connect these two.

A sub-forum would be nice...and would keep those threads out of other sub-forums. At the very least a sticky in The Cafe...and just refer people there when that question is asked. At least guys would be able to get the advice they're looking for and the topic is kept in a centralized location.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

So post something in The Cafe. If it gets a lot of replies we can always sticky it.


----------



## ecunited (Jul 22, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> The trick is to get a pen in your dominant metal (and said metal should match your watch, your wedding band, glasses, and preferably, umbrella). ;-) Of course, other gentlemen often carry two pens, navy and gray, to match the two wonderful colors lounge suits should ideally be.


Graphite watch with number 2.5 pencil - it's already happening now in the Prairie Provinces. Japan is not far behind.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Never been a big fan of pencils. Much too ephemeral. There's a finality about a big splotch of ink, like winning American Idol or being Paris Hilton.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> ...a pen in your dominant metal (and said metal should match your watch, your wedding band, glasses, and preferably, umbrella). ;-) Of course, other gentlemen often carry two pens, navy and gray, to match the two wonderful colors lounge suits should ideally be.


So should I get new fillings ? They're gold, but I rarely WEAR or carry gold on my person externally.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I don't see how the Café can be the right place:

"The Café: Dedicated to _non-watch related hobbies and interests_, except politics and religion"​
Current topics include what you're snacking on, how much sleep you got, and whether you like Arrested Development. Who would think watch & attire questions should go there?

The best watch to wear while diving or flying is covered in the regular forums, not in the Café. The best watch to wear with a suit is equally watch-related and no more controversial.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Post it where you like. If you don't like The Cafe you can post it here. I don't have a problem either way.


----------



## mike120 (Aug 1, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



drt said:


> The best watch to wear while diving or flying is covered in the regular forums, not in the Café. The best watch to wear with a suit is equally watch-related and no more controversial.


Very true, but when it turns into someone being snide and degrading because of someone else's personal choice, then it is more controversial. I wouldn't mind if there were threads where people talked about the atrocity that is matching your tie, watch strap and pocket square. That being said, it is extremely annoying when someone posts a thread "Look at my new diver!!!", they show a pic of them wearing it with a suit and then 10 snobs condescendingly respond with "I wouldn't hire you at my firm" and "Well YOU don't know how to dress" and "You must be an incompetent fool because of your watch." That's when it becomes different, and I have yet to see a "What to wear while driving a car" thread turn into that.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

We try to keep things civil but we need your help. If you see this sort of condescension or personal attacks please report same using the little triangle icon. There's no need for it, and it is technically a Rule #2 violation. We all have different ideas about what to wear with what, but that doesn't mean we can't respect one another.
ETA: I'm going to stick this thread for a while and we'll see what happens.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Thread should be viewed as what it is then...guys giving advice on what watch to wear to someone who is actually looking for it. There are guys who are truly inquiring about watches and attire...the fact that they are asking shows that they are inclined to think that there are some sort of "rules" for wearing certain watches with certain outfits and are willing to consider them.

The thread should not be turned into an argument nor ad hominem attacks. It should also not be hijacked by those who think that it doesn't matter/who cares...that's not the advice a lot of the people are looking for. In fact...I have felt that many times the attacks are towards those who do attempt to give advice. The term "snob" is used many times in an offensive manner...it's not OK to use this term to begin verbal attacks as well.

Just keep in mind what the nature of the thread is...if you are bothered by "rules" of attire...don't visit it. Similar to threads about what dive watch to wear...go ahead and wear your waterproof dress watch...just don't expect divers to have much sympathy over your choice of watch.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I could not have said it better.

I have gasped many times in these fora at the inanity of people giving advice to someone who asks what to wear, and they answer with: "Whatever ya wanna wear! Who gives a rats arse what they think," etc.

Seriously?! I am vehemently against condescending snobbery. But I dislike also equally boorishness wrapped in ignorance.

Some people are mindful of rules. Some are not. Rules concerning "proper attire" exist, whether one likes them or not. 
So there is no point in continuing to childishly counter with: "Yeah, but who sez I can't wear a tie with a mankini?" Do as you like, nobody will stop you.

The pertinence and value of this topic (if continued as a Sticky!) would lie in providing useful information that is INTERNAL and COHERENT to an already existing system of rules (of dressing formally, and/or decorously, fitting whatever the occasion) - even if the rats of "individualism" are constantly gnawing at its perimeter, offering "personal comfort" as the highest value in clothes wearing.

For those who are inclined to learn these rules -- and they exist, much the way rain does, even though nobody's ever been able to "capture" rain in a jar -- this thread could be quite useful, even if occasionally filled with mild disagreements among the cognoscenti over some of the more obscure points of sartorial decorum

Charlie Parker: "First learn the music, then forget it and just play."

Miles Davis: "You have to play a long time to play like yourself."

THAT is how one forges one's personal style.



baronrojo said:


> Thread should be viewed as what it is then...guys giving advice on what watch to wear to someone who is actually looking for it. _*There are guys who are truly inquiring about watches and attire*_...the fact that they are asking shows that they are *inclined to think that there are some sort of "rules" for wearing certain watches with certain outfits and are willing to consider them*.
> Just keep in mind what the nature of the thread is...if you are bothered by "rules" of attire...don't visit it.


----------



## Lawe (Nov 27, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

It always struck me odd that WUS, the leading site for watch collectors (a hobby that is so obviously associated for most of us with personal values and style) did not have more of a focus on providing its members with a forum to understand what society's (and multiple societies) view of what to wear when. I find this kind of insight from someone who has more experience useful.

I would, however, prefer to not have a forum on attire, etc. at all if it will be used to tell people what are the "_rules" _or to provide a more formal platform for condescension than the obnoxious remarks that people make when someone wants to wear a diver with a suit, etc. I also think that there needs to be a set limit of how many fora there are on WUS. Maybe introduce the forum for a trial period, with very clear rules for behavior, and only if another forum should be retired?


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

View attachment 487973
View attachment 487974


----------



## Coler (Mar 28, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Prediction : people post pics of them wearing a diver/shock with a suit. One third of replies say it looks great, one third say it's a travesty, one third say wear what you want even if that means your underpants on your head.

WUS suffers angst ridden schism and further sub fora are required. One called 'what to wear with your watch' and another called 'I don't care what I wear with my watch'. Members who post in one are permanent-banned from the other.

At some point a member who wears a day date chrono to a black tie affair is perma-banned from the 'what to wear with your watch forum'. He successfully lobbies for a 'pictures of me wearing watches and looking pretty darn slick imho' forum.

Somebody finally points out existence off www.style forum.net. All WUSers go there and are immediately perm-banned for being irredeemably uncool. They return to WUS realising afresh that this hobby should unite and not fragment it's participants. Everybody decides to ignore or report pissy disparaging posts and not to respond to them. People who wear divers with suits continue to do so.

Peace all 

Coler (Who would not like the proposed sub forum because he has no interest in what clothes you fellas are wearing. Seriously he finds that thread where people post their shopping totally weird already)


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



> I also think that there needs to be a set limit of how many fora there are on WUS. Maybe introduce the forum for a trial period, with very clear rules for behavior, and only if another forum should be retired?


The Moderator staff never recommends another forum. In fact, we would prefer that we don't introduce new forums unless we have a sponsor willing to pay for one, or the Owner thinks it necessary. In the past we have introduced a forum and due to lack of interest it has later been removed. So the number of forums does not grow indiscriminately.
Our view is that the theme forums are the way to go.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



mike120 said:


> Very true, but when it turns into someone being snide and degrading because of someone else's personal choice, then it is more controversial. I wouldn't mind if there were threads where people talked about the atrocity that is matching your tie, watch strap and pocket square. That being said, it is extremely annoying when someone posts a thread "Look at my new diver!!!", they show a pic of them wearing it with a suit and then 10 snobs condescendingly respond with "I wouldn't hire you at my firm" and "Well YOU don't know how to dress" and "You must be an incompetent fool because of your watch." That's when it becomes different, and I have yet to see a "What to wear while driving a car" thread turn into that.


 Annoying it is. I agree totally.

The flipside of this is when someone asks if a particular watch can be worn with a suit, someone offers reasonable advice that's supported by outside sources, and then there's a slew of posts calling the person a snob and advising the OP to "wear whatever you want."

The original poster wants to wear what's appropriate and wants some advice as to what that might be. It's a legitimate question.

It's the namecalling that's inappropriate, on both sides. There's way more heat than light and it takes over and ruins a lot of innocent threads.

Forum members, as a group, are an excellent authority on watches and are in pretty good agreement most of the time. That's not true for etiquette or dressing well - we are not, as a group, authoritative experts. There's no forum consensus and no forum-recognized authority to cite. Opinions are going to be diverse, and with these topics, offense is easily taken. Flames follow. The situation calls for some humility when discussing the topic, but it's hard to remember that if you feel under attack.

It seems to me there are three things that can be done:

1. Refer people to outside sites
2. Make a subforum
3. Let the flames go unchecked, or police threads with these topics closely.

The second seems best to me, but I understand why there can't be an unlimited number of forums.


----------



## Lawe (Nov 27, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Ray MacDonald said:


> The Moderator staff never recommends another forum. In fact, we would prefer that we don't introduce new forums unless we have a sponsor willing to pay for one, or the Owner thinks it necessary. In the past we have introduced a forum and due to lack of interest it has later been removed. So the number of forums does not grow indiscriminately.
> Our view is that the theme forums are the way to go.


Maintaining any forum is hard work and there has to be both interest and sponsorship.

Also - I have spent the last couple of hour searching on recommendations on "what to wear with what". I, personally, don't want a forum that concentrates those kinds of silly/arrogant comments even if there are a few useful bits of information included.

Although a shame, the evidence speaks for itself. I vote against.


----------



## Blue bird (Feb 11, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I think it may be a recipe for disaster simply because there are as many opinions on this matter as there are grass blades on a football field. I've seen this type of discussion get pretty heated at times. Keeping this as a sticky would be good so that it can be discussed a little more casually versus a sub forum where people could go in with their guards up. Otherwise, it could just be left as it was before with the occasisonal thread started on the subject every so often. 
This is just my 2 cents.....


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

I think we've established that this conversation can indeed take place so long as no offensive comments are made. Once again...I will reiterate that if you are against any type of sartorial advice and value individualism over dressing according to certain standards...then by all means do not visit this thread. 

Most of the times the poor guy who posted the legitimate question walks away more confused than before and his question never gets answered. 

The guys who do offer such advice...do so with the true intent of trying to help the person who asked in the first place. The advice is no different from advising on the best watch to wear when diving, driving, flying, yachting, etc. Every watch is appropriate at some point...but there is no watch appropriate for everything. Good, solid advice is always welcomed. 

With that said...I think we can move on peacefully and hope that no one person starts the "name-calling". I don't think many of us like to be called "condescending snobs" no more than many of us like to be told we "dress like pigs". 

Any attacks in this thread should get reported...we're all civilized here and should be respectful of other's boundaries.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

This is brilliant. I particularly enjoyed "even if the rats of 'individualism' are constantly gnawing at its perimeter..."

I wholeheartedly support the notion that a properly developed sense of style comes from _first_ knowing the "rules" and _then_ conscious, informed deviations to make it your own.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Test. Test. Test.

I'm getting married tomorrow and want to know whether Black Tie or Evening Dress is more appropriate attire for the watch I've choosen to wear:

View attachment 488688


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

ljb187 said:


> Test. Test. Test.
> 
> I'm getting married tomorrow and want to know whether Black Tie or Evening Dress is more appropriate attire for the watch I've choosen to wear:
> 
> View attachment 488688


 Oh, no no no. You want to embrace today's falling standards by choosing "street dress," which nowadays means wearing trousers so loose that, in the back, the waistband gently settles just below the lowest point of the cheek of each buttock, exposing one's ratty gray underwear for all to see.

I've seen it in real life, and I _really_ wish I hadn't.


----------



## Lawe (Nov 27, 2010)

drt said:


> Oh, no no no. You want to embrace today's falling standards by choosing "street dress," which nowadays means wearing trousers so loose that, in the back, the waistband gently settles just below the lowest point of the cheek of each buttock, exposing one's ratty gray underwear for all to see.
> 
> I've seen it in real life, and I _really_ wish I hadn't.


Very nice.

I have a question -

Many of my shoes/dress boots are Alden cordovans in the traditional cordovan color. I usually wear a brown or Alden cordovan belt with the shoes. Is it business-accepted to wear a blck-strapped watch (Seiko Grand Seiko, Rolex Datejust, Rolex Air King) with the shoes/belt.

I promise for the good of all that is decent not to show my underwear with any combination that I choose...


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

ljb187 said:


> Test. Test. Test.
> 
> I'm getting married tomorrow and want to know whether Black Tie or Evening Dress is more appropriate attire for the watch I've choosen to wear:


Depends. Will your incarceration happen during daylight hours or at nightfall? More importantly, I hope your taste in partners is better than your taste in watches.



Lawe said:


> Very nice.
> 
> I have a question -
> 
> ...


One does not wear boots with a "business outfit", heathen. Unless, of course, you're planning on riding a horse to work.


----------



## Lawe (Nov 27, 2010)

Metlin said:


> Depends. Will your incarceration happen during daylight hours or at nightfall? More importantly, is she pretty?
> 
> One does not wear boots with a "business outfit", heathen. Unless, of course, you're planning on riding a horse to work.


:rodekaart

LOL, the fact that I happen to sacrifice small animals on certain full moon days has nothing to do with the fact that there are such things as dress boots that can be worn with suits. At least I hope so unless I have spent alot of money on looking good in my weekend honey-do clothes!!!!


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Lawe said:


> :rodekaart
> 
> LOL, the fact that I happen to sacrifice small animals on certain full moon days has nothing to do with the fact that there are such things as dress boots that can be worn with suits. At least I hope so unless I have spent alot of money on looking good in my weekend honey-do clothes!!!!


Living in Kansas is nothing to be ashamed of. At least it's not Canada.


----------



## Lawe (Nov 27, 2010)

Metlin said:


> Living in Kansas is nothing to be ashamed of. At least it's not Canada.


True, at least I tend to wear shoes. At least on cold days where it is my turn with my ten brothers.

Hmmm... I hope that God is not Canadian....

But then, isn't Celine Dion Canadian? Right... not such a worry... :-d


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Lawe said:


> True, at least I tend to wear shoes. At least on cold days where it is my turn with my ten brothers.
> 
> Hmmm... I hope that God is not Canadian....
> 
> But then, isn't Celine Dion Canadian? Right... not such a worry... :-d


It is nice that you consider your sheep part of the family, but isn't sharing your footwear going too far?


----------



## Blue bird (Feb 11, 2009)

Lawe said:


> True, at least I tend to wear shoes. At least on cold days where it is my turn with my ten brothers.
> 
> Hmmm... I hope that God is not Canadian....
> 
> But then, isn't Celine Dion Canadian? Right... not such a worry... :-d


God may not be, but Santa is.....
As for Celine Dion......well......no country is perfect......you guys know that;-)


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

drt said:


> ... just below the lowest point of the cheek of each buttock, exposing one's ratty gray underwear for all to see... I've seen it in real life, and I _really_ wish I hadn't.


Whatever it is, once you have seen... you cannot UNsee.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Metlin said:


> Depends. Will your incarceration happen during daylight hours or at nightfall?
> One does not wear boots with a "business outfit", heathen. Unless, of course, you're planning on riding a horse to work.


Most witty, that 'incarceration' bit! Some high quality snark right there.

As for boots: 
Since there are so any 'kinds' of boots, with equally as many 'moods' that they invoke, what of "dress" boots? By which I mean, those fine-leathered, low-heeled slip-ons whose top and sides were not truncated in time to remain fully slip-onable - at least not without the assistance of one's hands, as they (sides & top) extend right past one's ankles.

What exactly is the significance of laces*on "dress" shoes - symbolic or otherwise, other than function? 
* - The 'Cambridge Cut' as it was once called, was a method of snubbing using ones shoelaces as an excuse to ignore the snubbie - by pretending to be busy tying one's shoelaces, thus looking down.

NB: I may be confusing with the "Oxford Cut" - another method of snubbing/ignoring, involving checking the time - by pretending to be looking at the tower clock. But let's not get pedantic about which is which: we get the general idea.
This precious and droll connection between shoelaces and time-telling should not go unnoticed by any WIS worth his potassium chloride.

And, given their eminent position (symbolically AND functionally) of shoelaces in the question of proper attire, how and when do laces function in optimizing one's sartorial decorum in relation to the seasons, and various occasions - formal and informal? 
And as a corollary, When is it best to opt for shoes without laces - for the same purpose?

Lesson: Compare the difference between these 2 formal Occasions and Place/Time:

1. A mid-spring garden wedding, with the reception at the yacht; Newport, Rhode Island (still chilly)
2. A late summer funeral; New Orleans (still very muggy)

And finally, what of zippers on shoes?

(Now, that is the caliber of questions that should be asked around here, and reappear at the end of this thread on the final exam!)


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

> Living in Kansas is nothing to be ashamed of. At least it's not Canada.












Well, at least we know proper attire when we see it. :-x


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> Most witty, that 'incarceration' bit! Some high quality snark right there.
> 
> As for boots:
> Since there are so any 'kinds' of boots, with equally as many 'moods' that they invoke, what of "dress" boots? By which I mean, those fine-leathered, low-heeled slip-ons whose top and sides were not truncated in time to remain fully slip-onable - at least not without the assistance of one's hands, as they (sides & top) extend right past one's ankles.
> ...


Chronopolis, I am offended that you did not include an Ivy cut, to accommodate your less civilized brethren.

On the topic of boots: they are frowned upon given their equesterian or sport origins (at least for Chelseas, Jodhpurs, Chukkas etc).

I cannot speak to the significance of shoelaces; however, certain styles of shoes are certainly considered more formal than others (Oxfords/Balmorals, which have closed laces, are considered more appropriate for suits than Derbys or Bluchers, which have open laces). And if one wants to get into specifics, Balmorals themselves are a type of Oxford, of which there are three: Balmorals, Adelaides, and Wholecuts. But I've found that in the US, at least, Oxfords are generally referred to as Balmorals. And of course, brogues or wingtips are almost always considered less formal than their counterparts.

Of course, you have other categories of shoes, such as monkstraps, that straddle the line. And on the other extreme, you have loafers, which are considered a bit too casual to be worn with a suit (not that it's prevented anyone...).

But given the preponderance of the more traditional elements in classic style, I will state that things like zippers are perhaps a tad too casual and "modern" to be paired with the more traditional elements. And in that spirit, I will go out on a limb and state my personal taste in these matters:


Formal: Oxfords with suits. I even break the rules myself by preferring the non-patent leather Oxfords for black tie events, since I find the patent leather too ostentatious. Brogues or wingtips are fine with suits, but never with a dinner jacket. And always a leather strapped dress watch.
Semi-formal: Bluchers and monk straps with sport coats. And of course, wing tips. Always a leather strapped dress watch.
Business Casual: Loafers or derbys with the abomination that is business casual (e.g khakis and a dress shirt with a blazer). Watches with leather straps or metal bracelets, but no digitals or divers.
Casual: Boots or loafers with jeans, never with suits or sport coats. Pretty much anything goes, including divers and digital watches.
 Of course, other people more knowledgeable than me can certainly chime in.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Metlin said:


> _Chronopolis, I am offended that you did not include an Ivy cut, to accommodate your less civilized brethren.
> On the topic of boots: they are frowned upon given their equesterian or sport origins (at least for Chelseas, Jodhpurs, Chukkas etc)_.


*Ivy Cut:* The less civilized also have their own way; less civilized, but all their own.

*Boots:* Mr. Ralph Lauren notwithstanding, the frownworthiness in question here, it should be clarified, is as it applies to business attire, and up. I'm sure boots bearing their full equestrian (or bovine) heritage would be most welcome, and appropriate in all Ralph Lauren sponsored outdoor occasions: picnics, fund raisers, Easter egg hunts, whatnot.

[/QUOTE] _I cannot speak to the significance of shoelaces; however, certain styles of shoes are certainly considered more formal than others (Oxfords/Balmorals, which have closed laces, are considered more appropriate for suits than Derbys or Bluchers, which have open laces). And if one wants to get into specifics, Balmorals themselves are a type of Oxford, of which there are three: Balmorals, Adelaides, and Wholecuts. _[/QUOTE]

*Cough cough pics.*


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Metlin said:


> Of course, you have other categories of shoes, such as monkstraps, that straddle the line. And on the other extreme, you have loafers, which are considered a bit too casual to be worn with a suit (not that it's prevented anyone...).
> 
> But given the preponderance of the more traditional elements in classic style, I will state that things like zippers are perhaps a tad too casual and "modern" to be paired with the more traditional elements. And in that spirit, I will go out on a limb and state my personal taste in these matters:
> 
> ...


I agree.


----------



## TheDarkHorseOne (May 21, 2011)

So the question becomes, then, what watch is appropos when you're unattired? I assume waterproof or resistant is rather mandatory, but do you match the strap with a certain mole color, or perhaps prominent hair color, or is it considered accessorizing, and you're looking for a dial that flatters your eyes? Is a big watch appropriate, but perhaps unflattering to anatomy, and is that a proportion that one should consider?

We kid, folks. We kid because we love.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Just happened to be in the neighborhood, so dropping by:
Actually, you do bring up a relevant topic that I've always been curious about: Air travel attire.
After all, "appropriate" attire is always a matter of being "appropriate" to some given situation, not per se. And I think air travel attire is still very "19th century" in its mentality, and so unsafe.

Personally, I find it absurd that we still fly in suits at all. Uncomfortable even in First Class. Pajamas? believe it or not, I think it's the better alternative, frankly, given how grueling the whole ordeal is. Even jeans are uncomfortable in the long run. And hard soled shoes? Fuggedabouddid. Do astronauts wear that kinda crap?

I've always thought we should treat flying like any other 'sport' - something that demands stamina and requires optimal physical support. As a matter of safety! A lot of people get - especially ladies wearing pantyhose (nylon- combustible) - get burned unnecessarily when there's a fire. Etc.

I think we should ALL be wearing "space suits" of some kind modified proportionally for air travel - with the whole survival kit built right in. No more stupid floatation device announcements, since your suit will be designed to float you, and emit light signals on your behalf if you're in water. I can imagine a dozen other qualities that would make such a suit not only "suitable" for air travel and its dangers, but also positively cool.

BUT, such suits will NOT come equipped with a watch, so I'd imagine the more sensible among us would opt to wear a diver watch.... Or a pilot watch? Which?
I'd choose a diver myself: the chances of my flying a jumbo jet pale compare to those of finding myself in water, hopefully still alive.



TheDarkHorseOne said:


> So the question becomes, then, what watch is appropos when you're unattired? I assume waterproof or resistant is rather mandatory, but do you match the strap with a certain mole color, or perhaps prominent hair color, or is it considered accessorizing, and you're looking for a dial that flatters your eyes? Is a big watch appropriate, but perhaps unflattering to anatomy, and is that a proportion that one should consider?
> 
> We kid, folks. We kid because we love.


----------



## TheDarkHorseOne (May 21, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Just happened to be in the neighborhood, so dropping by:
> Actually, you do bring up a relevant topic that I've always been curious about: Air travel attire.
> After all, "appropriate" attire is always a matter of being "appropriate" to some given situation, not per se. And I think air travel attire is still very "19th century" in its mentality, and so unsafe.
> 
> ...


Welcome to the neighborhood.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Legend has it that Yuri Gagarin was scared of sharks, and carried shark repellent with him on all his space flights (should he land in water with sharks).


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> Just happened to be in the neighborhood, so dropping by:
> Actually, you do bring up a relevant topic that I've always been curious about: Air travel attire.
> After all, "appropriate" attire is always a matter of being "appropriate" to some given situation, not per se. And I think air travel attire is still very "19th century" in its mentality, and so unsafe.
> 
> ...


Since Philadelphia has had a summer of constant record-breaking heat, I've broken out the loose fitting khakis. Easily the most comfortable thing to wear in the long run.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

Chronopolis said:


> Actually, you do bring up a relevant topic that I've always been curious about: Air travel attire.[..]
> 
> I think we should ALL be wearing "space suits" of some kind modified proportionally for air travel - with the whole survival kit built right in. No more stupid floatation device announcements, since your suit will be designed to float you, and emit light signals on your behalf if you're in water. I can imagine a dozen other qualities that would make such a suit not only "suitable" for air travel and its dangers, but also positively cool.


 Flying attire is important. One _must _wear it properly, and adherence to standards is paramount.

My son has taken to watching a show called "Mayday," which reenacts airplane disasters and the investigations that followed - unapproved bolts 1-32" short, and such.

One of these episodes involved a "water landing." The crew instructed the passengers to don their yellow inflatable life vests, which were _de rigeur_. Many made the _faux pas_ of inflating them prematurely and found they were too buoyant to exit the plane. They floated to the top of the passenger compartment instead, and survived only as long as the air pocket did.

_Very_ bad form.

I wear a "poor man's B-1" style ana-digi when I'm flying. It's not the prettiest watch, but flying isn't exactly an elegant social event.

I look for those emergency exits, too.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

While I conventionally support looking ones best, I relax my expectations somewhat for flight. The key rules are thus: be clean and presentable, fit entirely within your allotted space, let's not have small talk, and most importantly leave the children at home. I propose a child-free airline. Anyone?

More to your point, considering the stage of undress necessary to pass through security, it is not that much more unreasonable to simply change into flight suits at that juncture.


----------



## brokenblinker (Jul 2, 2011)

I understand the pedantic jesting occuring in this thread, but on a serious note, directly pertaining to the thread's purpose, I have a question.

What is the most formal dress that would be considered appropriate when worn with a watch as follows? My follow up question pertains to the correct colors to wear. Would this be appropriate to wear with black slacks and a polo (considering the tanish/brown strap)? In the same vein, considering the black dial, could it be worn with khaki pants? Sorry if I'm off with the colors a bit, I'm somewhat color blind.
View attachment 490446


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

Other more knowledgable chaps (Metlin and Raza) will likely chime in shortly, in the meantime perhaps this will help. 

First, there are two different types of questions being asked here; what is the most formal attire at which the watch in question still remains viable? And, which color-ways does the watch work best with? 

Regarding formality, I view Panerai in general, and the watch shown specifically, as best suited for casual (or business casual, if you are into that) attire; say, button-up and slacks as the most formal level. 

With respect to color matching, the strap should match the belt and shoes at a minimum. Ergo, I would not wear the watch with black slacks because I would not wear brown shoes with black pants*. A swap to a black strap opens the door for black shoes and, therefore, black pants.

I am now standing by, waiting to be corrected...

*Some people claim that brown shoes with black pants is acceptable under certain conditions, but I have rarely seen this play out well in practice.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

I would agree with TylerDurden's statements. Generally, Panerais are too "loud" to be considered a subtle dress watch.

There's a certainly element of subjectivity at play here, of course, but even the ~40mm Panerais _look _and feel much bigger.

I am not sure what exactly business casual entails (but it scares me), and I would hesitate to wear it in a place of business in the more formal businesses. For instance, where I work, business casual is slacks (not khakis), a dress shirt, and a sport coat. Elsewhere, it could be jeans and a dress shirt with loafers. So, I would perhaps wear it with jeans and khakis, but not when I'm wearing suits or dress slacks.

Matching your leathers and your metals is recommended, so I always ensure that my belt, shoes, and watch straps match. I prefer that they are also a similar shade simply because a burgundy-brown belt and watch strap would look odd with light-brown whiskey cordovan shoes, for instance, making the unmatched element stand out. And if none of them match, well, that just looks haphazard.

But at the end of the day, it entirely depends on how anal retentive you are, and what exactly it is that you're retaining.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

TylerDurden said:


> With respect to color matching, the strap should match the belt and shoes at a minimum. Ergo, I would not wear the watch with black slacks because I would not wear brown shoes with black pants*. A swap to a black strap opens the door for black shoes and, therefore, black pants.


I would advice against black pants, unless you're working for the secret service or planning on a funeral. The problem with a color like black is two fold: one, it forces a certain level of formality that would be at odds with any dress code but the most formal (e.g. black tie, and in some cases, black suits -- as much as I despise them, and that is why the rules recommend them only for formal occasions). And another, more pragmatic point is that it greatly reduces your flexibility in mixing and matching outfits, given how severe it looks. I find that dark navy works just as well, and is infinitely more flexible.

Personally, I prefer most of my slacks to be shades of gray or navy, perhaps with stripes and patterns for variety. Gray in particular lends itself well to a wide variety of colors, from black through shades of brown, and burgundy. But like I said, the rules are one thing, but personal style quite another, and it all comes down to a degree of subjectivity.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

brokenblinker said:


> I understand the pedantic jesting occuring in this thread, but on a serious note, directly pertaining to the thread's purpose, I have a question.
> 
> What is the most formal dress that would be considered appropriate when worn with a watch as follows? My follow up question pertains to the correct colors to wear. Would this be appropriate to wear with black slacks and a polo (considering the tanish/brown strap)? In the same vein, considering the black dial, could it be worn with khaki pants? Sorry if I'm off with the colors a bit, I'm somewhat color blind.
> View attachment 490446


Strictly speaking, that is a casual watch. Panerais are technically divers, despite not having bezels. Conventional wisdom says that your watch strap should match your belt and shoes, so that leaves you with brown shoes, which means no black slacks. I've seen it done, and as lenient as I am with the rules of fashion, it's particularly offensive to the eye. At a push you can do gray (I wear gray slacks with brown or tan shoes and I think it looks quite good if the rest of the outfit matches), but I'd stick to khaki colored trousers.

Business casual means a lot more goes than you would think. A watch like that is fine at an office for the day to day, but at a proper function like a client meeting or upper management meeting, it's going to look out of place--unless your goal is to get your watch noticed.

Black dial and khakis should be fine. After all, black goes with everything (although conversely, not everything goes with black).


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

TylerDurden said:


> Other more knowledgable chaps (Metlin and Raza) will likely chime in shortly, in the meantime perhaps this will help.


Haha, I don't know if I'd consider myself particularly knowledgeable, but thanks! Also, I did notice that Metlin and I were the next guys to chime in!


----------



## ajack (Jul 28, 2011)

*What kind of watch to match your suits?*

It's so obvious that watch more and more become a jewelry nowadays: there're tons of thing to tell time, such as cell phone, clock somewhere else in public train, or even clock in CD-player of your car. I'm not saying the timepiece that strap on your wrist is useless, but it's somehow a toy for your hobby (at least for WUS). Thus, what you're wearing should match your cloths: you shouldn't wear flip-flop while wearing a suit. So, I really wonder what kind of watch will you wear in specific situation.

For me
1. Oris Arterlier Moon Phase (with leather strap): when I'm wearing suits or dress shirt
2. Chronograph clock with steel strap: for casual wear

Does moon phase watch match with dress shirt? And dress watch is a simple one which only indicate hour, minute and second, isn't it?


----------



## Mr Rick (Jun 21, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I'm retired. Before I bought that dress watch I'd have to buy a..........suit.:-d


----------



## mike120 (Aug 1, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

On the few times that I find myself in a suit, I wear my SNK809 on a black leather strap (to match my shoes, belt and soul). Its small and discreet, which is perfect. Don't want the interviewer thinking that I'm loaded when he mistakes my SKX007 for a Rolex ;-).


----------



## FusionMK (Jun 7, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Really slim pocketwatch with all of my black suits (No BS!). My Elgin with my white suit, unless I decide to casually wear it and go blingy, which then I go with the Rolex.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Maybe read the sticky thread at the top of the forum.....


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Indeed, we have a running thread on this very topic that contains an increasing amount of good advice.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Ray MacDonald said:


> Maybe read the sticky thread at the top of the forum.....


Ray, we could perhaps merge this with the sticky thread?


----------



## Sodiac (Dec 6, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Depends on what you mean by "suit" For me, it's when my flip-flops, shorts and T-shirt colors all match. :-d So then I wear a matching el Cheapo Amphibia with a plastic or NATO strap to match. OK, so I'm a _cavone_, whaddya eggspect?


----------



## ohmegah (Dec 16, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Depending on the suit it's usually one of these two:


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

This is my suit watch.

View attachment 491420


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> Ray, we could perhaps merge this with the sticky thread?


Sure can. Good idea.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Crucify me, but I'm going to wear my Speedmaster or Monaco with a suit. Speedy is more low-key, the Monaco is a flashier since it's Gulf colors on a blue strap.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I'd posted the gradient scale once, based on a discussion on shoes, but here's how I see it for just watches and formality:


*Attire*
*Ideal/Recommended*
*What I wear
**Examples*
Black Tie/White Tie
No watch (out of respect for the host) or a subtle and dressy watch with black leather strap
Dressy watch with black leather strap on a white dial. 
PP Calatrava, VC Patrimony, RW Maestro etc. 
Business formal (suits, sport coat and/or a tie)
Dressy watch on a leather strap, where the leather matches your shoes/belt
Dressy watch on a leather strap, where the where the leather matches the shoes/belt and the metals match
PP Calatrava, VC Patrimony, RW Maestro etc. 
Strict business casual (slacks, dress shirt, occasional sport coat)
Dressy watch on a leather strap, where the leather matches your shoes/belt - but you have some leeway here on how dressy/subtle the watch is not
Usually a dressy watch on a leather strap, but occasionally, something not-so-subtle.
Mostly same as above, but occasionally something like an Omega Speedmaster or a Breitling Navitimer.
Loose business casual (khakis, dress shirts, button downs, polos, occasional sport coat)
Watches with leather straps or metal bracelets
Watches with leather straps or metal bracelets, occasionally divers, never digital watches (usually with what I call the New England summer boating look: khakis, white shirt/polo shirt, and navy blazer with loafers). 
Dress watches (e.g. Calatrava), chronographs (e.g. Speedy), aviation watches (e.g. Navitimer). Occasionally, divers (e.g. Rolex Submariner, Panerai).
Casual (jeans, shorts, t-shirts etc)
No limits, as far as I know
Whatever I feel like, although if I'm in dress jeans and good shoes and a dress shirt/sport coat, I'll wear a dress watch with a leather strap.
Anything from a PP Calatrava to a G-Shock. Even a Monaco. ;-)


Is this all? Not really. However, this is my (albeit, limited) understanding of dress codes and their associated timepieces. Others, please feel free to chime in.


----------



## TheDarkHorseOne (May 21, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Who makes up the rules?


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Raza said:


> Crucify me, but I'm going to wear my Speedmaster or Monaco with a suit. Speedy is more low-key, the Monaco is a flashier since it's Gulf colors on a blue strap.


I wear a Speedmaster with a suit sometimes but I would draw the line at the Gulf Monaco.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



camb66 said:


> I wear a Speedmaster with a suit sometimes but I would draw the line at the Gulf Monaco.


It's a little loud, sure, but it works with a navy blue suit.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

*"No watch (out of respect for the host)"*

This had not occurred to me, being the horologically selfish ape that I am.
But I can see how it could be a subtle gesture if refinement - but only if you know the host well, I suppose. Otherwise, you might come off looking like you forgot to wear your watch.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Sound advice. 
But I myself actually favor black pants - One, becz I am not usually found in "business" (e.g., corporate) settings even when I am conducting (my) business. 
Two, I prefer it precisely for the "severity" it conveys. I find that it works well for me when I wear it with intense rust brown or deep hunter-green sport jackets and dark bronze-tone ties.

But indeed: rules are rules, personal style is personal style. And here, insofar as a "personal style" IS a style (yours), and a "style" is a kind of "language" it too has an obligation to be coherent, lest you "speak" jibberish with your attire. There are no rules except yours, but you must still have them. It's kinda like "diction": the way you speak. 
So then, your subjectivity/sense of style has to be refined/disciplined enough to make, and keep, certain rules of your own making.

This mastery of autonomy in creating a personal style is also what refines & strengthens your confidence in your sense of judgment. It takes courage - willing to fail, and make mistakes - and a certain intellectual curiosity about what it means to project an image of yourself to the world.... because, we DO project an image, whether we do it consciously or not. Why not be the master of your own image(s)? After all, you spent a lot of time/money in researching/buying that watch, didn't ya? You'd rather go naked-wrist than wear an INVICTA quartz, wouldn't ya? Well, there ya go.

What you wear - and how it is "appropriate" also has a lot to do with your own character AND line of work - these contextualize the "propriety" of your "style", and make it acceptable or not. (To wit, what Steve Tyler wears is not acceptable on anyone - not even on a woman - but on him.)



Metlin said:


> I would advice against black pants, unless you're working for the secret service or planning on a funeral. The problem with a color like black is two fold: one, it forces a certain level of formality that would be at odds with any dress code but the most formal (e.g. black tie, and in some cases, black suits -- as much as I despise them, and that is why the rules recommend them only for formal occasions). And another, more pragmatic point is that it greatly reduces your flexibility in mixing and matching outfits, given how _*severe*_ it looks. But like I said, the rules are one thing, but personal style quite another, and it all comes down to a degree of subjectivity.


----------



## Spit161 (Oct 9, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



camb66 said:


> I wear a Speedmaster with a suit sometimes but I would draw the line at the Gulf Monaco.


Hmm.. I could see how it would work, but it would need to be a more "dressed down" suit (something a bit more colorful that the normal black/white job).

cheers.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TheDarkHorseOne said:


> Who makes up the rules?


No particular person or group. It's a general social convention, like the rules about using the fork on the left, keeping your elbows off the table and not beginning to eat before the hostess sits down. Because they're social conventions, you can't just figure them out logically - someone has to tell you what they are. And it's good to know what they are, even if you don't always obey them, because then you'll know what's (probably) expected in a formal situation, which makes you more confident.

Let's keep perspective, though. Flowers or wine for the host or hostess is more important than this watch discussion, for sure.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> I'd posted the gradient scale once, based on a discussion on shoes, but here's how I see it for just watches and formality:
> [...]
> 
> Is this all? Not really. However, this is my (albeit, limited) understanding of dress codes and their associated timepieces. Others, please feel free to chime in.


I'd like to drive a huge wedge between formal social practice and business practice.

In business, you have to wear what gets the job done. If a diver on bracelet helps you do your job, it's the right thing to wear. I do think a dress watch is the right watch for an interview, but I doubt it makes too much difference weather it's on leather or bracelet.

A formal social occasion is different. A guest at a formal social event owes it to the hosts to make an effort. One thing hosts want, in particular, is for the occasion to be formal. And it'll be formal only if the guests con-form.

If you ask the hosts whether you can wear a particular watch, they will graciously say yes, but I think their true wishes, shown by the substantial time, money, and energy they put into making a formal event happen, should prevail. With a suit, that means a dress watch on matching leather.

Some formal occasions happen in a house of worship. The rule there for adherents and other believers is that God deserves your best. That may or may not be what the ordinary social rules prescribe.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



drt said:


> No particular person or group. It's a general social convention, like the rules about using the fork on the left, keeping your elbows off the table and not beginning to eat before the hostess sits down. Because they're social conventions, you can't just figure them out logically - someone has to tell you what they are. And it's good to know what they are, even if you don't always obey them, because then you'll know what's (probably) expected in a formal situation, which makes you more confident.
> 
> Let's keep perspective, though. Flowers or wine for the host or hostess is more important than this watch discussion, for sure.





drt said:


> I'd like to drive a huge wedge between formal social practice and business practice.
> 
> In business, you have to wear what gets the job done. If a diver on bracelet helps you do your job, it's the right thing to wear. I do think a dress watch is the right watch for an interview, but I doubt it makes too much difference weather it's on leather or bracelet.
> 
> ...


I couldn't agree more with both these comments. I will say that for some of us, business conventions closely mirror social conventions given the amount of social interactions that are involved -- this need not be the case for everyone, and in which case, differentiating the two becomes quite important.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> Sound advice.
> But I myself actually favor black pants - One, becz I am not usually found in "business" (e.g., corporate) settings even when I am conducting (my) business.
> Two, I prefer it precisely for the "severity" it conveys. I find that it works well for me when I wear it with intense rust brown or hunter green sport jackets and dark bronzish ties.
> 
> ...


Were Voltaire a stylin' man, I'm sure he'd have said something about disagreeing with your style, but defending your ability to flaunt it nevertheless. ;-)

But speaking of black, I recently discovered that I enjoy mixing black and midnight blue at relatively "less formal" black tie events (usually hosted by friends) by wearing a black bowtie with a midnight blue dinner jacket and trouser outfit. It just stands out, especially under lighting. People can see that something's different, but they're usually unsure for a minute or two.

And I wonder if one can get a midnight blue leather watch strap, to match.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Metlin said:


> Were Voltaire a stylin' man, I'm sure he'd have said something about disagreeing with your style, but defending your ability to flaunt it nevertheless. ;-)
> 
> But speaking of black, *I recently discovered that I enjoy mixing black and midnight blue* at relatively "less formal" black tie events (usually hosted by friends) by wearing a black bowtie with a midnight blue dinner jacket and trouser outfit. It just stands out, especially under lighting. People can see that something's different, but they're usually unsure for a minute or two.
> 
> And I wonder if one can get a *midnight blue leather watch strap*, to match.


If it's not beneath you, you can easily find a "midnight" blue at this German fellow's shop on ebay. I got mine there, for my Armand Nicolet. Just type in "*BOB night*" under 'watches/jewelry'. Excellent quality, rationally priced.

As for mixing it up, how dare you. 
On the other hand, bravo. That's how it starts, bubbah. ;-)
And then, before you know it, your liver has lost its ability to secrete fear enzymes, and you're ordering shirts from India by the dozen: lime and lavender stripes. :-!

Black trousers work well with strong, dark, chthonic, but vibrantly "electrified" colors.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

1) I've often thought about wearing shoes that don't match. A deep cordovan shoe paired with a black one might go well with a navy suit. You could setup your watch strap in the same manner

2) People who like to wear giant watches should consider getting one of those 55mm fliegers and strapping it to the outside of their B-3 bomber jackets


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

Five pages in to this sticky-worthy thread, and I think I see a pattern beginning to emerge. In particular, I fear this thread will evolve into a five-page cycle that will contain (at least) one merge of another independent thread asking a similar variation of the same question, and a subsequently required repost of Metlin's concise yet appreciably awesome guide for newcomers who lack the attention span to catch up in the thread the old-fashioned way - by reading it.

In order to contribute in some small way to the progression of the discussion, I would like to attempt to challenge the capabilities and parameters of the in-house style council by which these two important aspects of a man's dress, clothing and watch, should be coordinated. Otherwise, we're just a bunch of naked idiots wandering around without a clue as to what time it is.

So it is in this spirit I present to you the following:

View attachment 491963


This is Dennis Rodman arriving at yesterday's NBA Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony.

First question: What watch would be appropriate with this tastefully understated ensemble? Bonus question: What shoes should he wear to ensure proper dress coordination with both his suit and the watch you selected?

Now, Mr. Rodman&#8230; excuse me&#8230; Hall of Fame Rebounding _Machine_ Dennis Rodman, is no Cretan. He brought with him a wardrobe change for his acceptance speech:

View attachment 491964


So I ask the council, did you select a watch that was equally appropriate for both, er, _suits_? Or is the watch you selected for his arrival at the ceremony inappropriate for his choice of evening wear? If so, what watch would you select for this understated ensemble with that subtle red piping? On a more personal note, should I accidentally stick both _my_ hands through a pair of lace doilies, should I change my watch if it is not already on a leather strap?

Lastly, I presume it is axiomatic that one should always match the metal of their nose ring(s) with their watch and belt buckle. Metlin?


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

TheSanDiegan said:


> Five pages in to this sticky-worthy thread, and I think I see a pattern beginning to emerge. In particular, I fear this thread will evolve into a five-page cycle that will contain (at least) one merge of another independent thread asking a similar variation of the same question, and a subsequently required repost of Metlin's concise yet appreciably awesome guide for newcomers who lack the attention span to catch up in the thread the old-fashioned way - by reading it.
> 
> In order to contribute in some small way to the progression of the discussion, I would like to attempt to challenge the capabilities and parameters of the in-house style council by which these two important aspects of a man's dress, clothing and watch, should be coordinated. Otherwise, we're just a bunch of naked idiots wandering around without a clue as to what time it is.
> 
> ...


50/50 chance his shoes didn't match!


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



drt said:


> No particular person or group. It's a general social convention, like the rules about using the fork on the left, keeping your elbows off the table and not beginning to eat before the hostess sits down. Because they're social conventions, you can't just figure them out logically - someone has to tell you what they are. And it's good to know what they are, even if you don't always obey them, because then you'll know what's (probably) expected in a formal situation, which makes you more confident.
> 
> Let's keep perspective, though. Flowers or wine for the host or hostess is more important than this watch discussion, for sure.


Next time I wear a tux, I'm wearing my 46mm Sunset, but I'll bring a nice bottle of red.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

ljb187 said:


> 50/50 chance his shoes didn't match!


Phew, I was so close to buying that exact same hat. That would have been embarrassing.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Raza said:


> Next time I wear a tux, I'm wearing my 46mm Sunset, but I'll bring a nice bottle of red.


Just make sure it isn't a Merlot.


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

Raza said:


> Phew, I was so close to buying that exact same hat. That would have been embarrassing.


Just make sure when you wear it that your shoes match.


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> Just make sure it isn't a Merlot.


It is one of the six noble grapes, and as a general rule, a Right Bank Bordeaux is predominantly Merlot. I think he's good to go with a nice Merlot, provided he doesn't wear that damn hat. The feathers won't match.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TheSanDiegan said:


> It is one of the six noble grapes, and as a general rule, a Right Bank Bordeaux is predominantly Merlot. I think he's good to go with a nice Merlot, provided he doesn't wear that damn hat. The feathers won't match.


It's amazing the difference one can find between a delightful Cabernet Sauvignon and a Merlot -- so close, yet so far. I will refrain from using a political metaphor. And utter disregard for the growths, even.

But you're right of course. Petrus has some delightful reds, but I'm just not a fan of what's usually grown and sold in the US. Disgusting is perhaps too strong a word, but bland perhaps? Although, that's probably the limited mass-market availability of good quality Merlots here.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

TheSanDiegan said:


> View attachment 491963
> 
> 
> This is Dennis Rodman arriving at yesterday's NBA Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony.
> ...


 I am under the impression from the photos and your description that Mr. Rodman treated the event as a commercial activity. Is that correct?

Hmmm. That changes things. As you know, I like to draw a distinction between business and social activities.

But I do believe I can be of assistance. Please PM me Mr. Rodman's contact information. I can, for a small fee, find Mr. Rodman a number of pieces commensurate with his taste, outfit and, er, station in life. Please include whether he likes diamond-encrusted jewelry or prefers obscene displays of gold, either white or yellow, his choice. Or maybe platinum?

His satisfaction I personally guarantee.

("Hey, honey! You still want that yacht???")


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> It's amazing the difference one can find between a delightful Cabernet Sauvignon and a Merlot -- so close, yet so far. I will refrain from using a political metaphor. And utter disregard for the growths, even.
> 
> But you're right of course. Petrus has some delightful reds, but I'm just not a fan of what's usually grown and sold in the US. Disgusting is perhaps too strong a word, but bland perhaps? Although, that's probably the limited mass-market availability of good quality Merlots here.


I consider myself fortunate to live here in California. There is no shortage of quality Old World-style Cabs and Merlots available if one knows where to look. I have had Meritage that are phenomenally deep and complex, with a terrior every bit as distinctive as their Left Bank and Right Bank counterparts. And some of the vintners in the appellations of Southern California (in which the climate is favorable to the varietal) have produced Syrah on par with some of the nicer Côtes du Rhône I've had the pleasure to drink. I can't speak on behalf of any of the wine produced out of the state though (with the exception of Washington).


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TheSanDiegan said:


> I consider myself fortunate to live here in California. There is no shortage of quality Old World-style Cabs and Merlots available if one knows where to look. I have had Meritage that are phenomenally deep and complex, with a terrior every bit as distinctive as their Left Bank and Right Bank counterparts. And some of the vintners in the appellations of Southern California (in which the climate is favorable to the varietal) have produced Syrah on par with some of the nicer Côtes du Rhône I've had the pleasure to drink. I can't speak on behalf of any of the wine produced out of the state though (with the exception of Washington).


Yes, but you have to live in California. ;-)

On a more serious note, I was merely being flip about the dismal quality of Merlots that are available in the US. There are good ones, of course, but they just seem quite uncommon.


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

What do you think of mesh bracelets in dress watches? I usually wear my Seagull M177s with a mesh bracelet in summer to have both black and brown color clothes covered as style. Here is a picture from mobile.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



flori78 said:


> What do you think of mesh bracelets in dress watches? I usually wear my Seagull M177s with a mesh bracelet in summer to have both black and brown color clothes covered as style. Here is a picture from mobile.


They are still metal bracelets. You can wear them with "casual" business casual and below, but never with anything more formal.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



flori78 said:


> What do you think of *mesh bracelets in dress watches*?


I am not aware of any hard & fast rules regarding mesh bracelets per se, but it seems to me that the general reception of said type of bracelet is that it is decidedly more "sporty" than the full bracelet whose design intentionally shows a a greater degree of design integration to the watch head itself, and thus does not show a gap between it and the watch case.

A mesh will always have that certain air of casual and free about it, thus making it occupy a lower rung on the ladder of strict "formality". 
BUT, having said that, I hasten to add - as a big fan of meshes - that in a more casual setting/occasion, a cool watch on a mesh could have a MUCH higher "cool quotient" than a regular bracelet.

But in any case, it is a generally accepted rule of thumb that in a _high formal_ setting, metal bracelets of any kind should be shunned in favor of a leather strap.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> Just make sure it isn't a Merlot.


No [email protected]$%ing merlot! (Anyone else see that movie?)


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Raza said:


> No [email protected]$%ing merlot! (Anyone else see that movie?)


Great flick. If you want to see an equally entertaining movie about California wine, grab a bottle of your favorite California Cab or chilled Chardonnay and check out Bottleshock.


----------



## jwalther (Dec 31, 2006)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> They are still metal bracelets. You can wear them with "casual" business casual and below, but never with anything more formal.


I beg to differ. . .


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Would you like a cookie?


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

In all fairness, Metlin is mistaken here. You *can* wear a bracelet with something more formal than "'casual' business casual" (as your picture indicates), it just happens to be some sort of mortal sin. Seek ye absolution my child...

By the way, that is a gorgeous watch you have there.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> Would you like a cookie?


Thank you M, 
I just came very close to experiencing, for the first time ever, yogurt exiting through my nose... and unto my keyboard.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TylerDurden said:


> In all fairness, Metlin is mistaken here. You *can* wear a bracelet with something more formal than "'casual' business casual" (as your picture indicates), it just happens to be some sort of mortal sin. Seek ye absolution my child...
> 
> By the way, that is a gorgeous watch you have there.


This is true. There are a lot of things you _*can *_do, but shouldn't. Such as dating a girl who has a clutter of cats.



Chronopolis said:


> Thank you M,
> I just came very close to experiencing, for the first time ever, yogurt exiting through my nose... and unto my keyboard.


You're quite welcome. I strive to entertain my patrons.


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



jwalther said:


> I beg to differ. . .


Watch, jacket, shirt - fantastic combo.

Cufflinks- what were you thinking? ;-)


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Business Casual- is this appropriate?

View attachment 494870


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



camb66 said:


> Watch, jacket, shirt - fantastic combo.
> 
> Cufflinks- what were you thinking? ;-)


If he keeps the cufflink pressed while putting on the watch, the bracelet becomes a leather strap.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



camb66 said:


> Business Casual- is this appropriate?
> 
> View attachment 494870


I actually like that combination. You definitely have more freedom in a more casual environment...a nice and subtle NATO strap on a non-diver watch can complement an outfit nicely. I would say that flashy colors, divers, and rubber straps are the definite no-no in any business environment.

As long as it's not an "attention getting" combination it should be ok...for casual only. I actually have some of my vintage watches on a few Brooks Brothers straps which I combine with khakis and button down shirts...about as informal as you can get without crossing the line.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TheSanDiegan said:


> If he keeps the cufflink pressed while putting on the watch, the bracelet becomes a leather strap.


That reminds me of the joke about a retiring rabbi who gets a present from his congregation: 
a wallet (made out all the foreskins that he's cut) that can turn into a suitcase just by stroking.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



camb66 said:


> Business Casual- is this appropriate?
> 
> View attachment 494870


I love it.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



baronrojo said:


> I actually like that combination. You definitely have more freedom in a more casual environment...a nice and subtle NATO strap on a non-diver watch can complement an outfit nicely. I would say that flashy colors, divers, and rubber straps are the definite no-no in any business environment.
> 
> As long as it's not an "attention getting" combination it should be ok...for casual only. I actually have some of my vintage watches on a few Brooks Brothers straps which I combine with khakis and button down shirts...about as informal as you can get without crossing the line.




Both my managing directors wear dive watches (a Submariner and a rubber strapped Breitling of some time, with red accents).


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



baronrojo said:


> I actually like that combination. You definitely have more freedom in a more casual environment...a nice and subtle NATO strap on a non-diver watch can complement an outfit nicely. I would say that flashy colors, divers, and rubber straps are the definite no-no in any business environment.
> 
> As long as it's not an "attention getting" combination it should be ok...for casual only. I actually have some of my vintage watches on a few Brooks Brothers straps which I combine with khakis and button down shirts...about as informal as you can get without crossing the line.





Raza said:


> Both my managing directors wear dive watches (a Submariner and a rubber strapped Breitling of some time, with red accents).


 From which we can conclude that baranrojo's business environment is more formal than Raza's, but not much else. But readers don't need this thread to figure out their own business environment. A general, "safe" rule is more useful for occasions when you're not sure what exactly the culture is like.

As I said in another thread, I asked around among some people I know in large East Coast law firms what guys wore for watches. (I picked those firms because they're thought of as relatively conservative environments in a profession in which prestige is important.) The answers I got:

1. Metal-cased analog watches
2. Dress or "nice" sports (i.e., divers and chronos)
3. Metal bracelets or leather straps
4. No rubber, plastic, or canvas straps
5. NO G-Shocks

I get the impression from reading around that a dress watch on leather or bracelet is safe/preferred for interviews.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but that gives a good idea of current practice. There may be environments in which only a dress watch on leather will do, or in which a totally different watch is called for. Or, you may be such a hotshot that it doesn't matter. You have to do your homework. But if you're not sure, it's hard to go far wrong with the above rules.

Social rules are going to be different, of course, and no business environment's rules automatically transfer to the social arena.


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Since this is a test thread to see if this should be permanently left as a sticky I felt I wanted to weight in.

I personally come to this site to talk about watches, advance my horological knowledge, and to discover new brands and styles of watches not to discuss style. I personally find this to be off topic and quite honestly off putting. When someone comes to Watchuseek it's because they like watches and this is something we can assume we all have in common regardless of our differing opinions therein.

I hate style, the discussion of style, the self imposed governance of it all and I want no part. Then again I am sure there are many who find my taste in fashion unorthodox at best and rudely inappropriate at worst. That is the joy and curse of opinions. I once heard it ludely said that opinions are like buttholes, we all have them and they are mostly full of crap and a disagreement is where two people fan their offense to the other's nostril hoping to be the last to pass out. Anyone who has participated in one of these threads will agree it often degenerates into something like this.

The fact is I come here to discuss watches. Please leave fashion to a forum where it is appropriate as I feel it is not relevant here and personally I dont want it here as it makes me want to go elsewhere for my horological discussions. I mean no offense and apologize to those I do offend with my comments, but please let's not go this direction. At least that is my opinion as I sit here vigorously fanning.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



camb66 said:


> Business Casual- is this appropriate?
> 
> View attachment 494870


I've always thought NATOs were really casual, so I gotta say- to me, this looks terrible. I think a bracelet would look tons better. Sorry.

Or maybe I just don't like NATOs.

If it's any help, I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority here.


----------



## brokenblinker (Jul 2, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Since this is a test thread to see if this should be permanently left as a sticky I felt I wanted to weight in.
> 
> I personally come to this site to talk about watches, advance my horological knowledge, and to discover new brands and styles of watches not to discuss style. I personally find this to be off topic and quite honestly off putting. When someone comes to Watchuseek it's because they like watches and this is something we can assume we all have in common regardless of our differing opinions therein.
> 
> ...


I'm not a fashionista, but since this forum is about watches, why exactly is watch style not relevant here? I mean this with no ill will, but if you don't like it couldn't you just stay out of it?


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Chronopolis said:


> That reminds me of the joke about a retiring rabbi who gets a present from his congregation:
> a wallet (made out all the foreskins that he's cut) that can turn into a suitcase just by stroking.


ha! I'm going to shamelessly steal this and use it as my own.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Since this is a test thread to see if this should be permanently left as a sticky I felt I wanted to weight in.
> 
> I personally come to this site to talk about watches, advance my horological knowledge, and to discover new brands and styles of watches not to discuss style. I personally find this to be off topic and quite honestly off putting. When someone comes to Watchuseek it's because they like watches and this is something we can assume we all have in common regardless of our differing opinions therein. [...]


 I respect that opinion. The problem is the topic comes up again and again, so a number of people disagree with you and think it's on-topic. You're asking for the moderators to close the thread each time the topic comes up and refer inquirers to outside boards. But it seems odd to ban talking about style when, if you think about it, every second thread discusses it in one form or another. Admittedly, the topic does ruffle feathers, but the point of this thread is to allow normal discussion of the topic without having so many threads "hijacked".

Readers should take what they want and leave the rest, or even not read the thread at all. No one needs to be interested in every thread on the board.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Since this is a test thread to see if this should be permanently left as a sticky I felt I wanted to weight in.
> 
> I personally come to this site to talk about watches, advance my horological knowledge, and to discover new brands and styles of watches not to discuss style. I personally find this to be off topic and quite honestly off putting. When someone comes to Watchuseek it's because they like watches and this is something we can assume we all have in common regardless of our differing opinions therein.
> 
> ...


There are thousands of other threads you can visit while ignoring this one. Some people actually have legitimate questions regarding watches and their appropriateness in certain settings/situations or with certain outfits. You are under no way obligated to take part in this discussion.

This thread has been pretty civil...there's no fighting going on around here. The problem is with posts like yours that really add nothing to the discussion and really just seem like an intent to start an argument. There are numerous times when threads are started about topics I could care less about...why chime in? To express discontent about something other people are happily discussing? I just skip over it and let the members have their discussion...why rain on their parade? It would be nice if everyone else showed the same courtesy.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TheWalrus said:


> ha! I'm going to shamelessly steal this and use it as my own.


But then you must add the little details that's required: 
The rabbi is glowing with expectation, is then let down by the small wallet. "Is that all?" He thinks. "After 40 years of service to the community? I cut every boy that was ever born to this congregation!"

The Cantor is quick to pick up on the rabbi's disappointment, and sez: "Rabbi! Rabbi! I know what you're thinking. Unbeknownst to you, we lovingly kept all the foreskins in a jar all these years! Oy! We worked for months with the best tanners from Italy, etc."


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Avoiding these post is a valid point on some level but at the same time I have watched many a thread turn into fashion when that's not what it's about. In the last day I saw a poll about which watch should I pick and another about opinions on a particular watch brand both boil down to fashion and that was not the point. Creating a thread like this give that credence and I prefer it be pushed away not fed.

As far as watch style being watch related I would disagree but that's b/c for me fashion has nothing to do with watches and is very offputting in the same way political discussion are not allowed in the forums even if they are watch related as they just stir up emotions. Ultimately this is something the WUS community should decide because there is no right/wrong. Personally I think the moderators should create a poll and let the results decided the outcome.

Finally I take no ill will from your comments, I revel in difference of opinion as it's how we learn and grow. I always say listen as if your humble, speak as if you are confident, and live as if you are wise. So I appreciate you dissension even I don't speak or act accordingly.



brokenblinker said:


> I'm not a fashionista, but since this forum is about watches, why exactly is watch style not relevant here? I mean this with no ill will, but if you don't like it couldn't you just stay out of it?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I really enjoyed reading that. Was funny - about opinions, and fanning. Ha!

I understand where you stand, and I respect that. But if you had read some of the earlier posts, you'd know what this thread is really about, and what it is not.

Anyway, as an example how this thread could be useful to some people, I will invent a scenario: Imagine if you will, 
a smart young man named X - a legal immigrant to this great country of ours, not fully familiar with everything American - just out of college, working at his first real job is invited to his GF's VERY rich father's ranch. The occasion is supposed to be "casual" but you know how it is with them rich folk - they have their ways.

X wants to make a good impression, and not embarrass himself or his GF. 
Now, where should he go on this Forum to ask what would be appropriate to wear to such an occasion? X, being an immigrant, really does not understand why in the Land of the Free, he cannot go to this party wearing a tank top. 
Some people, for reasons of their own, want to know what the conventional "rules" of etiquette are, is all.



LeoWatch said:


> Since this is a test thread to see if this should be permanently left as a sticky I felt I wanted to weight in.
> 
> I personally come to this site to talk about watches, advance my horological knowledge, and to discover new brands and styles of watches not to discuss style. I personally find this to be off topic and quite honestly off putting. When someone comes to Watchuseek it's because they like watches and this is something we can assume we all have in common regardless of our differing opinions therein.
> 
> ...


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Im glad someone at least got some amusement from my post. I realized it's hard to state an opinion without the fervor coming off as offensive so I hoped that would lighten the "load".

I actually did read all 6 pages of the thread before I posted I just felt since this was a test thread I would state my feeling on it. I may be wrong and will willing follow suit if found to be such. Ultimately though concerning you analogy I think that person should be going to a forum on etiquette and style instead of here.



Chronopolis said:


> I really enjoyed reading that. Was funny - about opinions, and fanning. Ha!
> 
> I understand where you stand, and I respect that. But if you had read some of the earlier posts, you'd know what this thread is really about, and what it is not.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Oops, I forgot to add, the guy was planning on wearing his black 50mm Invicta to complete the commando "look" that he likes so much, after watching so many Chuck Norris / Rambo movies. There! There's a watch in play now. 



LeoWatch said:


> I think that person should be going t*o a forum on etiquette and style instead of here*.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



drt said:


> From which we can conclude that baranrojo's business environment is more formal than Raza's, but not much else. But readers don't need this thread to figure out their own business environment. A general, "safe" rule is more useful for occasions when you're not sure what exactly the culture is like.
> 
> As I said in another thread, I asked around among some people I know in large East Coast law firms what guys wore for watches. (I picked those firms because they're thought of as relatively conservative environments in a profession in which prestige is important.) The answers I got:
> 
> ...


Well, from what I've seen, lawyers are quite slovenly, and most lawyers that I know (even at top firms like CSM or Skadden), couldn't care much about watches. Half of them still wear Timexes. You must remember that a good many of the top lawyers are essentially geeks, and extremely brilliant ones at that. So, style, understandably, is a lower priority. You'll find more "traditionalism" from a mid-western law firm than any of the top ones in the East Coast.


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

How dare you insult the watch tastes of Chuck Norris....someone needs to consult www.chucknorrisfacts.com. Just remember Chuck Norris does not wear a watch, he decides what time it is.
In seriousness though answering that question is tough it takes into account culture, status, beliefs...all thing that are far deeper and far greater in scope than a watch forum should tackle. In the end I understand the purpose of this thread, and how it is supposed to be a place to attract all those who want to discuss this topic away from other posts, I really do. The very fact that there is a need to have a special thread to distract away from this behavior in my mind only prove that it should not be a part of this forum or at the least not a part of the public forum. 


Chronopolis said:


> Oops, I forgot to add, the guy was planning on wearing his black 50mm Invicta to complete the commando "look" that he likes so much, after watching so many Chuck Norris / Rambo movies. There! There's a watch in play now.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

At this very moment, in the Public forum, are such great watch related debates as "If you won $5,000,000" and "What are the worst watch/brand names." Truly edifying topics, no doubt. Moreover, almost every thread is at its base about opinions (is this or that movement better?, Chinese-versus-German-versus-Swiss*, etc) and not infrequently do those threads devolve into zealous arguments.

This thread arguably provides _some_ learning opportunity (saturated in sarcasm) for those interested in seeking counsel on the more traditional rules regarding which watch is appropriate for what. There is little reason to tell a member that they cannot get advice on which watch to wear to that rich girlfriend's parents' ranch** on a watch forum, especially given the breadth of topics covered on WUS.

* In alphabetical order so as not to offend.
** Chronopolis, if the kid is into the "commando look," he is already beyond our ability to help.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Im glad someone at least got some amusement from my post. I realized it's hard to state an opinion without the fervor coming off as offensive so I hoped that would lighten the "load".
> 
> I actually did read all 6 pages of the thread before I posted I just felt since this was a test thread I would state my feeling on it. I may be wrong and will willing follow suit if found to be such. Ultimately though concerning you analogy I think that person should be going to a forum on etiquette and style instead of here.


And on certain forums of "style and etiquette", there are often questions on whether or not they merit a new watch sub-forum. Ahh, the irony.


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Since this is a test thread to see if this should be permanently left as a sticky I felt I wanted to weight in.
> 
> I personally come to this site to talk about watches, advance my horological knowledge, and to discover new brands and styles of watches not to discuss style. I personally find this to be off topic and quite honestly off putting. When someone comes to Watchuseek it's because they like watches and this is something we can assume we all have in common regardless of our differing opinions therein.
> 
> ...


While I respect your opinion, you should consider that having a central repository for these types of queries keeps the rest of the forum clear for more horologically centered discussions.

In other words, the very existence of this sticky helps maintain the decorum of the forum in line with your own expectations.

Or, in your parlance, some forumites are passing gas in here so you don't have to smell their flatulence over _there_. Frankly, I rather avoid my neighbor's house then go knock on his door just to tell him he should stop baking air biscuits in his metaphorical kitchen.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> ... *it takes into account culture, status, beliefs...all thing that are far deeper and far greater in scope than a watch forum should tackle*. In the end I understand the purpose of this thread, and how it is supposed to be a place to attract all those who want to discuss this topic away from other posts, I really do. The very fact that there is a need to have a special thread to distract away from this behavior in my mind only prove that it should not be a part of this forum or at the least not a part of the public forum.


Watches ARE everything you say we should NOT be talking about here. Watches ARE culture: from making to buying to wearing to showing them off in what setting.

Watches are objects of 'desire,' not 'need', to a lot of people. Why else would some people spend thousands for one watch and not another, when the expensive watch is not substantially better as a machine, but only in terms of its status as a symbolic object?

This thread is for people who MIGHT want to ask for help/advice, and for those who, being a little more familiar with the "rules" and "codes" as established by *tradition* (not personal whim), MIGHT want to give it. 
Nobody's here to tell anyone what to wear or not wear against their wishes. This point was established early on.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> Well, from what I've seen, lawyers are quite slovenly, and most lawyers that I know (even at top firms like CSM or Skadden), couldn't care much about watches.


 The ones I polled weren't. In any event, the point is I'm having trouble finding occupations in which most people are substantially more careful dressers.

As far as "caring about watches" in the WIS sense of the term, I think that's irrelevant. Most people don't.



Metlin said:


> Half of them still wear Timexes.


 Whoa! This is the worst thing I've seen you write. Bringing brand names into this discussion is a big mistake. There's nothing wrong with a nice Timex dress watch (or any other brand) on a black leather strap, from a style point of view. Brand isn't the issue, and neither is cost.



Metlin said:


> You must remember that a good many of the top lawyers are essentially geeks, and extremely brilliant ones at that.


 I resemble that remark, and my brass rat and I agree that most top lawyers don't remotely qualify as geeks. Actually, most wouldn't know an IP address from a postal code - all of which is red herring, really.

==

I'm not saying the practices I posted will meet with everyone's approval, or that they're the ideal - just that they are widespread and unlikely to cause offense in most workplaces. Some readers might be interested in actual practice, rather than opinion.

So here's my question. Top lawyers are slovenly, you say. In my experience, upper-level corporate management dress about the same, or worse. The same goes for "rich people", only more so. So, in what occupations do_ the majority_ of men currently dress properly for business, when it comes to watches, in your opinion?

I'm not trying to trap you - readers should know when more stringent standards are likely to apply.


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TylerDurden said:


> At this very moment, in the Public forum, are such great watch related debates as "If you won $5,000,000" and "What are the worst watch/brand names." Truly edifying topics, no doubt


I believe the appropriate response from me is touche. I guess my zealousness is more from an annoyance of hijacked threads that I was truly enjoying until the fashion stuff came up....which is probably the same you are feeling at my hijack. For that reason I feel it appropriate to act with the respect I hope will be returned.

I respectfully bow out and leave you Fashionistas to your Fashism. May I suggest you rename your thread to Critique of Clothes and Clocks in Places (CCCP). Sorry had to leave with a bit of Snark. :-d In all seriousness though enjoy, afterall thats the real point of this forum and thanks for the healthy debate.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Fashism.


Awesome.

And, stick around; we kid because we love.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Slovenly, eh? I smell a defamation suit...

Forgot to mention: There may be variances by practice area, a lot of the corporate/M&A/securities guys and gals I know are quite well dressed.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TylerDurden said:


> I smell a defamation suit...


A gold Rolex Sub goes nicely with those.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

More lawyers should be encouraged to read the UBS Dress Code -- for the hilarious language certainly, if not for the advice.



Metlin said:


> Well, from what I've seen, lawyers are quite slovenly, and most lawyers that I know (even at top firms like CSM or Skadden), couldn't care much about watches. Half of them still wear Timexes. You must remember that a good many of the top lawyers are essentially geeks, and extremely brilliant ones at that. So, style, understandably, is a lower priority. You'll find more "traditionalism" from a mid-western law firm than any of the top ones in the East Coast.


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Not leaving the forum just the thread. I have nothing to add....Want to know my idea of fashion:

Im wearing kahkis with a redish brown belt, black shoes, white socks, light gray undershirt, a green and blue striped polo, while sporting a german chrono. I also had alot of stuff come up before I left for the office and forgot to shave so I'm rocking the 5 oclock shadow pretty hard core. So...yeah.

I once met Karson Kressley of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy when he came to my college and I was working maintenance there (my friends forced me). He insulted my maintenance attire and told me there was no hope for me. I asked him if I started dressing like him if I could be a D list celebrity too. He got pissed and walked away....diva.



TylerDurden said:


> Awesome.
> 
> And, stick around; we kid because we love.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Wow, I just skimmed parts of that. They could seriously use an editor, among other things.


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> How dare you insult the watch tastes of Chuck Norris....someone needs to consult www.chucknorrisfacts.com. Just remember Chuck Norris does not wear a watch, he decides what time it is.


That's why we never see him post here... Chuck Norris already completed the internet.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



drt said:


> From which we can conclude that baranrojo's business environment is more formal than Raza's, but not much else. But readers don't need this thread to figure out their own business environment. A general, "safe" rule is more useful for occasions when you're not sure what exactly the culture is like.


Far...very far from formal. I'm a civil engineer...I work in the geotechnical engineering field. As both a consultant and a university lecturer...my environment consists of soil and dirt most of the time. It's not like I'm out there playing in a sandbox...so there's no need to don construction boots and such...but I definitely outdress my colleagues. My uniform wearing years in the military fueled my attention to detail even more...which is why I'm a stickler for adhering to dress codes. Even in boot camp I would wake up before everyone just to iron my camouflage gear...yeah I tore it to hell in the field a few hours later...but I looked neater than everyone else while doing so.

I just think that dressing well shows a certain degree of respect for anyone you're dealing with. Whether it's clients...students...colleagues...I think it's important to show a degree of professionalism while at the same time saying..."your business is important to me". Attention to detail dictates that you wear an appropriate watch to match your outfit. Nothing kills a suit like an outstretched arm with a plastic monstrosity on the wrist. It's almost like white socks with a suit...I've seen it done before...and though the person had the best intention they were still not quite there. Sometimes the person just doesn't know that what they're doing is wrong...a little push in the right direction never hurt anyone.

It's interesting because something as insignificant as a watch can make a huge difference in the outfit. I find it very hard to believe that more people don't see that.


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Aggggh. Another entirely salient point I now feel compelled to balance with some additional irreverence.

So I for one am grateful for this thread.

Had it existed several years ago, I could have benefited from it immensely. Take, for instance, this black tie event:

View attachment 495514


Had it not been for this thread, I would never have known that wearing my Connie on its 18k/SS bracelet that evening was a foul.

View attachment 495515


You see, all these years, I thought it was a _win_.

Now I know better.


----------



## TylerDurden (Aug 1, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

There is definitely at least some win in there.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TylerDurden said:


> There is definitely at least some win in there.


At least 3 wins...


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Chronopolis said:


> More lawyers should be encouraged to read the UBS Dress Code -- for the hilarious language certainly, if not for the advice.


All I can say is that Google Translate has a way with words.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



drt said:


> All I can say is that Google Translate has a way with words.


Were I an employee at UBS, I would greatly enjoy receiving the following imaginary letter: (but the quote is really from the manual.)

Attention! We here from our Germany Headquarters fling at you the UBS bank advisement reading, thus adding pleasantry to life yours and elegance into your outwardly mode of fabricbodywrapping.

Special attention! Please, is found on p36 for *Underwear*:
*
" __ Underwear __ *
*For aesthetic reasons and hygiene, as well as for **issues of well-being, we recommend **wear a vest. 
Choose your underwear **so they are functional, did not see over **your clothes, nor is divine from below." *

Wishing you often compatible client resolutions and comformance style,

Dress Code Director,
Wolfgang Sebastian Knottytwistenweiner Frederick Nosenhairclipper Johann Anusupschticken... of Ulm


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



drt said:


> A gold Rolex Sub goes nicely with those.


I'd prefer a 44mm yellow gold Yachtmaster.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Not leaving the forum just the thread. I have nothing to add....Want to know my idea of fashion:
> 
> Im wearing kahkis with a redish brown belt, black shoes, white socks, light gray undershirt, a green and blue striped polo, while sporting a german chrono. I also had alot of stuff come up before I left for the office and forgot to shave so I'm rocking the 5 oclock shadow pretty hard core. So...yeah.
> 
> I once met Karson Kressley of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy when he came to my college and I was working maintenance there (my friends forced me). He insulted my maintenance attire and told me there was no hope for me. I asked him if I started dressing like him if I could be a D list celebrity too. He got pissed and walked away....diva.


Oh man, picturing your outfit is giving me a seizure! Don't you know that blue and green should never be seen without a color in between!?

(Whatever floats your boat! Personal style is just that...personal.)


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Raza said:


> I'd prefer a 44mm yellow gold Yachtmaster.


Even better.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Chronopolis said:


> Were I an employee at UBS, I would greatly enjoy receiving the following imaginary letter: (but the quote is really from the manual.)
> 
> Attention! We here from our Germany Headquarters fling at you the UBS bank advisement reading, thus adding pleasantry to life yours and elegance into your outwardly mode of fabricbodywrapping.
> 
> ...


*Les sous-vêtements

*Pour des raisons esthétiques et d'hygiène, ainsi que pour des
questions de bien-être général, nous vous recommandons de
porter un maillot de corps. Choisissez vos sous-vêtements de
façon à ce qu'ils soient fonctionnels, ne se voient pas par-dessus
vos vêtements, ni ne se devinent par-dessous.
​To keep this on topic:

*
Astuces et conseils [...]*

- Qui porte une montre suggère la fiabilité et un grand souci de
la ponctualité.​
A Swiss watch, no doubt. (Signaling reliability and punctuality - try that with your cellphone!)


----------



## LeoWatch (Feb 9, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Ha, Had to Google that to see if you were serious. Now I know why there is a thin white stripe between the blue and green stripes....oh my seems I can't escape the rules.

I actually went through a phase in high school and college where I was very fashion inclined. The problem is that I think fashion died after the 1950s. If I could I would always wear pleated khakis, shiny black loafers, a pressed button down shirt, a knee length black overcoat, a 2 1/2 " brim fedora, and black tie with full Winsor. I always wanted to go with that Rod Serling look. Heck the watch that got me into the hobby was a Hamilton Ventura much like his. Now that is style and i still think a Ventura is one of the classiest watches to wear with a suit. The watch stands out enough to be noticed yet still very appropriate. If it was good enough for "the king" why not everyone?

Sadly that style would be far too overdressed even in my office environment as our industry tends to be laid back and VERY casual. May also explain why I hate "the rules"...because I on some level feel trapped by "what's appropriate."

Actually I think I have been inspired to change my icon.


Raza said:


> Oh man, picturing your outfit is giving me a seizure! Don't you know that blue and green should never be seen without a color in between!?
> (Whatever floats your boat! Personal style is just that...personal.)


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Chronopolis said:


> Special attention! Please, is found on p36 for *Underwear*:
> *
> " __ Underwear __ *
> *For aesthetic reasons and hygiene, as well as for **issues of well-being, we recommend **wear a vest.
> Choose your underwear **so they are functional, did not see over **your clothes, nor is divine from below." *


This is congruent with The San Diegan's dress code as it pertains to underwear, which may be found on page one:

"Underwear goes _inside_ the pants."

However, if I could find underwear that is "divine from below," I might have to reallocate money from my watch fund.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

... the wondrous and infinite mystery of language as such, and the swerve of meaning caused by the clinamen of syntax... mind boggling.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Chronopolis;
[B said:


> *
> Choose your underwear** so they are functional, did not see over **your clothes, nor is divine from below." *


I'm just hoping for underwear that remains functional...I'd hate to see the results of wearing non-functional underwear.


----------



## drt (Jul 3, 2007)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Well, it's Friday afternoon, and no one had answered this question. What to do?

I think the best thing to do is go get a cheeseburger and caffeine-bearing beverage. For this, I plan to wear blue jeans, a blue T-shirt, a black belt, and white sneakers. I'm not sure which watch I'll select, but I guarantee it won't be a dress watch. I may even get ice cream - chocolate, I think.

Have a good weekend, folks, and virtual beers all around.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



LeoWatch said:


> Ha, Had to Google that to see if you were serious. Now I know why there is a thin white stripe between the blue and green stripes....oh my seems I can't escape the rules.
> 
> I actually went through a phase in high school and college where I was very fashion inclined. The problem is that I think fashion died after the 1950s. If I could I would always wear pleated khakis, shiny black loafers, a pressed button down shirt, a knee length black overcoat, a 2 1/2 " brim fedora, and black tie with full Winsor. I always wanted to go with that Rod Serling look. Heck the watch that got me into the hobby was a Hamilton Ventura much like his. Now that is style and i still think a Ventura is one of the classiest watches to wear with a suit. The watch stands out enough to be noticed yet still very appropriate. If it was good enough for "the king" why not everyone?
> 
> ...


Haha! I actually learned that rule by watching Top Gear, of all things.

I have a 2 1/2" brim fedora that I wear on occasion. I quite like it when paired with a polo and khakis.

But pleats!? I hate the look. They make your man region look all poofy. I much prefer flat front.


----------



## bluloo (Nov 24, 2008)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



TylerDurden said:


> ...a properly developed sense of style comes from _first_ knowing the "rules" and _then_ conscious, informed deviations to make it your own.


This is, I think, though not for _everyone_, close to a perfect sentiment. :-!


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> They are still metal bracelets. You can wear them with "casual" business casual and below, but never with anything more formal.


This is my combo as dress watch.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

What is everyone's opinion on what colored dial would be more useful to someone looking to get a dress watch? A white dial watch with appropriate leather strap (depending on attire) or a black dial watch, also with an appropriate leather strap? Thanks in advance.


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



rjustice21 said:


> What is everyone's opinion on what colored dial would be more useful to someone looking to get a dress watch? A white dial watch with appropriate leather strap (depending on attire) or a black dial watch, also with an appropriate leather strap? Thanks in advance.


I'm sure someone will chime in with a more authoritative POV, but IMO, any metallic (e.g., gold, silver, platinum, etc.) dial color as well as black or white work well in a dress watch. Nor is a black dial is a sufficient condition, as no one would confuse a fleigeruhr with a dress watch. Less is more when it comes to indices on a dress watch, regardless of dial color. Just avoid anything that looks like a flattened Skittle.

I think black leather could be used on either stainless steal / white metal cases as well as gold. Brown straps will give a gold watch a very warm tonality. I would, however, personally avoid using a brown strap with a SS watch. Lastly, a black strap, like black shoes, is more universally compatible.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



rjustice21 said:


> What is everyone's opinion on what colored dial would be more useful to someone looking to get a dress watch? A white dial watch with appropriate leather strap (depending on attire) or a black dial watch, also with an appropriate leather strap? Thanks in advance.


It comes down to personal preference, but I prefer white dial since it's quite neutral. A black dial on a watch with a brown strap would look odd, and would clash if the rest of the outfit had brown tones. One could argue that black is more sober and understated, but it is also quite severe. I've seen white dials recommended for that very reason.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Thank you both.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



rjustice21 said:


> What is everyone's opinion on what colored dial would be more useful to someone looking to get a dress watch? A white dial watch with appropriate leather strap (depending on attire) or a black dial watch, also with an appropriate leather strap? Thanks in advance.


Without having any authority on the matter, I would recommend a lighter tone for the dial in general over a darker one - for the reasons that Metlin cited. Simply a matter of "elegance" more than anything.

But it all really depends on the DEGREE of "dress," and the tone of the occasion as well. 
I can imagine a formal "Goth" themed party - say, in celebration of Edgar Allen Poe's 120th whatever. A white dial would clearly not be as good (stylish) as a black dial in this case.

Generally speaking, the higher you go, the tighter the range of options (assuming you wanna play by the rules) -- but also the greater the pressure to show subtle refinements within that range. This is where it can get costly. Dang it.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I don't know if any of you watch soccer, but I'm a Liverpool supporter, and noticed this:










on the wrist of Steven Gerrard, obviously not playing, wearing a suit on the sidelines. Does it pass the test as a suit appropriate watch?

Funny story, I was hanging out with my brother during the match, still recovering from a cold, so I was basically half asleep. He woke me up and said "What watch is Steven Gerrard wearing? It looks like a Concord." I turned around, took one look at it, and said "Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore chronograph". He Googled it and I was right. I'm getting pretty good at this.

Oh, and now he wants one.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Didn't he get you the Monaco? So maybe you should return the favor. ;-)


----------



## TGE (Apr 24, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I had never visited the Public Forum before a bout of insomnia last night, but this thread has given me quite a few chuckles in the past couple hours.

Real question: I consider myself moderately well-versed on these things, but I have never heard of declining to wear a watch to a formal event out of respect for the host. In what sense does that show respect? I've been puzzling it over, and I can only think of two possibilities, and they're both pretty subtle:

1) Not wearing a watch could signify that you won't be checking it as if you have someplace else to be.
2) Leaving the watch at home ensures your timepiece does not overshadow the host's own.

Amirite? Or at least close?


----------



## firithmorgulion (Apr 12, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

for me, even a fliegeruhr is a dress watch but it must fit suit, shirt and tie
which is atm easy for me, my companies official shirts are black, we had to wear black or dark anthracite suits and the ties came in red with silver stripes and black pinstripes

and i wouldt wear a fliegerwatch an every formal event, just because the most drsswatches look really tiny on a big man like me


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



firithmorgulion said:


> for me, even a fliegeruhr is a dress watch but it must fit suit, shirt and tie
> which is atm easy for me, my companies official shirts are black, we had to wear black or dark anthracite suits and the ties came in red with silver stripes and black pinstripes
> 
> and i wouldt wear a fliegerwatch an every formal event, just because the most drsswatches look really tiny on a big man like me


IMO there is a difference between _wearing_ a fliegeruhr as a dress watch and categorizing one as such. Similarly, one could choose to wear a diver with a tux, and I am sure there is no lack of locals wearing their Speedys with a suit.

But I would hesitate to recognize any of the above _as_ a dress watch, which I consider to be a different category of watch altogether.

I will be the first to acknowledge though, I would have no problem wearing _this_ with a tux or a suit:

View attachment 504569


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

One ought to specify the *degree of dress (or "formal")* though, to determine the leeway one has in finding one type of watch "acceptable" and not another,

I mean, face it, anything more than a T-shirt and jeans is considered "formal" today.
In the Bond example, except for the wrong size strap, Bond is almost perfectly acceptably dressed for the occasion. Nor is he overdoing anything. In fact, he is being totally casual but elegant. I forget the exact details, but Bond was NOT at a 'formal' formal; just a dinner at a rather casual place actually. Most people wore "dinner jackets" back then to dinner is all. 
It's a shame that doing anything like this today would be considered "extraordinary," like wearing hats.

BTW, your IWC example: which part makes it "more" acceptable? The name? Or the design? I'd say the former. ;-)



TheSanDiegan said:


> IMO there is a difference between _wearing_ a fliegeruhr as a dress watch and categorizing one as such. Similarly, one could choose to wear a diver with a tux, and I am sure there is no lack of locals wearing their Speedys with a suit.
> 
> But I would hesitate to recognize any of the above *as a dress watch*, which I consider to be a different category of watch altogether.
> 
> ...


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TheSanDiegan said:


> I will be the first to acknowledge though, I would have no problem wearing _this_ with a tux or a suit:
> 
> View attachment 504569


Quite passable with a suit...I think pushing it a bit with a tuxedo. Thing is this watch doesn't have the militarized look of most fliegers. This is actually a very subtle and classy watch...very nice to look at...as long as it fits under the cuffs I can't see it serving as a distraction from the rest of the outfit. Of course the fact that it's on leather only helps accentuate this watch for more formal use.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Not watch related, but I have a question:

Once fall comes, I plan on wearing my fedora to work. What do you guys think? Is it okay to wear a hat with a v-neck sweater over a buttondown and pants (tie on some days)?


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Chronopolis said:


> One ought to specify the *degree of dress (or "formal")* though, to determine the leeway one has in finding one type of watch "acceptable" and not another,
> 
> I mean, face it, anything more than a T-shirt and jeans is considered "formal" today.
> In the Bond example, except for the wrong size strap, Bond is almost perfectly acceptably dressed for the occasion. Nor is he overdoing anything. In fact, he is being totally casual but elegant. I forget the exact details, but Bond was NOT at a 'formal' formal; just a dinner at a rather casual place actually. Most people wore "dinner jackets" back then to dinner is all.
> ...


Good points, all...

Regarding the Mk XVI, while for me personally I would admit to a strong allure to the brand, I think it could serve as a dress watch regardless of the name, given it's moderate (39mm) size, fit and finish, and elegant simplicity of design. The black alligator strap definitely gives it a more dressed-up appearance. It wouldn't matter what name appeared on the dial provided the watch executed each of these in turn with the same elegance as the Mk XVI.

By contrast, I wouldn't consider wearing a Big Pilot as a dress watch. IMO it's far too large (to serve as a dress watch), and the double-rivet aviator strap doesn't fit the bill:

View attachment 505250


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Raza said:


> Not watch related, but I have a question:
> 
> Once fall comes, I plan on wearing my fedora to work. What do you guys think? Is it okay to wear a hat with a v-neck sweater over a buttondown and pants (tie on some days)?


I'll defer to someone with regards to the suggested ensemble, but I for one was stoked to see the Fedora Renaissance spring forth from the dancehall. Thank you Rudy.

I had a sweet Knox fedora from the '50s that used to belong to a famous admiral. Unfortunately, it felt just a little too small on the head and I ended up trading it for Something Completely Different.

I'm personally awaiting the return of the Bowler. I have a killer old Stetson bowler that I'm able to pull off like this cat. But unlike the fedora, it has no strong counter culture roots, leaving me looking more like this guy if I wear it out of the house. Either way, should the bowler come full circle, what would be the appropriate color dial for my pocketwatch if wearing my bowler with a charcoal gray suit and a handlebar mustache?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I never was a fan of the bowler. I think it makes the wearer look a bit dopey. But maybe I've just been conditioned that way.


----------



## Redemption (Aug 31, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

I will be attending a Father's day dinner at of course, my Father's house. We will be having a Salmon and Salad dish and most likely soft drink. What would one wear in terms of clothing and watch to such an event. I can choose from the watches in my signature and a Cyma that my Father's Father passed down to him after he died. I will be leaving in an hour.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Redemption said:


> I will be attending a Father's day dinner at of course, my Father's house. We will be having a Salmon and Salad dish and most likely soft drink. What would one wear in terms of clothing and watch to such an event. I can choose from the watches in my signature and a Cyma that my Father's Father passed down to him after he died. I will be leaving in an hour.


Too late now, but I'd wear khakis or jeans and a sweater, most likely v-neck, possibly over a shirt. I think it's still cool in Australia, right?


----------



## Coler (Mar 28, 2009)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> A black dial on a watch with a brown strap would look odd, and would clash if the rest of the outfit had brown tones.


Nah.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f20/lets-see-pics-speedmaster-pros-brown-straps-558309.html


----------



## DEP21 (Jun 28, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> Well, from what I've seen, lawyers are quite slovenly, and most lawyers that I know (even at top firms like CSM or Skadden), couldn't care much about watches. Half of them still wear Timexes. You must remember that a good many of the top lawyers are essentially geeks, and extremely brilliant ones at that. So, style, understandably, is a lower priority. You'll find more "traditionalism" from a mid-western law firm than any of the top ones in the East Coast.


I have heard it said that Panerais are now the choice of the London banking crowd. Is this still the case?


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



TGE said:


> Real question: I consider myself moderately well-versed on these things, but I have never heard of declining to wear a watch to a formal event out of respect for the host. In what sense does that show respect? I've been puzzling it over, and I can only think of two possibilities, and they're both pretty subtle:
> 
> 1) Not wearing a watch could signify that you won't be checking it as if you have someplace else to be.
> 2) Leaving the watch at home ensures your timepiece does not overshadow the host's own.
> ...


Old school rule, applying to formal (white tie) or semi-formal (black tie) events.

I read that the original school of thinking is that when you are attending such an event, there is no other event you are planning on going to, your time schedule revolves soley on the formal event in attendance. As such, you don't wear a watch because there is no need to check the time (wearing a watch could be deemed as disrepectful by host).


----------



## ayz (May 7, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

the watch is an accessory

therefore the rest of your outfit actually tends to dictate how a watch is viewed

someone dressed sharply with a fitted shirt and in a tailored hugo boss suit wearing a rolex submariner on a NATO strap will be considered "fashionable" and good at accessorizing

someone dressed sloppily and in an ill-fitting $100 suit from men's wearhouse wearing the same thing will be considered tacky and clueless

if the rest of you looks good, you can pull any watch off


----------



## ayz (May 7, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

take burn notice as an example. i'm sure most people who see a chase-durer UDT would chalk it up as another tacky PVD watch. michael weston rocks it with some sharp looking clothes on TV and suddenly they're sold out and backordered.

also, i think in a thread like this people should post their occupation before chiming in their opinion. i'm pretty sure most of the people here commenting on what's important "in the boardroom" have never been in a boardroom


----------



## TheSanDiegan (Jul 8, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



ayz said:


> also, i think in a thread like this people should post their occupation before chiming in their opinion. i'm pretty sure most of the people here commenting on what's important "in the boardroom" have never been in a boardroom


I was a partner in a small process engineering firm. I've sat in boardrooms with directors of companies both here and abroad. And to be honest, I never paid much attention to what watch others were wearing. For poops and giggles, I looked back at the few photos I have of me at press conferences andor higher-profile meetings, and guess what? I couldn't see my watch in _any_ of them. And I'm kind of glad, too, as unbeknownst to me I was wearing the wrong kind of watch (for a suit).

I say that tongue in cheek, as I would argue it obviously didn't matter. Or did it? Guess I'll never know. I do know, however, that my choice is more deliberate now than it used to be, even if it's no longer as relevant to my day-to-day life. Based on the knowledge I have acquired - in no small part thanks to this thread - I now wear a different watch with my suits.


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



ayz said:


> take burn notice as an example. i'm sure most people who see a chase-durer UDT would chalk it up as another tacky PVD watch. michael weston rocks it with some sharp looking clothes on TV and suddenly they're sold out and backordered.
> 
> also, i think in a thread like this people should post their occupation before chiming in their opinion. i'm pretty sure most of the people here commenting on what's important "in the boardroom" have never been in a boardroom


Well I haven't been in the boardroom and frankly I couldn't care less about what they wear. Its not my world and who equates money with taste anyway.


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

question. If a Rolex Submariner and an Omega Seamaster (both on bracelet) are not dress watches how comes that many corporate managers wear them in a suit or lust after one?

Don't tell to show just they are successful. Where is taste in case my last assumption is true?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



ayz said:


> take burn notice as an example. i'm sure most people who see a chase-durer UDT would chalk it up as another tacky PVD watch. michael weston rocks it with some sharp looking clothes on TV and suddenly they're sold out and backordered.
> 
> also, i think in a thread like this people should post their occupation before chiming in their opinion. i'm pretty sure most of the people here commenting on what's important "in the boardroom" have never been in a boardroom


I'm a financial analyst. And I've worn my Chase-Durer UDT in the boardroom. AND in job interviews.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



flori78 said:


> question. If a Rolex Submariner and an Omega Seamaster (both on bracelet) are not dress watches how comes that many corporate managers wear them in a suit or lust after one?
> 
> Don't tell to show just they are successful. Where is taste in case my last assumption is true?


What is acceptable and what is appropriate are two different things.


----------



## shaunempire (Aug 30, 2011)

ayz said:


> the watch is an accessory
> 
> therefore the rest of your outfit actually tends to dictate how a watch is viewed
> 
> ...


What about wearing a 42"+ watch on a 6" wrist.

If you can pull off your clothing look, but your watch looks like it should be on Flavor Flavs neck... That's pretty tacky and clueless.

Now I don't know about you.. And I understand that a lot of the corporate world living in their work to pay off debt forever world buys a lot of these fancy watches to impress other guys at work, but what about rich people?

I have a lot of high net worth friends and they don't wear suits everyday because they are multi-millionaires and don't need to impress their managers.. I guess they are tacky and clueless because they aren't dressed up like a guy in an office making 80k pretending to be rich?


----------



## ayz (May 7, 2011)

If your friends don't wear suits then I guess they aren't really relevant to a discussion on what watches go with a suit, now wouldn't you agree?


----------



## shaunempire (Aug 30, 2011)

This looks like a conversation of clothing, watches and creating an image..


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

shaunempire said:


> What about wearing a 42"+ watch on a 6" wrist.
> 
> If you can pull off your clothing look, but your watch looks like it should be on Flavor Flavs neck... That's pretty tacky and clueless.
> 
> ...


There are levels of wealth. There's wealthy enough to dress well and there's also wealthy enough to dress however you want.


----------



## curious cheese (Jun 27, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Chronopolis said:


> "Do you pee with your watch on?" etc.[/QUOTE I'm still learning the details of posting and quoting. Chronopolis' entire post is below my comment.
> 
> Chronopolis,
> Now is 1st time I've looked at this thread. There is much to agree with in your post. But I gotta acknowledge the profound wisdom and humor in"Do you pee with your watch on?" A lesson for the ages.
> ...


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Okay, please clarify me in this question:

For someone wearing a suit, would be inappropriate to wear a pilot watch with the suit? I have seen some movies were people were wearing a IWC Mark watch in a suit. Is a pilot watch a dress one?


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



flori78 said:


> Okay, please clarify me in this question:
> 
> For someone wearing a suit, would be inappropriate to wear a pilot watch with the suit? I have seen some movies were people were wearing a IWC Mark watch in a suit. Is a pilot watch a dress one?


Ok in my book as long as it isn't the big Pilot. We have a guy on TV here who wears an IWC Big Pilot with a suit and it looks ridiculous as it wont fit under his shirt cuffs.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



flori78 said:


> Okay, please clarify me in this question:
> 
> For someone wearing a suit, would be inappropriate to wear a pilot watch with the suit? I have seen some movies were people were wearing a IWC Mark watch in a suit. Is a pilot watch a dress one?


In a non-formal setting on a leather strap...and like camb66 said as long as it fits under the shirt cuffs...should be OK. It is not a dress watch though...it's a pilot watch.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



flori78 said:


> Okay, please clarify me in this question:
> 
> For someone wearing a suit, would be inappropriate to wear a pilot watch with the suit? I have seen some movies were people were wearing a IWC Mark watch in a suit. Is a pilot watch a dress one?


As long as it's small enough, it should be fine, even if it's not a dress watch.

Just make sure to put it on a NATO. ;-)


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



DEP21 said:


> I have heard it said that Panerais are now the choice of the London banking crowd. Is this still the case?


Yes, and on the tube, one can still see them wearing 3-piece Armani suits in bright pinstripes with contrast collar shirts and idiotic ties. London city bankers have been accused of many things, but being stylish isn't one of them.

Living in London informs you of style in much the same way living in a cave makes you into a lion (though you may indeed find yourself with a thick hairy mane that English women are known to love and cherish).


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



flori78 said:


> Okay, please clarify me in this question:
> 
> For someone wearing a suit, would be inappropriate to wear a pilot watch with the suit? I have seen some movies were people were wearing a IWC Mark watch in a suit. Is a pilot watch a dress one?


No. Do you fly a plane for a living?


----------



## ShockMister (Mar 22, 2008)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

The best traditional watch is a classic design gold case. From Timex (carefully chosen) to Patek Phillipe. I like the white/light dial with a burgundy leather strap. Or metal bracelet. If it's a black dial, the leather strap would need to be black. As long as it's not too "dressy" this watch is even good for casual wear. The only option I don't like is the black dial with silver case. To me, that style looks better as a field/dive watch because it looks more military. But that's just my own opinion. (I think Paul Reiser wore a watch like this in Mad About You, but I never liked that style.) ...And I'm only half sold on white metal with the white dial.

Dive watches and field watches have become more popular in the last 10 to 15 years, so these are more and more acceptable today.

In the 80's many suit-wearers wore basic Casio digitals, like the F91 or similar. Now there are a lot more options in case design and colors. But if it's with a suit it should be black. Otherwise it might look like a kid's watch.

I think even some G-Shocks are acceptable with business wear. But it shouldn't be too "stealth" looking. It would be better to have metal around the bezel.


----------



## Coler (Mar 28, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> No. Do you fly a plane for a living?


Ridiculous.

By this eh 'logic' the only people who can ever wear Pilot watches are Pilots, and that only when they are flying an aeroplane.

That's not to say a Pilot watch in style terms amounts to a dress watch. Just that an attempt to restrict watch choices to those that are relevant to one's profession is nonsense.


----------



## Rogue310 (Sep 15, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Here's a sartorial conundrum. I wear two-button-cuff shirts - i.e. the buttons fasten one after another to button the cuff from upper to lower wrist, English-style. This makes a nice line when not wearing a watch - it helps keep the cuffs and sleeves looking slim - but when wearing a watch, after buttoning both buttons I have the choice of shoehorning my watch under the cuffs and wrestling it out when I need to check it, or leaving one button unbuttoned so it can move in and out of the sleeve.

Slovenly or practical?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Rogue310 said:


> Here's a sartorial conundrum. I wear two-button-cuff shirts - i.e. the buttons fasten one after another to button the cuff from upper to lower wrist, English-style. This makes a nice line when not wearing a watch - it helps keep the cuffs and sleeves looking slim - but when wearing a watch, after buttoning both buttons I have the choice of shoehorning my watch under the cuffs and wrestling it out when I need to check it, or leaving one button unbuttoned so it can move in and out of the sleeve.
> 
> Slovenly or practical?


So if I read this right, you have two buttons on the cuff, in line, one closer to the hand and one closer to the wrist, both of which are fastened.

Leaving one unbuttoned would look slovenly, unless you unbutton one on the off wrist as well, as if some sort of fashion statement. There are times when I wear my cuffs unbuttoned (usually under a sweater) but I don't roll the sleeves up because I like the look.


----------



## var (Sep 8, 2011)

From this thread, I came to the following two threads :
U.S. Attitudes/ Sales Regarding Swiss Watches
https://www.watchuseek.com/f20/swiss-looking-revive-luxury-watch-sales-u-s-571652.html

And I have to say that I learned a lot.

So here are my lessons learned:


The only true authority on what you should wear is the people who you want to impress. If you are everybody's boss, then you probably don't belong to our reality and people will allow you to do pretty much everything you want to do.
Your watch represents you. In a sense, you are your watch. Wear it with responsibility. Hence, it makes sense to know the established etiquette for wearing your watch. Doing so will put you in a state of knowledgeability. And true authority stems from knowledgability, not position. Being ignorant of the established etiquette will only, next time someone passes judgment on you because of the watch you wear, put you in a state of confusion over what you did wrong. Choosing to deviate, it is far more preferable to be a rebel than an ignorant.
You are entitled to your own opinions. You can fight for what you believe in.

Having stated that. Wow. This is a great thread.


----------



## SAM2 (Apr 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Chronopolis, Look what you started.
Are we forgetting that some visitors to this forum are women? We tend to shun fashion watches on this forum but for some it is as much a part of watch ownership as is the nuts and bolts. I wouldn't condone excluding any topic that is of interest to just one person regardless of gender. If the topic is not your bailiwick, move on and stop hijacking a valid discussion.
We can't all be a "Phileas Fogg" but every gentleman must live by rules and a dress code is just one. What is considered acceptable in Silicon Valley would be unthinkable in a boardroom on Wall Street. When in Rome... Mr. Fogg was a man who had his act together. I'll bet he had a matching umbrella but by contrast, Passepartout looked more like a Missouri used car dealer. You may be a free spirit and just doing your thing but take it from this old dude, a gentleman would do well to dress for success. Next time you get invited to the White House, follow some simple rules.
I can think of numerous watches that work well for almost any occasion. Just match the strap to your outfit. That's what they make speed pins for. The same rule that applies to the correct choice of shoes and belt also applies to your watch strap. Brown and gray, maybe. Brown and black, never. Exception: Cordovan (dark cherry) works with gray slacks and a sport coat but black is better with a suit.
If your only watch is one of those plastic things on a NATO strap, just put in your pocket. 
And finally, if in doubt, ask your wife or significant other. She will know. I Garontee!

I'll go to my room now.


----------



## var (Sep 8, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



SAM2 said:


> ...
> And finally, if in doubt, ask your wife or significant other. She will know. I Garontee!
> 
> I'll go to my room now.


You'll go to your room now? That sounds like a legit order from your mom. Is she the significant other you were talking about?

I don't know. If my significant other, or if any girl for that matter, asks me what watch to wear with her suit or dress, all I would be able to say while looking awed is, "You look good no matter what you wear. Mom."


----------



## SAM2 (Apr 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

This is a test

The combined threads had me cornfused at first but now I'm getting the hang of it. Will future posts be tacked onto the end or will they end up someplace in the middle?


----------



## SAM2 (Apr 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Removed duplicate.


----------



## SAM2 (Apr 14, 2010)

These combined threads are hard to navigate but gave me much to sleep on. I must have been dreaming about the men that I have admired and respected during my sixty-seven years. Now wide awake and having had my second cup of coffee, I had one question to ask of my aging memory. Did they even wear a watch and if so what? Were they tools or fashion statements. I have my fathers 1962 Jaeger-LeCoultre Memovox, the story of which I have written on another forum. Before the Memovox, he had a relatively inexpensive Swiss Incabloc that I used until my wife thought I needed another. What did my grandfathers have on their wrists? No memories have surfaced. Both men were products of the Great Depression and probably couldn't afford a watch. How did they get to work on time? I haven't a clue. Auntie married a wealthy housing developer in St. Louis after the war and I will never forget his watch. It was a diamond encrusted gold Rolex that you could see from a mile away. An obvious fashion statement. Auntie was a nurse and wore a Wittnauer pendent watch in a heart shaped case. As a kid, I always marveled at the fact that the movement was mounted upside down. Uncle Ed was a railroad engineer and wore a Rolex, also purchased in 1962. Fashion statement or tool watch? Perhaps a little of both.
I just heard the whistle blow and that brings me to thoughts about the history of the watchmaker's art going back two centuries and more to a time before the wristwatch. You see, I live in a small railroad town where they still blow a whistle three times a day so that the men can set their watches. These days, it is unnecessary and never on time but tradition mandates that they make the effort. It is hard to hang around hear (the forum) very long without knowing about the advent of the wristwatch but I refer to an earlier time when a watch was a man's most valuable possession and a man carried it, well protected in his vest pocket. How could that be a fashion statement you ask? Well, when you hang it from a solid gold or sterling chain with a filigrene fob, it becomes a statement of some kind. Could be that Butch Cassidy just needed to know when the next train was due? Somehow, I think it was more than that.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Butchcassidy.jpg
Do vests still have a watch pocket? If so, shouldn't a well dressed man have one and a pocket watch to go with it or is the vest pocket just a convenient place to stash a cell phone?
Must stop now before I hurt my little grey cells.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



SAM2 said:


> This is a test
> 
> The combined threads had me cornfused at first but now I'm getting the hang of it. Will future posts be tacked onto the end or will they end up someplace in the middle?


It depends on your forum settings...if you are set to view in "linear mode" then any new posts should be at the end.

Cheers!


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

My mother's father wore an Omega, a gold Seamaster, I believe. It's why my brother and I both have Omegas.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Rogue310 said:


> Here's a sartorial conundrum. I wear two-button-cuff shirts - i.e. the buttons fasten one after another to button the cuff from upper to lower wrist, English-style. This makes a nice line when not wearing a watch - it helps keep the cuffs and sleeves looking slim - but when wearing a watch, after buttoning both buttons I have the choice of shoehorning my watch under the cuffs and wrestling it out when I need to check it, or leaving one button unbuttoned so it can move in and out of the sleeve.
> 
> Slovenly or practical?


Could be sprezzatura if you can pull it off. I recommend a slovenly pocket square and go-to-hell socks to complete the look.


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Could be sprezzatura if you can pull it off. I recommend a slovenly pocket square and go-to-hell socks to complete the look.


True that. But I haven't seen successful sprezzatura in the USA so far. So the emphasis should be "IF you can pull it off". I'd simply opt to move the cuff buttons or get custom made shirts or even wear a darn dress watch, which is meant to be worn under a cuff. 

It probably makes sense to post a link to my little watch category treaty in this nice thread: Definitions of Dress, Sports and Tool Watch Categories - Long read


----------



## AllenB (Aug 21, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

How would one fit a two tone Rolex Datejust (or something similar) into the rule of matching metals? Acceptable with both gold and silver colored belt buckles? Only gold? Only silver?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



AllenB said:


> How would one fit a two tone Rolex Datejust (or something similar) into the rule of matching metals? Acceptable with both gold and silver colored belt buckles? Only gold? Only silver?


Personally, I wouldn't.

But I know that's not a help. I think by the nature of it, it should go with both, but the gold portion might stand out a little too much if matched with steel only.


----------



## AllenB (Aug 21, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> Personally, I wouldn't.
> 
> But I know that's not a help. I think by the nature of it, it should go with both, but the gold portion might stand out a little too much if matched with steel only.


I personally wouldn't wear one either; call it morbid curiousity. I noticed my doctor wearing a TT Datejust the other day and just sort of wondered if he was violating any "rules." However, as long as he's saving my life, he can wear a pink G-shock for all I care.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



AllenB said:


> How would one fit a two tone Rolex Datejust (or something similar) into the rule of matching metals? Acceptable with both gold and silver colored belt buckles? Only gold? Only silver?


One may - and many do - rant against the very idea of 2-tone watches, but this is why exactly it was invented in the first place: to rid you of this potentially trivial but annoying dilemma.
Today a man has only so much time (and/or patience) to WANT to coordinate ALL his metals ALL the time, every time.

So, YES, acceptable with either gold or steel buckle. Theoretically.

Why theoretically? Because here is where sensibility comes in (for proportion, etc), and one's own sense of style - other colors that are present in one's attire that day will have a big effect on the totality of your presentation. 
And when it comes to your own unique style, nobody can help you with that. 
What looks atrocious on one man may well look like the very exemplar of nobility and panache on another.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Chronopolis said:


> One may - and many do - rant against the very idea of 2-tone watches, but this is why exactly it was invented in the first place: to rid you of this potentially trivial but annoying dilemma.
> Today a man has only so much time (and/or patience) to WANT to coordinate ALL his metals ALL the time, every time.
> 
> So, YES, acceptable with either gold or steel buckle. Theoretically.
> ...


Indeed. And besides, I don't necessarily think there are rules on two tones per se, at least none that I can recall. Much like how there aren't rules against giant pink G-shocks. So, as with everything else, common sense and a modicum of propriety.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Ugh, I get no points, really. Yesterday, I wore a gray sweater with a blue argyle pattern over a white shirt with blue stripes (two shades of blue in each stripe) and matched it with my silver dial Halios Bluering and a gray NATO. Comments? "I like your sweater"!


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> Ugh, I get no points, really. Yesterday, I wore a gray sweater with a blue argyle pattern over a white shirt with blue stripes (two shades of blue in each stripe) and matched it with my silver dial Halios Bluering and a gray NATO. Comments? "I like your sweater"!


Well, nobody has ever accused the common man of being stylish.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Speaking of styles, I saw someone today wearing a Daniel Wellington watch on a Nato strap with the New England uniform (khakis, loafers, OCBD shirt, and a navy blazer).

I had never heard of the watch, so I did some searching, and turns out it's a fashion watch with a Miyota movement (no seconds, though). This is one of the few dress watches that I think look great on a Nato, and could be paired with less casual outfits. Not because it's dressy but because the Nato adds enough character and sprezz to the dressy looking watch (i.e. breaking the rules not because you don't know any better, but because you choose to look stylish). Looks like an excellent beater watch, too.


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Now that is stylish. Thanks for posting. Is it gold tone or does it just look like that in the picture?

EDIT: Strike that. Clicked on the link. It's gold tone. I suppose it is a quartz movement. $28 for a Nato strap is ambitious, though.

I think that would look sharpest on a grey or dark green or dark khaki Nato. I can also imagine a bordeaux and brown, as well as a sand color strap.

Pity that the hardware on the natos won't be matching in tone. Do Natos with gold buckles exist? Not sure I've ever seen one.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Watchalex said:


> Now that is stylish. Thanks for posting. Is it gold tone or does it just look like that in the picture?
> 
> EDIT: Strike that. Clicked on the link. It's gold tone. I suppose it is a quartz movement. $28 for a Nato strap is ambitious, though.
> 
> ...


That's a good point. I never thought of that. But I suppose if you've enough swag to pull off wearing a Nato on a gold dress watch and look good, mismatched metals shouldn't be much of a problem. ;-)

Personally, I like the bright colored stripes because that's a very preppy look. YMMV.


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> That's a good point. I never thought of that. But I suppose if you've enough swag to pull off wearing a Nato on a gold dress watch and look good, mismatched metals shouldn't be much of a problem. ;-)
> 
> Personally, I like the bright colored stripes because that's a very preppy look. YMMV.


Thanks for the flowers. 

At age 39 the bright colored straps are a bit girly. That said I currently wear bright orange RL driving mocs, barefoot (Texas) with a super-classic Wrangler 13MWZ raw broken twill jeans in asphalt grey, a Levi's jeans shirt in washed out blue and top that of with the APRO. I think it looks spiffy enough.

If I were to go bright colored stripes, I'd choose blue with orange stripe. Got one of those British college scarfs like that. Then I'd cut off the hardware and simply tie a knot in the Nato. I'd wear a (K)not-Nato with no chance of mismatching and full 'sprezz' as you put it nonchalantly.

BTW, this watch is a good example of how one can have a perfectly good dress watch grade 1 without having to be a millionaire or elitist p%&ck.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Watchalex said:


> Thanks for the flowers.
> At age 39 the bright colored straps are a bit girly.


You didn't know? Metlin IS girly. 



Watchalex said:


> BTW, this watch is a good example of how one can have a perfectly good dress watch grade 1 without having to be a millionaire or elitist p%&ck.


+1 ! 
Well said Professor!
Take note - for the nth time! - all ye who ERRONEOUSLY equate "dress" or "formal" anything with your own mangled projections of "snobbery" and "elitism."


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Speaking of styles, I saw someone today wearing a Daniel Wellington watch on a Nato strap with the New England uniform (khakis, loafers, OCBD shirt, and a navy blazer).
> 
> I had never heard of the watch, so I did some searching, and turns out it's a fashion watch with a Miyota movement (no seconds, though). This is one of the few dress watches that I think look great on a Nato, and could be paired with less casual outfits. Not because it's dressy but because the Nato adds enough character and sprezz to the dressy looking watch (i.e. breaking the rules not because you don't know any better, but because you choose to look stylish). Looks like an excellent beater watch, too.


I know a guy at work who wears that general outfit almost everyday. J. Crew Timex on a J. Crew NATO.

I'm not against NATOs on dress watches, but I don't like the gold tone on that watch. In steel it might be interesting, but I'd much rather buy a watch from the Hamilton Jazzmaster collection for a few hundred more.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> I know a guy at work who wears that general outfit almost everyday. J. Crew Timex on a J. Crew NATO.
> 
> I'm not against NATOs on dress watches, but I don't like the gold tone on that watch. In steel it might be interesting, but I'd much rather buy a watch from the Hamilton Jazzmaster collection for a few hundred more.


Well, I like that the gold lends a more serious/dressy look to the watch, which is in strong contrast with the Nato strap. Personally, I like the DW watches for their simplicity -- extremely clean dial with no second hands, no unnecessary markings (not even hour markings) and just plain and simple. I find the Jazzmaster to be way too busy and complicated to work fine with a Nato, but of course, that's my personal preference.



Chronopolis said:


> You didn't know? Metlin IS girly.


There are empirical tests.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Well, I like that the gold lends a more serious/dressy look to the watch, which is in strong contrast with the Nato strap. Personally, I like the DW watches for their simplicity -- extremely clean dial with no second hands, no unnecessary markings (not even hour markings) and just plain and simple.


Nice watch. Made the most of what would have been a debilitating constraint to a lesser designer. 
I like that it does not have the second hand, given that it's a quartz. Can't stand seeing it doing the stop n go.
Was gonna think about getting one, but this (see below) kinda put a damper on things. 
Once you have seen, you cannot UNSEE. Sigh.

View attachment 551661


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I propose the creation of a creepy watches thread, starting with these pictures:


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

If it's warm enough to warrant an adult wearing shorts (ugh), then how is it cool enough to justify a sweater? I believe that man should see his doctor. His body is confused.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> If it's warm enough to warrant an adult wearing shorts (ugh), then how is it cool enough to justify a sweater? I believe that man should see his doctor. His body is confused.


Boys and girls, this is what happens when you mix up your styles -- being underwater with wearing a suit, for instance. ;-)

Next thing you know, you're wearing a bow-tie with beach sandals, shorts, and a sweater


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> If it's warm enough to warrant an adult wearing shorts (ugh), then how is it cool enough to justify a sweater? I believe that man should see his doctor. His body is confused.


It's an affectation.
I know, -- no, change that to *have the misfortune of being acquainted with* -- people in the fashion and "design" related industries.
The kind of affectation 'they' sport is truly, absolutely vomitatious. 
Name-dropping is par for the course, of course, and some of them even go so far as to pronounce Barcelona as 'BarTHelona' with a lisp. It's an amazing phenom: to see the same giddy, vapid, "beautiful people" one saw and tolerated in high school continue their vile ways as a matter of career.

I find it to be a very very unfortunate side-effect, or symptom, of this area of sartorial interest.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Boys and girls, this is what happens when you mix up your styles -- being underwater with wearing a suit, for instance. ;-)
> 
> Next thing you know, you're wearing a bow-tie with beach sandals, shorts, and a sweater


Those 2 creepy pics kinda did me in. 
Now I really cannot imagine wearing a DW watch. 
I don't blame the model: he's paid to do as he's told. And he was obviously told to be as unctuously preppy as possible.
So I gotta blame the stylist - who is working either under direct orders from DW, or is him/herself in charge of shaping its brand image. Vile and pretentious nincumpoop.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Chronopolis said:


> Those 2 creepy pics kinda did me in.
> Now I really cannot imagine wearing a DW watch.
> I don't blame the model: he's paid to do as he's told. And he was obviously told to be as unctuously preppy as possible.
> So I gotta blame the stylist - who is working either under direct orders from DW, or is him/herself in charge of shaping its brand image. Vile and pretentious nincumpoop.


To be fair, those pictures are not available on the site. This was the result of intense joblessness and my attempts at internet sleuthing to find more interesting pictures of DW. Clearly, it worked. :-|


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Boys and girls, this is what happens when you mix up your styles -- being underwater with wearing a suit, for instance. ;-)
> 
> Next thing you know, you're wearing a bow-tie with beach sandals, shorts, and a sweater


He looks very upset in the second picture. "Where did the rest of my pants go?"


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Question. Would a Hamilton Khaki King with a brown leather strap be appropriate for business casual? I'm looking at getting one but want something that I can wear a lot. Thanks.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



rjustice21 said:


> Question. Would a Hamilton Khaki King with a brown leather strap be appropriate for business casual? I'm looking at getting one but want something that I can wear a lot. Thanks.


Short answer: yes.

Any place that allows for the abomination that is business casual shouldn't really care. I think the rules are more appropriate for social situations more so than professional situations. So, go ahead. It's a good watch.

Long answer: I personally would get something that's not as busy, with a white dial and Roman numerals. Plus, the Khaki King has a sporty look to it that would look odd with "serious" business casual (i.e. slacks and a sport coat, or when the occasional tie is worn). At the end of the day, it would depend on what constitutes business casual at your work place and what everyone else is wearing (watches and clothes). There are several better options at that price point that are more conservative.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Yeah, I have a watch to suit the "serious business casual" you described. My business is one that allows the abomination that is "business casual"... so I guess the Hamilton will work. Thanks.

Another question... Is a black dialed watch ever appropriate for formal attire? Or is a white dialed watch considered more formal? Thanks.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



rjustice21 said:


> Yeah, I have a watch to suit the "serious business casual" you described. My business is one that allows the abomination that is "business casual"... so I guess the Hamilton will work. Thanks.
> 
> Another question... Is a black dialed watch ever appropriate for formal attire? Or is a white dialed watch considered more formal? Thanks.


I believe white is considered more formal than black, but unless you're talking black or white tie, most people are not going to care.

That said, wearing a black dialed watch with brown shoes/belt/strap looks odd to me, personally. I find white to be more flexible in that regard (mostly because I save black only for formal occasions, and most of my shoes/belt/straps are brown).


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Short answer: yes.
> 
> Any place that allows for the abomination that is business casual shouldn't really care. I think the rules are more appropriate for social situations more so than professional situations. So, go ahead. It's a good watch.
> 
> Long answer: I personally would get something that's not as busy, with a white dial and Roman numerals. Plus, the Khaki King has a sporty look to it that would look odd with "serious" business casual (i.e. slacks and a sport coat, or when the occasional tie is worn). At the end of the day, it would depend on what constitutes business casual at your work place and what everyone else is wearing (watches and clothes). There are several better options at that price point that are more conservative.


Khakis (I'm told I can't call them pants because they have no crease), driving loafers (laces suck), shirt (button down collar, I admit), tie, and V-neck sweater. I look fantastic. And a Khaki King would go great with this; I'm wearing my Speedmaster today.

Although, yesterday, I wore a similar outfit with my Hamilton King Scuba on a red and white NATO. Ha!

(But yes, most people here look like slobs.)


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> I believe white is considered more formal than black, but unless you're talking black or white tie, most people are not going to care.
> 
> That said, wearing a black dialed watch with brown shoes/belt/strap looks odd to me, personally. I find white to be more flexible in that regard (mostly because I save black only for formal occasions, and most of my shoes/belt/straps are brown).


It's funny; I've worn my last two black dial, PVD watches on brown or tan leather. But a steel case watch with a black dial (like my Speedmaster) looks odd to me on a brown strap.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> Khakis (I'm told I can't call them pants because they have no crease), driving loafers (laces suck), shirt (button down collar, I admit), tie, and V-neck sweater. I look fantastic. And a Khaki King would go great with this; I'm wearing my Speedmaster today.
> 
> Although, yesterday, I wore a similar outfit with my Hamilton King Scuba on a red and white NATO. Ha!
> 
> (But yes, most people here look like slobs.)


Navy suit, white shirt, maroon tie, and brown monk-straps and crocodile brown belt. With my Seagull 1963 on a cognac strap. Although, yesterday, I was in a similar outfit with a knit tie and my DJ. I usually like to have one piece of my outfit breaking the rules.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> It's funny; I've worn my last two black dial, PVD watches on brown or tan leather. But a steel case watch with a black dial (like my Speedmaster) looks odd to me on a brown strap.


I think your problem is that most of your watches are meant to be worn with bracelets, so they look odd on anything other than black leather (let's face it, most things look good in black).

So, brown does look bad with those watches, and understandably so. I think with dress watches, it's probably a little easier, but that could just be me.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Here's a question: most days I wear a US Public Health Service uniform (same as the Navy uniform). Its a rather unattractive khaki (think light brown baby poo) with black leather shoes, shiny gold and silver bits, black name tag and some ribbons and awards that manage to clash with every thing else.

Is it wrong to wear this?










I know it's not shiny, but it looks appropriately tool like and frankly the next best option is my diver which just looks too shiny.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Navy suit, white shirt, maroon tie, and brown monk-straps and crocodile brown belt. With my Seagull 1963 on a cognac strap. Although, yesterday, I was in a similar outfit with a knit tie and my DJ. I usually like to have one piece of my outfit breaking the rules.


No offense, but I think I'd hate that outfit. I don't like navy suits, white shirts, or maroon ties. Maroon isn't even a color. It's like red, but it's also like purple, and Bugs Bunny didn't like it either.

EDIT: All personal preference. I don't like green either. It's just a weird color.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> I think your problem is that most of your watches are meant to be worn with bracelets, so they look odd on anything other than black leather (let's face it, most things look good in black).
> 
> So, brown does look bad with those watches, and understandably so. I think with dress watches, it's probably a little easier, but that could just be me.


It just donned on me today that my first PVD watch has always been on black. First the black steel, and then later on I put it on black rubber (Bonnetti Cinturini, i.e. heaven in rubber and not for the cost or ugliness of an ISO, and then I modified it with a deployant), but that's the only one that's stayed on black. I'm not sure I'd agree that most of my watches were meant to be on bracelets, though. The Sumo, definitely, but not really the others.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Raza said:


> No offense, but I think I'd hate that outfit. I don't like navy suits, white shirts, or maroon ties. Maroon isn't even a color. It's like red, but it's also like purple, and Bugs Bunny didn't like it either.
> 
> EDIT: All personal preference. I don't like green either. It's just a weird color.


Hahaha, pretty much all my shirts are white or light blue, and all my suits are navy or charcoal gray. I even get them made from the same fabrics whenever possible to facilitate cross-pollination. So, my ties tend to be predominantly darker colors (usually maroon/purple/dark blue, sometimes yellow, light blue, and gray patterns thrown in). Today is pretty much the same as yesterday, except that I've a dark purple tie on, with light blue dots.

And now that I think about it, I think I've exactly two ties that have some green in them, and they're both Hermès-esque ones that don't get much wear.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Hahaha, pretty much all my shirts are white or light blue, and all my suits are navy or charcoal gray. I even get them made from the same fabrics whenever possible to facilitate cross-pollination. So, my ties tend to be predominantly darker colors (usually maroon/purple/dark blue, sometimes yellow, light blue, and gray patterns thrown in). Today is pretty much the same as yesterday, except that I've a dark purple tie on, with light blue dots.
> 
> And now that I think about it, I think I've exactly two ties that have some green in them, and they're both Hermès-esque ones that don't get much wear.


My wardrobe for work is largely gray, blue, and black, with a bit of purple and pink here and there.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*



Metlin said:


> They are still metal bracelets. You can wear them with "casual" business casual and below, but never with anything more formal.


While traditionally a dress watch should be on a leather strap, I personally think that a mesh bracelet can look very smart. So long as the watch itself is suitable, a mesh bracelet is not inappropriate for business attire, including with a suit.

By all means know the rules before you break them, but breaking them can be half the fun sometimes! I work as a lawyer at a national firm in Australia. In addition to many years experience in Australia I worked in London for a few years. In neither country would it be out of place for a lawyer to wear a watch with a stainless steel bracelet, so long as you are not talking about some 45 mm monstrosity. More of an issue may be wearing a rubber or plastic strap.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



flori78 said:


> Okay, please clarify me in this question:
> 
> For someone wearing a suit, would be inappropriate to wear a pilot watch with the suit? I have seen some movies were people were wearing a IWC Mark watch in a suit. Is a pilot watch a dress one?


Wearing a flieger with a suit is fine IMO, especially with a leather strap without rivets, and on the proviso it is not too large and obvious. No it's not a dress watch but nevertherless a stylish choice. The only occasion I would consider it too informal is with black tie (a tux).


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> No. Do you fly a plane for a living?


I don't suppose you own a diving watch?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



bhall41 said:


> Wearing a flieger with a suit is fine IMO, especially *with a leather strap without rivets*, and on the proviso it is *not too large* and obvious. No it's not a dress watch but nevertherless *a stylish choice*. The only occasion I would consider it too informal is with black tie (a tux).


Theoretically speaking, +1 absolutely!!

BUT... 
it - the stylishness - really would depend the suit (fabric, color & cut) and tie. And shoes.

But more importantly, the shape/fit and age of the person, as well as his sense of confidence in his choice of style. The "aura" if you will.
We know that, for example, Sean Connery would look very stylish with it. All the time, any time. In fact, the guy would style UP the Flieger quite a bit. 
(Has any woman ever come forward to complain about the guy "sexually harassing" them?)

It's these small but unavoidable and essential variables that make it impossible to give one correct answer for all, but only a guideline. One's style is/must be one's own, and none other's.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



bhall41 said:


> I don't suppose you own a diving watch?


Yes, but I dive. Your point?


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> Yes, but I dive. Your point?


You only wear it diving do you?


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



bhall41 said:


> You only wear it diving do you?


I usually only wear one by the water (surfing/swimming/sailing). That's their purpose, is it not?

I feel odd wearing a diver otherwise.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> I usually only wear one by the water (surfing/swimming/sailing). That's their purpose, is it not?
> 
> I feel odd wearing a diver otherwise.


Ought not a diving watch only be used for diving not water pursuits at large?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Sir, given your description of your usual daily attire, AND your location - associated, rightly or wrongly, with rugged wilderness, and manliness associated with living in it - I would say the watch you show (Damasko) is the very pinnacle of stylishness.
May you wear it in good health! But go easy on the ladies. Chicks dig stylish but rugged men. 



Will_f said:


> Here's a question: most days I wear a US Public Health Service uniform (same as the Navy uniform). Its a rather unattractive khaki (think light brown baby poo) with black leather shoes, shiny gold and silver bits, black name tag and some ribbons and awards that manage to clash with every thing else.
> 
> Is it wrong to wear this?
> 
> ...


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



bhall41 said:


> Ought not a diving watch only be used for diving not water pursuits at large?


Well, swimming, surfing, and sailing do involve being underwater (the latter less so than the first two, but I've had my fair share). They may not include scuba gear or be to great depths, but it is certainly fair to say that I would be... underwater.

Plus, dive watches are the only ones that provide reliable water resistance, which is a necessity in all those instances. While I appreciate your attempt at stretching my flight analogy, it is a bit flawed.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> While I appreciate your attempt at stretching my flight analogy, it is a bit flawed.


Maybe. My attenae are alert to the smell of hypocrisy.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



bhall41 said:


> Maybe. My attenae are alert to the smell of hypocrisy.


It would be hypocritical if I wore it outside of large water bodies (and I am not referring to fat people here). But wearing a watch outside of its provenance, or at least related activities, feels odd to me. YMMV.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Metlin said:


> It would be hypocritical if I wore it outside of large water bodies (and I am not referring to fat people here). But wearing a watch outside of its provenance, or at least related activities, feels odd to me. YMMV.


Not to walk across the court while you two gents are enjoying your lobs, but I did inadvertently overhear, so I might add this:
What is a "diver" watch but one that has had extra attention paid to regarding ability to resist water?
And a "pilot" watch but one that aimed to secure better/longer visibility in the dark - which condition also applies to diver watches.

There is a great deal of overlap in their so-called respective virtues, and frankly, I am baffled that pilot watches do not also come with much higher WR ratings. It seems like a useful feature in all watches. Yes, I am aware that the physics of pressure under water is different from that of atmospheric pressure inside a cabin, but to cite that would be probably either academic (read pedantic), or pedantic (read obsessive).

Be that as it may, it would seem that one may wear "diver" watches whenever there is going to be water near one - like rain, or hosing (for the purpose of washing something), for example. 
And if the lume is notably good, one might wear it when one expects to be in a place with little lumination for some duration, like at the movies. I like to wear any watch with good lume when I go to the movies, especially if I am gonna go see a dull movie, and would like to know how much longer I must suffer when I am 20 minutes into it.

As for wearing watches appropriate for flying at high altitudes, neh, not really.

So, my point by way of a rhetorical question: what exactly is the provenance of any watch beyond the semiotic value that has been artificially created through "stylistic" manipulation (exaggeration) of certain details and virtues that could easily be had in common?


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Diver's must actually have certain design features to pass ISO criteria. For example they must have uni-directional bezel. The bezel markings must be all around the bezel for each minute (not just five minute steps) but the first 15-20 minutes must be marked. There must be a Lume pip at the Zero minute. WR has special requirements, of course. 12h position on dial must be clearly marked and different from other markers. Second hand must be a) present and b) have lume as to quickly check whether the watch is still running. Dive watches also often feature an extension bracelet. OK, this exists for Fliegers, too, to be worn over a jacket.

I know of no such criteria for Flieger watches. However, IWC, a Flieger specialist, makes their watches underpressure proof, too. So that the glass doesn't pop off when the cabin pressure gets low. Chronographs for aviation purposed often have a flyback mechanism and should ideally combine that with a telemeter scale to measure distance (measure time between visible explosion and sound of explosion will give approximate distance to artillery). Flyback will allow multiple runs without having two operations to reset and then start again.

Inversely, a chronograph on a dive watch is a bit absurd. Cases should have as few holes as possible. It is difficult to make the pushers waterproof and even more so to have them work under water. However, while the function can rarely be used under water, the cluttered dial is there to make reading more difficult. The buttons are also there to get hooked to whatever is in their way.

An alarm on a dive watch would make much more sense, as the sound expands quickly under water and could be used to alert the diver to when he has to surface again.

Besides that, I enjoy watching intelligent people lob. There is always something to learn.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Watchalex said:


> Inversely, *a chronograph on a dive watch is a bit absurd*. Cases should have as few holes as possible. It is difficult to make the pushers waterproof and even more so to have them work under water. However, while the function can rarely be used under water, the cluttered dial is there to make reading more difficult. The buttons are also there to get hooked to whatever is in their way.


I also thought so, and once opined thus, only to soon find myself, paddleless, in shark-infested waters, so to speak.
While I became subsequently more "educated" about how/why a diver might use a watch "chronographically," I still remain entirely unconvinced that it is *really* a necessary or even a desirable feature in the task of diving and doing things underwater. 
And even if it really were, I'd have to rank it to be on par with going to Venice to see... some masks. 

Also, I find it not surprising that the majority of 1st rank professionals in any field tend to shirk bells-n-whistles tools in favor of the minimal thing that will do the job, whatever the job. 
This phenom is particularly well-showcased, I find, in sports in general, and especially in the martial arts of the Far Eastern variety.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

This thread is very helpful. For example: prior to reading, I thought I might have enough watches. I now realize that none of them really qualifies as a dress watch. I clearly must buy a Grand Seiko on black leather as soon as possible.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> This thread is very helpful. For example: prior to reading, I thought I might have enough watches. I now realize that none of them really qualifies as a dress watch. I clearly must buy a Grand Seiko on black leather as soon as possible.


It is deeply gratifying to me that someone finds this thread - now labyrinthine from so many meanderings and hijackings - "helpful".

Since you mentioned getting a Grand Seiko as your dress watch, I would just like to reiterate, in the name of decency, fairness, and common sense, and against all who have unjustly leveled accusations of "elitism" and "snobbery" in the motive behind this thread: NO positive/helpful contributor to this thread has ever claimed that a dress watch must be above a certain price point, let alone one of the calibre/price point that the Grand Seiko is.

I know that you, Sir, own a Damasko, so it is clear that you know your watches. 
And so I would certainly wish you to have the best watch you can afford and care to own, and wear it in good health.

But, again for those who might misunderstand, let me repeat/re-phrase what many who are knowledgeable about the rules of formal attire have said already:

Dressing "formally" has to do more with presenting oneself with dignity and gravity, in a way that is "appropriate" to the venue one is attending. And that means, coordinating colors (everything, not just the metal/leather on the watch) is a matter of far greater importance than the price tag or pedigree of the watch. (Or shoes, or suit, etc.)

By the way,
In my own experience, I have found that those who are truly at the top - not only economically, but more importantly in terms of breeding, education, humanity, and decency - care far more about finding in a person those same deep values that really show the quality/character of that person, than about the various evidence of the ever-mutable set of circumstances that might indicate one's current state of faring on the sea of fortune.

In other words, "better sort" of people never "look down" on people who are unwealthy, or poorly dressed. They only "look down," if they look at all, on those who are ill-bred, and are simply uneducable, and are loud and "proud" of it. The Kardashians, for example.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> It is deeply gratifying to me that someone finds this thread - now labyrinthine from so many meanderings and hijackings - "helpful".
> 
> Since you mentioned getting a Grand Seiko as your dress watch, I would just like to reiterate, in the name of decency, fairness, and common sense, and against all who have unjustly leveled accusations of "elitism" and "snobbery" in the motive behind this thread: NO positive/helpful contributor to this thread has ever claimed that a dress watch must be above a certain price point, let alone one of the calibre/price point that the Grand Seiko is.
> 
> ...


Good points. Good looking and appropriate doesn't mean expensive. There are a huge number of handsome dress watches for less than the price of a fancy meal for the family. The Grand Seiko was a bit tongue in cheek. While I would dearly love a GS, it would have to be a 40 year old one for me to be able to afford it. More likely is the WU-YI limited edition that Seagull USA has promised by the end of the year.

Alaska is pretty egalitarian. You are considered well within the bounds of social convention if you wear Carhardts to the Symphony or opera. If you want to dress to the nines, that's fine too but kind of impractical when there are multiple feet of snow on the ground. A Gshock with a suit would not earn you style points, but no opprobrium either. The only high end watches I've seen outside of a store (a solid gold sub and a two tone DJ) were on the wrists of the scariest looking guys you could possibly imagine.

However, I have to take issue with you re the Kardashians. It isn't fair to brand everybody living in Kardashia as loud and proud. While I've never watched the documentary, the women appear to be attractive (make-up is apparently used as some sort of tribal decoration) if a little vapid and the men seem fit and quite capable of protecting the country from invasion by the Papparazi hordes. Keep to the topic please.

I
(for those who need a clue, I'm trying for humor)


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

I have unilaterally called a halt to hostilities, for the time being. ;-)

A chronograph on a dive watch is - to coin a phrase - as useful as tits on a bull. Nevertheless, dive watches are rarely used for their intended purpose these days, which makes the sin of introducing sub-dials more forgivable. I am an avid diver but take my dive watch off (if I am wearing one), when I go for a dive, as it surplus to my requirements.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

I have three dive chronographs. Most useful watches made, in my opinion. I can time two things at once, with with to the minute precision, and one with to the 10th or 20th of a second precision. I time a lot of things. Every watch should be a chronograph. Thinking about my own watch collection today, I realized that every watch I own either has a chronograph complication, a dive bezel, or both, save for one (you could say two if you don't count the inner bezel on my Hamilton Sunset). 

I time a lot of things. Turbo cooldown, smoke breaks, cooking (dive chronos are the best thing for grilling), deliveries, and lots of other stuff. I find the fact that I wouldn't dive with a dive chrono largely irrelevant (though I would dive with my Chase-Durer, as it has screwdown pushers).


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

Chrono, love your above post. If it was possible that would be an awesome, if pretentious (Because of its length), signature.

Raza, I am totally with you on the wonderful utility of having a dive bezel on a chronograph. It's great. But having a chronograph on a dive watch which is actually used for diving is like tits on a bull, as bhall41 eloquently put it.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Hmmm... teats on a bull? I'm all for it.
Moooo~~~~~ 

View attachment 556706


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

Hilarious!!! Where do you find that stuff? Let's hope it passes the strict eye of our mods as this is supposed to be a child friendly forum. Well, the youngest member I know of here is a precocious 13 year old and I'm sure he's seen worse. 

While she doesn't wear much, her sleeves are too long. One cannot see her watch. Maybe she is wearing an AP Montoya. Or better yet a Hublot Big Bang!


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Chronopolis said:


> Nice watch. Made the most of what would have been a debilitating constraint to a lesser designer.
> I like that it does not have the second hand, given that it's a quartz. Can't stand seeing it doing the stop n go.
> Was gonna think about getting one, but this (see below) kinda put a damper on things.
> Once you have seen, you cannot UNSEE. Sigh.





Metlin said:


> I propose the creation of a creepy watches thread, starting with these pictures...


On that note, here is one more creepy picture, of recent origin:










Is that a donkey? Or a deer? I'm not sure what, but all I can say is WTF?!


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Duuuuude! What is UP with these DW people? They - and their "sensibilities" - are freaking me out.

Btw: 
1. I hope you're young enough to casually wear the term 'dude' used in that "Keeanusian" way... but if not, wear it anyway.

and...

2. Did you know that the word 'dude' used to mean (19th c) a well-dressed gentleman? Hence the origin of 'dude ranches' - for those well-heeled gents who, without getting actually roughed up, wanted to savor the "taste" of the rugged life in the wild west. His female counterpart would have been called a "dudette".



Metlin said:


> On that note, here is one more creepy picture, of recent origin:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Awesome. I learn something every day here.


----------



## strongblackcoffee (Jul 29, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Since this is a test please let me ask a question. Several really.

The Omega Speedmaster Professional (the moonwatch, or modern version of it) seems to me one of the few watches that look good on metal bracelets, black leather straps *and *the various nylon straps. The reason is (I'm guessing) that the history and application of this watch as a piece of equipment in a technical environment as well as the scientific environment (rocket science!) made the look acceptable - thus the watch very versatile regarding strap options. (I'm picking on this watch as an example only because it is a potential future purchase, and is an example of an already versatile watch - or am I mistaken?)

I am on the fence regarding this watch on a brown leather strap (or, for that matter, any other similar type watch with a black face, white markers and a SS case). I think with this watch it looks good, don't get me wrong, but ... is it acceptable? If so, at what level of formality?

I tend to wear business or business casual in the wider sense - i.e. either blacks/ blues/ greys with light shirt or warm eath tones with browns, greens and sand tones. I need a watch that is compatible with various brownish belts/ shoes as well as black belts/ shoes.

So, are there any watches out there that can be worn (and are acceptable) in a formal and business environment (such as boardroom, corporate banks, corporate HQs) and can be worn either black or brown leather straps, i.e. dress watches that are versatile regarding strap/ bracelet options?

Thanks for your advice.

Mike


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

There are a couple things about the Speedmaster:

1. The caseback is a good deal lower than the lugs, so the one piece straps have to bend back upwards before they come down. It makes them sit strange on the wrist.

2. I've tried my Speedmaster on brown leather; I don't like it much. To me, the Speedmaster belongs on black croc, which is what I got it on; sometimes I wish I had gotten the bracelet, just to have it for hot days, but it really doesn't make a difference.

So I say black leather or a bracelet. Brown leather with a black dial doesn't always work and I think this is one of the case where it doesn't.


----------



## Watchalex (Oct 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Mike,

I think the reason the Speedmaster looks good on a variety of bands is that it is simply a very good design. A really good design goes with anything. This is exaggerated to make a point.

You are asking two questions. The classic black dial/steel with brown leather strap question. And the is this combo dressy enough question.

On number 1. There are combos where black dial brown strap can look good. Usually it's when the dial is rather simple. Not clustered. On some dive watches like Panerai or Blancpain it can look good. Much depends on the shade of brown. I have a Citizen diver on a brown leather strap. Looks funky and unusual but actually quite alright, and I am really sensitive to these things.

On number 2. Not sure about the nomenclature. Would business mean suit and tie with black shoes and belt? Then business casual would mean pants, button-down shirt (no tie, never with a button-down) and brown shoes and belt, right? If so, for the latter a Speedy would be OK in my book.

For a get-up in suit and tie and a boardroom meeting the speedy even on black shiny gator strap is not the right choice in my opinion. At 42mm it is already pretty big (even if it looks smaller) and it is clearly a sports or tool watch by definition. It is a chrono. It doesn't even have a date. That would be my prime concern if wondering about the Speedy as an everyday watch. Will you use the chrono more often than the date? Also, Speedy is handwind. Do you want to do that every day? Forget to wind it, put it on the next day and your watch has stopped. Now you are out and about and don't have the time. Well, cell phone, ok, but still. Wearing it every day also means scratches to the hesalite crystal will be hard to prevent. Then you have to polish those out. Giant PITA as an everyday watch. I wouldn't recommend it.

Here is my recommendation. One watch that is really super versatile is the Omega AT 8500 be it with silver/champagne dial or with the grey/brown dial. Both versions look good on black or brown leather straps (grey looks marvelous, too). And both versions look good on their metal bracelet. Stricter sartorialists than myself would never wear a watch on a metal bracelet with a suit (n'est-ce pas, Metlin?) but I think it's perfectly acceptable, if not as refined as an assorted leather strap. And wearing a brown leather strap with black shoes and belt is really not ideal. I have never done it with a suit. In a very casual setting in the US where people generally care less, I have done it. But I was self-conscious about it. I know that's stupid. 

I'd say the Omega AT8500 is one of the most versatile watches all around. With its intricate dial and white gold hand and indices, as well as thanks to the nicely decorated movement, it is a beauty to behold. With its date, lume and 60hr power reserve it is very practical. And thanks to the screw-down crown, its AR coated domed sapphire, the integrated crown protection, superior WR at 150m and very safely closing, solid bracelet it does good duty as a sports watch in casual situation or even on the beach. The brushed finish on the bracelet and case sides means that you can easily restore the finish yourself (not as good as a watchmaker but good enough to lower the frequency that it has to be done by a watchmaker).

I also think that because of its beautiful lyre lugs it does look better on straps than its closest competitor the Rolex DJ.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Mike, I think the Speedy Pro is a very versatile watch, as you mentioned. On the Omega sub-forum there are tons of pictures of it on a brown strap - I think it looks fantastic. While it's not a dress watch IMO you can definately get away with wearing it with business casual or even a suit. I would avoid wearing it with black shoes and belt but other than that you can't go wrong really.


----------



## Muslickz (Nov 1, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Watchalex said:


> Diver's must actually have certain design features to pass ISO criteria. For example they must have uni-directional bezel. The bezel markings must be all around the bezel for each minute (not just five minute steps) but the first 15-20 minutes must be marked. There must be a Lume pip at the Zero minute. WR has special requirements, of course. 12h position on dial must be clearly marked and different from other markers. Second hand must be a) present and b) have lume as to quickly check whether the watch is still running. Dive watches also often feature an extension bracelet. OK, this exists for Fliegers, too, to be worn over a jacket.
> 
> I know of no such criteria for Flieger watches. However, IWC, a Flieger specialist, makes their watches underpressure proof, too. So that the glass doesn't pop off when the cabin pressure gets low. Chronographs for aviation purposed often have a flyback mechanism and should ideally combine that with a telemeter scale to measure distance (measure time between visible explosion and sound of explosion will give approximate distance to artillery). Flyback will allow multiple runs without having two operations to reset and then start again.
> 
> ...


I never really liked dive watches personally but to each his own

-M


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

So, I now have two watches.

The first is this watch, purchased a while ago, based solely on the basis that I liked it:










The second watch is a recent purchase, based solely on the basis that I liked it:










In the second case, having an ETA movement and a sapphire crystal were important considerations regarding what I liked.

My questions are: when are these watches appropriate, and do I have a glaring hole in my wrist watch wearing wardrobe? Would either of these be OK for a formal or business occasion?

If not, what would round out my watch collection in terms of wardrobe functionality?

Thanks!
ABG


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



AngryBaconGod said:


> So, I now have two watches.
> 
> The first is this watch, purchased a while ago, based solely on the basis that I liked it:
> 
> ...


Both are nice watches, and while you could get away with wearing them in business casual situations, I wouldn't wear either with a suit.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

AngryBaconGod said:


> So, I now have two watches.
> 
> My questions are: when are these watches appropriate, and do I have a glaring hole in my wrist watch wearing wardrobe? Would either of these be OK for a formal or business occasion?
> 
> ...


No expert on fashion, but I'd say you need a dress watch. Thinking along the same lines, I decided I needed one too, so I started looking at vintage watches. As far as I can tell, the vast majority are much more formal than modern watches and the price you pay for top quality is substantially less than I ever imagined. The only downside is that you can pretty much be certain servicing will be required.


----------



## Bureaupath (Dec 4, 2011)

Hmn . . ."The only downside is that you can pretty much be certain servicing will be required."

This isn't really a downside, everything needs servicing to improve reliability and longevity. For example, I live in a remote part of Australia's Northern Territory and drive 3200kms just to get my car serviced. I also get all my watches serviced every three years or so. Two go to Geneva (Patek and Vacheron) while all the rest can be serviced in Adelaide while my car is having its oil and belts changed. The upshot is that both my sons will inherit fine timepieces that run as sweetly now as they did twenty years ago. Finally, I noticed many U.S. sites selling collectible early americana (Walthams, Elgins, etc.) that have been fully serviced and restrapped for just a few hundred bucks. Those early Walthams look fabulous with a suit, and the elegant and vintage character of such a timepiece is always a great conversation starter. So I'll take an early Hamilton or Walthams for $350-400, knowing full well that having run reliably for 70-80 years, and been freshly serviced, chances are it will still be going strong in the next century. We might all live in a throwaway society but we don't have to accept it.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Bureaupath said:


> Hmn . . ."The only downside is that you can pretty much be certain servicing will be required."
> 
> This isn't really a downside, everything needs servicing to improve reliability and longevity. For example, I live in a remote part of Australia's Northern Territory and drive 3200kms just to get my car serviced. I also get all my watches serviced every three years or so. Two go to Geneva (Patek and Vacheron) while all the rest can be serviced in Adelaide while my car is having its oil and belts changed. The upshot is that both my sons will inherit fine timepieces that run as sweetly now as they did twenty years ago. Finally, I noticed many U.S. sites selling collectible early americana (Walthams, Elgins, etc.) that have been fully serviced and restrapped for just a few hundred bucks. Those early Walthams look fabulous with a suit, and the elegant and vintage character of such a timepiece is always a great conversation starter. So I'll take an early Hamilton or Walthams for $350-400, knowing full well that having run reliably for 70-80 years, and been freshly serviced, chances are it will still be going strong in the next century. We might all live in a throwaway society but we don't have to accept it.


I meant that when you buy a vintage watch, the first thing you will have to do is spend some more money to service it Because its almost certainly past due.

Will


----------



## catlike (Aug 7, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I have worn suits for most of my career and attended countless formal functions. I always take care to wear what I feel is an appropriate dress watch for the occasion, it makes _*me*_ feel good to complete "the look". But in all honesty, the watch you wear in a formal situation is probably less important than a more casual situation. My reasoning for this is the exposure time and the chances that the watch will actually be seen.

A tailored jacket sleeve length should just cover the wrist with your arms hanging, the perfect length is when the sleeve shortens just enough to check the time on your watch. So in reality, the only time your matching watch is likely to be seen is when you are checking the time, have your arms folded or you are purposely drinking with your left hand (for us right handers). The first two can be considered rude if you do them too much ;-) So maybe your watch gets a couple of minutes of stage time at an event that lasts for hours and where the majority of guests wouldn't have a clue how much care you have taken to match the watch to your outfit.

In less formal situations my watch is on constant display, in a climate such as this, a dress shirt with the sleeves neatly rolled half way up the forearm is considered well dressed for most occasions.

I am not condoning the wearing of big ugly watches with suits, if it doesn't fit neatly under the cuff then I think it's inappropriate. I would always pick a nice thin dress watch for formal occasions, but I wouldn't get too hung up if I thought my watch wasn't quite formal enough, as long as it showed some indication of good taste and it didn't necessitate me to physically pull back or unbutton the cuff to see the time.

OK, that's enough of me being a dress snob, I've got an itch I've gotta scratch..........


----------



## Rusty_Shakleford (Jan 19, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I've begun the overwhelming task of reading this thread and it is very interesting. I consider myself fairly cognizant of style but I do not take it nearly to the extremes of some of you guys. It is hard to tell when you are being serious, tongue-in-cheek, or merely trolling. Either way it is entertaining and somewhat informative.

For me, these rules apply...

1. All leathers must match basic color and be as close as possible, watch strap, belt, & shoes, e.g., brown with brown or black with black. There are no other colors. This applies to all levels of dress from the beach to black tie.
2. Big chunky dive watches are a no-go with a suit. Submariner types and my 39mm TAG Link with it's unassuming polished bezel are not too over sized to "Suit Up!" watch dials must be subdued, no bright colors with suits.
3. Nylon straps are perfectly acceptable with jeans and casual shirt. Color rules are looser but still apply.
4. I do not care about my pen beyond it being black ink. One must be available at all times. If not on your person, very near. Yes, you may borrow mine but you may have to remove it from your neck, Casino style.
5. I am in the US Army Infantry and we do not carry umbrellas unless holding one for a lady or elderly veteran. Non-Vet old men have to carry their own. This rule is set in stone. Overcoats are allowed with suits only. Any other outfit gets wet like a real man.
6. Tailored suits\jackets are preferred but so are 1950s Ferrari's. Both are financial hurdles that may be insurmountable to everyone. Your suit should fit if off the rack. I have one, tailored suit, not Ferrari and that is about all I plan to spend on that for a while.
7. Learn to tie a tie. I will no longer tie them for grown men. Yes, this comes up every now and then in my circle of friends and colleagues. Clip on bow ties are also verboten. Concerning bow ties, Google is your friend, use it.
8. Suits can only be black, gray, brown\khaki, or dark blue. Green is, of course, only OK as part of a uniform. Any other color is not a suit. Pin stripes are allowed, just not on my suits.
9. Shoes worn with suits should have leather soles. Rubber is not allowed.
10. Except for ties and PT belts, no cloth part of your clothing should ever be shiny.
11. Nothing but your socks or undershirt should be tight. You work out, I get it, now go put on a shirt that fits.

This is where my friends and I really disagree but they apparently lack self respect...

12. A male over the age of 13 should not wear shorts outside of his own home unless he is near a body of water at least as large as a pool for an extended period of time, say an hour, minimum. Yes, it is hot outside. What does that have to do with wearing pants with legs on them. There is a waiver for sporting activities like running, playing team sports, etc. but change clothes when finished. There are no waivers for hot tubs as everyone knows that you should be naked in a hot tub.
13. The same rules apply to flip-flops. When I am at the supermarket in July I should not see a grown man's toes, ever. No water, no flip-flops or sandals.

There are probably more but that's all I can think of at the moment. Other than these, I am pretty flexible, LOL.

RS


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

catlike said:


> A tailored jacket sleeve length should just cover the wrist with your arms hanging, the perfect length is when the sleeve shortens just enough to check the time on your watch. So in reality, the only time your matching watch is likely to be seen is when you are checking the time, have your arms folded or you are purposely drinking with your left hand (for us right handers). The first two can be considered rude if you do them too much ;-)


Sadly, this is a big challenge for me. When I get bored, I have to remind myself to not look at my watch or I start admiring the sheer beauty of whatever I'm wearing. Shamefully bad manners.


----------



## DiveWatch87 (Oct 26, 2011)

Will_f said:


> Sadly, this is a big challenge for me. When I get bored, I have to remind myself to not look at my watch or I start admiring the sheer beauty of whatever I'm wearing. Shamefully bad manners.


Don't be ashamed of what you have on. I think a watch is a key part of any outfit. Watches are getting larger and louder, but the watches in your signature are not Breitling Bentley gaudy. Actually, the sleeve of a sport coat or suit jacket should land right above the wrist bone and allow for 1/2" of shirt cuff to show. Almost 99% of men I see have sleeves that are entirely too long. Some dandy's and younger kids even like to show more shirt cuff.

A little off topic here, but something worth mentioning in this thread. People often say a tool, or sport watch should not be worn with a jacket or blazer. To an extent this is true (ironman or G-shock), but misjudged with many watches. I will use Rolex just bc it is a brand where most ppl who read this will know all the models. Sub, Yachtmaster, or Daytona are all sport watches. There is a reason jackets are often called sport coats, that is what they were originally designed for. If your wearing a tweed jacket or blue blazers, the original intent for these jackets were hunting/shooting clays and yachting. I think a sport or not so loud tool watch looks exceptional with them.  They were not made for tuxedos or 3 piece suits, but to me they are ways of being casual and refined at the same time.


----------



## 7Pines (Jun 28, 2007)

_O...M...G...
:-d:-s:rodekaart:roll:_


----------



## FAC (Dec 25, 2011)

Hello WUS, interesting thread you got going on.

I just received my first real watch (had a Casio rubber watch when I was 6, haven't had one since) and I'm really happy for it.
It's a Certina DS Action, 40,5 mm, Quartz (yes I know, but it's my first watch so please bear with me), 200m waterproof, etc. Link: Certina Swiss Watches - Time Maker Since 1888 - DS Concept - A Company of the Swatch Group
And here's a picture of it:
View attachment 586126

And a wrist shot of it on my hand, the bracelet is a little too big for my wrist (my wrist is probably like 6,5 - 6,7 inches), unfortunately all jewelers near me are closed until the 27th:
View attachment 586129


My question is, do you think the watch will work with my daily school uniform and my gala clothes? (pictures below)
Daily school uniform (not me on the pictures):
View attachment 586130

Half gala:
View attachment 586132
+ our tie:
View attachment 586133
We can also choose this tie, but it's mostly used on specific dates:
View attachment 586139

And gala:
View attachment 586134


Thanks in advance.

Best regards, 
FAC.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

I don't usually express my opinion on fashion (because I am pretty bad at it), but IMHO, that watch will go splendidly with your uniform, half gala, a pair of jeans, a day at the beach, etc. in short, everything except your formal gala attire. Too sporty for that. You could get an inexpensive dress watch for the formal occasions, but I'd probably just not wear a watch. Someone will come along shortly to correct me if I'm wrong.

Nice watch, btw.


----------



## Myron Gaines (Dec 25, 2011)

Would you guys wear an Orient Esteem maybe daily, wearing something like chinos and a tee shirt to school or is the Esteem too formal? i reeeeaaaally like this model.

Out of these 3 colors, which is the most casual for a daily wearer?




Also thinking of adding a nice Hirsch leather strap or Nato to add to the casual look. What do you guys think?


----------



## Badandy (Nov 3, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Rusty_Shakleford said:


> 12. A male over the age of 13 should not wear shorts outside of his own home unless he is near a body of water at least as large as a pool for an extended period of time, say an hour, minimum. Yes, it is hot outside. What does that have to do with wearing pants with legs on them.


Is this a serious question? It's cooler and more comfortable. I can understand not want to see a man's toes (although I live in Southern California where sandals are the most popular footwear), but no shorts? Ridiculous.


----------



## jDrexler (Dec 15, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

recently purchased a Seiko SARB017 for myself and was looking for some advice or pointers, I have no problem dressing it wayyyy down with a "nato" band, and with it's leather band it is quite sharp looking in my opinion, but my concern is over the green dial and small rotating internal bezel, How dressy of a situation it would still be appropriate in your eyes? it's also not a big watch, case is 38-39mm (I've seen it listed as both). I'm also 24 if age has any bearing.










on wrist:


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Badandy said:


> Is this a serious question? It's cooler and more comfortable. I can understand not want to see a man's toes (although I live in Southern California where sandals are the most popular footwear), but no shorts? Ridiculous.


I agree with Rusty.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

What do the experts say about a watch like the Ball Fireman? (Sorry, stock photo)









OK with a suit on leather only? Bracelet OK for sports coat or more casual? Rubber or NATO only for jeans or more casual?


----------



## Hummingbird (Jan 7, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> I, for one, think the idea of wearing a suit with a G-shock opens up myriad of intellectually challenging directions. Questions concerning hierarchy, order, rebellion, individualism, conformity, decency, modernity, tradition, etc are all there... wrapped in the wrapper of "taste" and "personal style".


My boss used to wear a G-Shock with a suit! - Along with his french cuffed shirts and Mont Blanc pen. But a G-Shock, wtf!?Yep... he had some issues...


----------



## shuie (Dec 28, 2011)

I'm in the market for a new watch for my business attire. That said, any advice on brand and band that would go best with a sleeveless t-shirt and jean shorts. If shoes matter, its usually flip-flops with one of the rubber straps duct taped on - classy black colored duct tape. HAHAAHAH. Sorry, couldn't resist being the smart a$$ on the thread. Anyway, this thread is very good read with lots of insightful tips. Thanks guys


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

~tc~ said:


> What do the experts say about a watch like the Ball Fireman? (Sorry, stock photo)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think it looks a bit like a field watch (which I like). Perhaps its shinier than it looks in the photo, If not I'd say its best for casual, up to and including office wear with a tie and sports jacket. You could get away with wearing with a suit, though it's not ideal. I don't think it matters much whether it's Ieather or metal band, but leather would make it a tad more dressy.

Will


----------



## catlike (Aug 7, 2009)

A friend of mine is a young lawyer at the beginning of his career in Helsinki. He went to a meeting at a prestigious law firm in London and wore a suit with brown shoes, he is a smart dresser, so I assume whatever he wore looked snappy. Anyhow, whilst standing having a cup of coffee, one of the local London lawyers looked at his shoes and sneered _*"a gentleman never wears brown in town"*. _He recites this story with a posh English accent and it is hilarious. :-d

Anyway, based on this principle, I guess there would be no need for a dress watch with a brown strap? Come to think of it, I don't have any brown dress shoes, they're all black :think:


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

If you're still in school, and in one where students are required to wear uniform as you've shown below, I would say this:
By NOT wearing a watch that is excessively symbolic of status and financial standing, but instead opting for one that is sensible for your age and station in life, you would shine with every virtue that reflects positively your parents' refinement.

After all, you spend most of your time "studying" and engaging in athletic activities, as you should, do you not? 
Those at your age who spend disproportionate amount of $ and time looking like they already own the company they will perhaps one day inherit, or hope to interview for a job at, show a kind of precociousness with worldly matters that Schopenhauer so rightly disdained as examples of what passes for ambition among those with vulgar souls.

Not only is the watch appropriate at all times for you, in your situation, it is actually even MORE so when worn in gala. 
Why? 
Precisely because it IS off (technically speaking), BUT/AND you are a student, a young man not yet making his own way in the world. 
This is why it would actually be a display of very great vulgarity to show that one has consciously gone out of ones way to "match" everything so perfectly: it shows how eager one is to please, to fit in. Not a noble trait.

Youth is a time of one's Own Majesty - one is beholden to no-one. In one's youth, if one is blessed, one has many people around him who are trying to steer him right. Therefore, one may feel one is not a master of anything. Not so!

Having a certain "indifference" (in one's youth) to being so correct about everything, while at the same time being respectful of tradition and rules, is a good trait to cultivate.
Skol!



FAC said:


> Hello WUS, interesting thread you got going on.
> 
> I just received my first real watch (had a Casio rubber watch when I was 6, haven't had one since) and I'm really happy for it.
> It's a Certina DS Action, 40,5 mm, Quartz (yes I know, but it's my first watch so please bear with me), 200m waterproof, etc. Link: Certina Swiss Watches - Time Maker Since 1888 - DS Concept - A Company of the Swatch Group
> ...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

This is why a gentleman should also have business in the country.



catlike said:


> A friend of mine is a young lawyer at the beginning of his career in Helsinki. He went to a meeting at a prestigious law firm in London and wore a suit with brown shoes, he is a smart dresser, so I assume whatever he wore looked snappy. Anyhow, whilst standing having a cup of coffee, one of the local London lawyers looked at his shoes and sneered _*"a gentleman never wears brown in town"*. _He recites this story with a posh English accent and it is hilarious. :-d
> 
> Anyway, based on this principle, I guess there would be no need for a dress watch with a brown strap? Come to think of it, I don't have any brown dress shoes, they're all black :think:


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Yep, I can vouch for that Catlike. I worked in London as a lawyer for a while, and brown shoes in the City (i.e. City of London, not to be confused with central London, the West End, the City of Westminster or Greater London) are taboo. Thankfully such sartorial rigidity re choice of shoe colour does not apply in Australian cities or indeed probably anywhere else in the world.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

bhall41 said:


> Yep, I can vouch for that Catlike. I worked in London as a lawyer for a while, and brown shoes in the City (i.e. City of London, not to be confused with central London, the West End, the City of Westminster or Greater London) are taboo. Thankfully such sartorial rigidity re choice of shoe colour does not apply in Australian cities or indeed probably anywhere else in the world.


Wow. I basically exclusively wear brown shoes. I don't like the way black shoes look with anything but black pants.


----------



## strongblackcoffee (Jul 29, 2010)

Raza said:


> Wow. I basically exclusively wear brown shoes. I don't like the way black shoes look with anything but black pants.


+1

I particularly like to wear brown shoes (brogues or "winter sailing shoes").

Black dress shoes or boots look good with blue jeans for a more casual look. I like that too!


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

Raza said:


> Wow. I basically exclusively wear brown shoes. I don't like the way black shoes look with anything but black pants.


And some men like to wear shorts on occasion.

Isn't fashion fickle?


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

AngryBaconGod said:


> And some men like to wear shorts on occasion.
> 
> Isn't fashion fickle?


Wait, shorts are fashionable? I can finally show off my sasquatch hairy legs? I am so stoked! Should I wear em in London (city) with black shoes (and I assume black socks)?

I'd wear my black leather belt and watch band with matching white stitching of course.


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

Will_f said:


> Wait, shorts are fashionable? I can finally show off my sasquatch hairy legs? I am so stoked! Should I wear em in London (city) with black shoes (and I assume black socks)?
> 
> I'd wear my black leather belt and watch band with matching white stitching of course.


Work it!


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Raza said:


> Wow. I basically exclusively wear brown shoes. I don't like the way black shoes look with anything but black pants.


The black shoe 'rule' is of course pretty silly, although there are presumably historical / cultural reasons for its existence. On the other hand, while I love wearing brown shoes with a suit, black shoes are very versatile - I am wearing black shoes today with a mid grey suit. Arguably, black shoes are more versatile than brown shoes, at least in relation to suits. I don't really care for brown shoes with a charcoal coloured suit, for example (although I would (and do) wear burgundy shoes on occasion). In terms of casual clothes, I generally prefer brown shoes to black.


----------



## d-rock (Jan 24, 2008)

When I read this, by Chronopolis:

"I, for one, think the idea of wearing a suit with a G-shock opens up myriad of intellectually challenging directions. Questions concerning hierarchy, order, rebellion, individualism, conformity, decency, modernity, tradition, etc are all there... wrapped in the wrapper of "taste" and "personal style"."

… it made me think about how all such objects serve a communicative function in a given social space. So we might ask, 'what does it communicate, and to whom, to wear certain watches (or shoes) in a given social space?" When we keep in mind that the meaning of practices — like wearing a watch of type, or shoes of a color — changes through time, and varies across cultures, we start to appreciate that the issue isn't "right or wrong" generally, but rather what is achieved specifically.

Somewhere on WUS I saw photos of numerous staffers at the U.S. Treasury all wearing Casios rather than more up-scale Swiss pieces. What does that communicate? The answer is a lot. Pragmatism, intellectualism, simplicity, commitment to public service. It says, in effect, "I am here to help, not to profit or advance my station." Whether any of this is true is irrelevant. It is a message. Whereas a diamond-studded Hublot won't do that. That would say, "This job is yet another step on my ladder of personal pleasure, and I'll be treating it as a diversion from my main occupation, which is myself."

The reason I like to see what celebs are wearing is not so I can imitate them. It is rather because it's interesting to see how they navigate the space between being "celebrity Inc." where they must maintain a certain public persona to maintain their market position, and simply expressing their own preferences and pleasures. And sometimes I wonder what they are. Sometimes i don't … That tension between the public and private plays out on wrists (among other places). And that's interesting. 

The statement "gentlemen do not wear brown in town" tells us more about the person making the comment than the one they do the one wearing the shoes. A comedic rebuttal might well be, "Perhaps not in your era." And again, that makes for dramatic tension, which is fun. The tough part is when the the dominant cultural expectation is so ensconced that it can't be toyed with. I suspect the City in London — and certainly some of the legal circles — are still like that. But even then, that world is under attack. 

Watches talk. That's probably my main point. So what are they saying? And to whom?

d.


----------



## rclark0809 (Jun 23, 2011)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

+1


----------



## Muslickz (Nov 1, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> Arguably, black shoes are more versatile than brown shoes, at least in relation to suits.


I personally own 6 pair of black and one pair of brown and I think I may have worn them once in a year.

-M


----------



## TrA (Apr 9, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I like sports watches. This one gives me the most versatility of my collection. I think it works pretty well dressed up or down.

View attachment 610536


I've found the more I've gotten into watches the more thought I've given to matching the complication, metal, strap and size to my attire and the occasion. To me it just adds another enjoyable dimension to it all.


----------



## kngspook (Dec 22, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

kngspook said:


> So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


No, only of the second order. 

Nice watch. I have sometimes worn my Sub with a suit in the past. It's ok but not the best combination either IMO. I wouldn't however suggest that you wear your watch with a dinner suit (tux) unless you have a license to kill ....


----------



## minky (Jan 25, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



TrA said:


> I like sports watches. This one gives me the most versatility of my collection. I think it works pretty well dressed up or down.


I really like that watch. what model, and how big is it? I would love one in a smaller size.

boy this thread is pretty funny, I've gotta sit and give it a good read through now. :]


----------



## kngspook (Dec 22, 2010)

bhall41 said:


> No, only of the second order.
> 
> Nice watch. I have sometimes worn my Sub with a suit in the past. It's ok but not the best combination either IMO. I wouldn't however suggest that you wear your watch with a dinner suit (tux) unless you have a license to kill ....


Oh, well, if it's only a second order faux pas... 

But more seriously, where does the IWC Portuguese Chronograph sit on the casual-formal spectrum? I imagine it would be more appropriate with a suit? Would you consider it with a tux?


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

d-rock said:


> Watches talk. That's probably my main point. So what are they saying? And to whom?
> 
> d.


I just quoted part of your post to save space. Anyway, that was fairly deep and I more or less agree.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

kngspook said:


> So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


I would say no. The thread basically says "It depends.". Tell us your entire ensemble. Shoes, shirt, tie, belt, haircut, glasses, etc. Then we can tell you what message we think it sends. You can then decide for yourself if it is appropriate for the venue.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

kngspook said:


> Oh, well, if it's only a second order faux pas...
> 
> But more seriously, where does the IWC Portuguese Chronograph sit on the casual-formal spectrum? I imagine it would be more appropriate with a suit? Would you consider it with a tux?


I think the Portuguese Chrono is also a pretty versatile watch - IMO it can definately be worn with a suit (although the chrono function and large dial mean that it doesn't strictly comply with the 'rules' for a dress watch). It looks fantastic with business casual or smart casual (e.g. open neck shirt, sport jacket and chinos / woolen trousers). Again, I wouldn't wear this watch with a dinner suit / tux.

For formal wear, I suggest you wear a traditional dress watch (black leather strap, plain dial, sub 40 mm diameter) or no watch at all.

HTH
Ben


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> I think the Portuguese Chrono is also a pretty versatile watch - IMO it can definately be worn with a suit (although the chrono function and large dial mean that it doesn't strictly comply with the 'rules' for a dress watch). It looks fantastic with business casual or smart casual (e.g. open neck shirt, sport jacket and chinos / woolen trousers). Again, I wouldn't wear this watch with a dinner suit / tux.
> 
> For formal wear, I suggest you wear a traditional dress watch (black leather strap, plain dial, sub 40 mm diameter) or no watch at all.
> 
> ...


I'm never quite sure what formal means. In my mind it translates to traditional English business attire.

Trying to define it in terms of formal / informal is dependent on context. Formal business dress in my office means service dress blues. An IWC Portuguese chrono would not be a problem. However, it would probably be less acceptable attending a formal dinner wearing almost the same uniform. Formal in a contractor's office would depend on if we're talking east coast US or west coast and etc, but almost certainly a Rolex DSSD would be acceptable.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Will_f said:


> I'm never quite sure what formal means. In my mind it translates to traditional English business attire.
> 
> Trying to define it in terms of formal / informal is dependent on context. Formal business dress in my office means service dress blues. An IWC Portuguese chrono would not be a problem. However, it would probably be less acceptable attending a formal dinner wearing almost the same uniform. Formal in a contractor's office would depend on if we're talking east coast US or west coast and etc, but almost certainly a Rolex DSSD would be acceptable.


Formal wear is generally understood to mean black / white tie (evening) or morning dress (daytime), at least in so far as non-military dress is concerned.

I realise that many people use the term more loosely than this.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> Formal wear is generally understood to mean black / white tie (evening) or morning dress (daytime), at least in so far as non-military dress is concerned.
> 
> I realise that many people use the term more loosely than this.


None of the parties I attend, the dinners I go to, the symphony, work, etc. require formal attire as you define it above. In cutures besides European aristocracy, "formal" can be very different. Perhaps, formal is something where the dress code is rigidly defined and conformity is expected.

I attended a party a couple of days ago where the guests were primarily lawyers, doctors and engineers, a fair number in the military. The food was very sophisticated (by the standards of Alaska), the level of dress was substantially above office casual, and there was live musical entertainment. In other words, it was a party of intellectuals and affluence. I spent part of the evening talking watches with a couple (he wearing a G-Shock and she wearing a nice pink Timex). Their watches were average for the party. I was above average in the watch dept (Seagull WUYI).

If this same party had occurred in NYC or London, the dress (and perhaps watch) code would have been different. If the hostess had specified "formal dinner attire", the guests would have considered it a costume party and you would have had formal dress blues, full blown Scottish regimental kilts, tuxes, dinner jackets, and who knows what else, all in the spirit of fun.


----------



## lamboalex (Sep 10, 2011)

I think EVERYONE should own a dress watch (im think of a tissot le locle type). That would take care of the "what to wear with a suit" question. All other watches can be worn with a great number of other outfits.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

lamboalex said:


> I think EVERYONE should own a dress watch (im think of a tissot le locle type). That would take care of the "what to wear with a suit" question. All other watches can be worn with a great number of other outfits.


Not a bad idea. I keep almost buying a SARB071. But I can't bring myself to spend the money on a watch I'll wear twice a year. And if I'm going to a special occasion, like a wedding or something like that, I'll probably wear my Speedmaster or Monaco, since they have sentimental value. I'd only ever wear the SARB at funerals and job interviews (basically the same thing).


----------



## KevinP. (Dec 24, 2011)

I wear a Riki Watanabe AAAA101 under a cuff and G-Shocks on Fridays.

I hope one day a Grand Seiko will be my daily work watch.

I love how simple and beautiful they are, I also love the fact that anyone that looks at it would just think it's another Seiko.



Raza said:


> Not a bad idea. I keep almost buying a SARB071. But I can't bring myself to spend the money on a watch I'll wear twice a year. And if I'm going to a special occasion, like a wedding or something like that, I'll probably wear my Speedmaster or Monaco, since they have sentimental value. I'd only ever wear the SARB at funerals and job interviews (basically the same thing).


If you don't mind the size, check out the Seiko ALBA AAAA101. It's fairly inexpensive, I got mine for $220 USD shipped.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

KevinP. said:


> I wear a Riki Watanabe AAAA101 under a cuff and G-Shocks on Fridays.
> 
> I hope one day a Grand Seiko will be my daily work watch.
> 
> ...


It's nice looking, but 38mm is already under my comfort zone. Going even smaller with a watch with a name that's not really recognizable (this matters only if I decide to flip the watch immediately, I'd like to get back what I put into it) just isn't going to work. I appreciate the suggestion though.


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

Raza said:


> It's nice looking, but 38mm is already under my comfort zone.


What's your wrist circumference?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

AngryBaconGod said:


> What's your wrist circumference?


Depending on the time of day, it's 7.5-7.75". I've never measured just after a shower though, it could be 8" in the morning.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Raza said:


> Depending on the time of day, it's 7.5-7.75". I've never measured just after a shower though, it could be 8" in the morning.


Yup. 38mm would be a bit small. Normally I'd suggest a nice vintage watch so you could minimize your initial investment and flip it for minimal loss if you didn't like it, but a 40mm might be tough to find.

Seagull makes some very nice traditional dress watches for much less than a SARB. The WUYI US special edition is 40mm and I believe it has a sapphire crystal (website says glass last time I looked though).

Edit: never mind. I see from another thread that chinese watches aren't your thing.


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

Raza said:


> Depending on the time of day, it's 7.5-7.75". I've never measured just after a shower though, it could be 8" in the morning.


Thanks. BTW I'm not stalking you, honest!

Mine is 7.25-7.5". I recently acquired a 38mm watch and was shocked at how small it wears. I definitely couldn't go any smaller. It's got me seriously rethinking the Stowa Antea.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Will_f said:


> Yup. 38mm would be a bit small. Normally I'd suggest a nice vintage watch so you could minimize your initial investment and flip it for minimal loss if you didn't like it, but a 40mm might be tough to find.
> 
> Seagull makes some very nice traditional dress watches for much less than a SARB. The WUYI US special edition is 40mm and I believe it has a sapphire crystal (website says glass last time I looked though).
> 
> Edit: never mind. I see from another thread that chinese watches aren't your thing.





AngryBaconGod said:


> Thanks. BTW I'm not stalking you, honest!
> 
> Mine is 7.25-7.5". I recently acquired a 38mm watch and was shocked at how small it wears. I definitely couldn't go any smaller. It's got me seriously rethinking the Stowa Antea.


I still want to try it out. The more watches I have, the more I really like how a 42mm watch (with a 48+mm L2L) fits me. I still like 44-46mm, but I'm working on smaller watches. If I can get used to a smaller watch, all that means is that it opens me up to more of the wonderful watches out there, including dress watches, of which I have none.

SARB071s never come up used. SARBs in general are hard to find used. People who get them seem not to let them go.


----------



## Has No Left (Jan 29, 2012)

Watch fashion police...please help me out. 

Can you wear a watch that has black in it with brown shoes/belt or with a casual outfit (jeans/brown loafers/polo shirt)? I'm thinking of something like an Omega Speedmaster, metal bracelet with a white face but with the black bezel and black chronograph elements?


----------



## TrA (Apr 9, 2011)

*Patek Philippe Nautilus 5726a*

40.5mm. 120mtr WR. Annual calendar and moon phase.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Has No Left said:


> Watch fashion police...please help me out.
> 
> Can you wear a watch that has black in it with brown shoes/belt or with a casual outfit (jeans/brown loafers/polo shirt)? I'm thinking of something like an Omega Speedmaster, metal bracelet with a white face but with the black bezel and black chronograph elements?


Yes


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Has No Left said:


> Watch fashion police...please help me out.
> 
> Can you wear a watch that has black in it with brown shoes/belt or with a casual outfit (jeans/brown loafers/polo shirt)? I'm thinking of something like an Omega Speedmaster, metal bracelet with a white face but with the black bezel and black chronograph elements?


Have you no shame man?

JK. I'm pretty sure the fashion police will let it slide.


----------



## lamboalex (Sep 10, 2011)

Has No Left said:


> Watch fashion police...please help me out.
> 
> Can you wear a watch that has black in it with brown shoes/belt or with a casual outfit (jeans/brown loafers/polo shirt)? I'm thinking of something like an Omega Speedmaster, metal bracelet with a white face but with the black bezel and black chronograph elements?


youre good to go as long as you arent mixing black leather band with brown shoes. Metal bands are so versatile you dont have to worry as much


----------



## keybers (Feb 17, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



jDrexler said:


> recently purchased a Seiko SARB017 for myself and was looking for some advice or pointers, I have no problem dressing it wayyyy down with a "nato" band, and with it's leather band it is quite sharp looking in my opinion, but my concern is over the green dial and small rotating internal bezel, How dressy of a situation it would still be appropriate in your eyes? it's also not a big watch, case is 38-39mm (I've seen it listed as both). I'm also 24 if age has any bearing.
> 
> on wrist:


Everyone ignored this post, so I'll chime in: you said it yourself with the greenish dial, but you've also offset it with being 24. Of course, it won't go with a tux. However, with anything below a tux, I think you can boldly wear it. It has a rather calm look to it (of course, it's hard to judge the exact hue of green without having seen the thing in person).


----------



## mikeyc (Jun 14, 2010)

lamboalex said:


> youre good to go as long as you arent mixing black leather band with brown shoes. Metal bands are so versatile you dont have to worry as much


IMO if you match your strap and shoe colour you're being too "matchy matchy".


----------



## Coler (Mar 28, 2009)

Raza said:


> I still want to try it out. The more watches I have, the more I really like how a 42mm watch (with a 48+mm L2L) fits me. I still like 44-46mm, but I'm working on smaller watches. If I can get used to a smaller watch, all that means is that it opens me up to more of the wonderful watches out there, including dress watches, of which I have none.
> 
> SARB071s never come up used. SARBs in general are hard to find used. People who get them seem not to let them go.


Hey Raza,

I have a bigger wrist than yours and frequently wear a 38 mm with formal wear (Omega AT 2500). It looks fine (actually it looks great, there I said it). Dress watches are not supposed to wear large, as you know.

Good luck with the search. That SARB is beautiful.

I'm about to purchase a GS Quarts (the 063) which is a 37 mm. I have no concerns on size.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Coler said:


> Hey Raza,
> 
> I have a bigger wrist than yours and frequently wear a 38 mm with formal wear (Omega AT 2500). It looks fine (actually it looks great, there I said it). Dress watches are not supposed to wear large, as you know.
> 
> ...


I know what you mean, I'd just feel more comfortable if it were 40mm instead of 38. I think I might pick up a Seiko 5 just so I can get accustomed to wearing a smaller than 40mm watch.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Raza said:


> I know what you mean, I'd just feel more comfortable if it were 40mm instead of 38. I think I might pick up a Seiko 5 just so I can get accustomed to wearing a smaller than 40mm watch.


You can better than that: check out the SRP20* series.
40mm, Sapphire, no '5' logo(!), 4R15 movement (same as in the Spork), bee yew tea full dial. Just got me one in silver, and another in gold (hands only).


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> You can better than that: check out the SRP20* series.
> 40mm, Sapphire, no '5' logo(!), 4R15 movement (same as in the Spork), bee yew tea full dial. Just got me one in silver, and another in gold (hands only).


Got lucky; my friend is loaning me his Seiko 5 that he doesn't wear much anymore, as he has developed a taste for larger watches (mostly around 42mm, but he did just get a Bathys Benthic Ti at a whopping 48mm! Bigger than anything I have) so I can get a feel for it without spending any money. He's also the guy I sold my G-Shock to when I decided my Suunto was a keeper. Great fellow, though I've cost him a lot of money by sharing my watch obsession with him. Orient. Bathys. Seiko. All watches he never would have bought were it not for me.

His collections getting pretty good, even by WIS standards. The Bathys adds a lot of microcred.

Chronopolis, (or, as I call you, creepy avatar guy...is that Mr. Bean's face on a baby?) can you clarify the Seiko model you mean? The only SRP20 something or other models I can find are divers.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Raza said:


> Chronopolis, (or, as I call you, creepy avatar guy...is that Mr. Bean's face on a baby?) can you clarify the Seiko model you mean? The only SRP20 something or other models I can find are divers.


Haha. I believe that is Mr. Bean as a baby.

* is a stand in for any number. Did you not know this? It's a handy thing - can use it on eBay too if you don't know the exact model number.
So, I mean SRP201, 202, 203, 204, etc.
Here's a coupla random pics: courtesy, the internet:
NB:The dial color is hard to describe. Not silver, more like "antique" silver, but way too subtle to even be anything "antique-y". "Pearlescent" maybe? yeah, "pearlescent".
Also, the bracelet is solid. I mean: SAH~LIDD. The ends I mean, where bracelet meets lug. No &%$#* hollow ends here. The overall quality is so high, I still cannot believe it's virtually unknown around here... or so it would seem by the silence surrounding this model/series. That Seiko doesn't charge more for this, is another thing to be amazed by. Honest people, them Seikonians.

View attachment 633116


View attachment 633118


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> Haha. I believe that is Mr. Bean as a baby.
> 
> * is a stand in for any number. Did you not know this? It's a handy thing - can use it on eBay too if you don't know the exact model number.
> So, I mean SRP201, 202, 203, 204, etc.
> ...


Thanks for the photos. I figured the asterisk part out, but when typing into Google, the only suggestion I got was SRP20x, which is apparently a diver line.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f21/[seiko-new-release]-[big-sized-divers]-srp20x-625574.html


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Here's a coupla random pics: courtesy, the internet:
> NB:The dial color is hard to describe. Not silver, more like "antique" silver, but way too subtle to even be anything "antique-y". "Pearlescent" maybe? yeah, "pearlescent".
> Also, the bracelet is solid. I mean: SAH~LIDD. The ends I mean, where bracelet meets lug. No &%$#* hollow ends here. The overall quality is so high, I still cannot believe it's virtually unknown around here... or so it would seem by the silence surrounding this model/series. That Seiko doesn't charge more for this, is another thing to be amazed by. Honest people, them Seikonians.


Those are very nice looking watches. I'll have to take a look at them.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dbakiva (May 7, 2011)

Raza said:


> Chronopolis, (or, as I call you, creepy avatar guy...is that Mr. Bean's face on a baby?)





Chronopolis said:


> Haha. I believe that is Mr. Bean as a baby.


You mean that's NOT you?


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

mikeyc said:


> IMO if you match your strap and shoe colour you're being too "matchy matchy".


To take this one step further, if you match your shoe colors on your left and right foot, you are being too matchy matchy.

I recommend canvas on one foot and leather boots on the other to avoid this problem.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

Metlin said:


> To take this one step further, if you match your shoe colors on your left and right foot, you are being too matchy matchy.
> 
> I recommend canvas on one foot and leather boots on the other to avoid this problem.


Agreed. Can't be too careful.


----------



## Muslickz (Nov 1, 2011)

I am so with you on this one  you got my thumbs up on this 

-M


----------



## Muslickz (Nov 1, 2011)

mikeyc said:


> IMO if you match your strap and shoe colour you're being too "matchy matchy".


I totally agree with that a watch is like a bag it should make a statement.... stand alone ya know 

-M


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Well, I got scolded by the fashion police yesterday. I thought I looked ok:

Black ultra suede shirt with button down pockets and collar
Green and gold tie with black spots (might have been ink? Matched the shirt)
Grey cargo pants
Black belt with brass buckle
Black shoes.

Most importantly, a rose god watch with black leather band and face.

What did I do wrong?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> Well, I got scolded by the fashion police yesterday. I thought I looked ok:
> 
> Black ultra suede shirt with button down pockets and collar
> Green and gold tie with black spots (might have been ink? Matched the shirt)
> ...


The god watch.
How dare you flaunt one among mortals.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> The god watch.
> How dare you flaunt one among mortals.


It was expensive too. I believe I paid $200 for it.

View attachment 662273


(this was before I put a leather band on it)


----------



## mikeyc (Jun 14, 2010)

*Re: What kind of watch to match your suits?*

Fwiw I agree with you, leather strap or metal bracelet for me only, please.


----------



## Skippy4000 (Jan 1, 2012)

mikeyc said:


> IMO if you match your strap and shoe colour you're being too "matchy matchy".


I wear a black leather band with my brown shoes all the time. Most people think I'm "handsome" anyways.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Shepperdw said:


> I wear a black leather band with my brown shoes all the time. Most people think I'm "handsome" anyways.


Most people also have low standards.


----------



## ItsMuskyTime (Mar 20, 2011)

I love this thread, & I have to say I'm sorry it hasn't gotten much attention lately. I personally believe that there are certain rules of dress, & while you're not obligated to follow them, you should know what they are before you break them.

I have a question about dial face colors. I've read this whole thread, & while it was touched on, I didn't feel that it was fully explored. I understand, & tend to agree with, the concept that one should match leathers, for example: brown leather band with brown leather belts & shoes, & black leather with black leather. A stainless steel bracelet should go with either, but what about a ss with a black face? Can this be worn with brown belts & shoes or should it only be worn with darker colors? I have to admit, I feel a little off when I wear a ss & black faced watch with light colors & brown leather accessories. Also, if you shouldn't wear black faced watches with brown belts, what could you wear a black faced watch on a brown leather band with? I find myself drawn to this combination, but would like to know if it can be pulled off with lighter colored clothes, brown belt & shoes. I'm not sure if anyone is still watching this thread, but I wouldlove to know if there are any fashion rules regarding this, or if anyone has any opinions on it.


----------



## billyp7718 (Nov 7, 2011)

ItsMuskyTime said:


> I love this thread, & I have to say I'm sorry it hasn't gotten much attention lately. I personally believe that there are certain rules of dress, & while you're not obligated to follow them, you should know what they are before you break them.
> 
> I have a question about dial face colors. I've read this whole thread, & while it was touched on, I didn't feel that it was fully explored. I understand, & tend to agree with, the concept that one should match leathers, for example: brown leather band with brown leather belts & shoes, & black leather with black leather. A stainless steel bracelet should go with either, but what about a ss with a black face? Can this be worn with brown belts & shoes or should it only be worn with darker colors? I have to admit, I feel a little off when I wear a ss & black faced watch with light colors & brown leather accessories. Also, if you shouldn't wear black faced watches with brown belts, what could you wear a black faced watch on a brown leather band with? I find myself drawn to this combination, but would like to know if it can be pulled off with lighter colored clothes, brown belt & shoes. I'm not sure if anyone is still watching this thread, but I wouldlove to know if there are any fashion rules regarding this, or if anyone has any opinions on it.


I personally match shoes to the belt and strap of the watch, not the dial.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

ItsMuskyTime said:


> A stainless steel bracelet should go with either, but what about a ss with a black face? Can this be worn with brown belts & shoes or should it only be worn with darker colors? I have to admit, I feel a little off when I wear a ss & black faced watch with light colors & brown leather accessories.


As a matter of MY "artistical"* opinion, Sir:
1. Generally, SS bracelet is not the best thing to wear with brown, beyond a certain level of dress in terms of "effort".
2. As for Black dial per se with a brown suit: This is in the grey zone; More info is needed to give a more definite answer. Tie, shirt, attitude, physique, facial hair, if any, the entire package, so to speak. In easy terms: if you're an Italian race car driver or financier or artist with a good build, and know how to spend money, then most likely, you will be able to not only pull it off, but provide a textbook example of it all, wearing with a tie of deep mustard yellow + black dots. 
However, speaking generally, it is NOT recommended. Nonetheless, a man - like myself - with a refined sensibility for color and form ought to be able to work around this easily.
3. No black dial with lighter colors.

* As opposed to 'artistic'



ItsMuskyTime said:


> Also, if you shouldn't wear black faced watches with brown belts, what could you wear a black faced watch on a brown leather band with? I find myself drawn to this combination, but would like to know if it can be pulled off with lighter colored clothes, brown belt & shoes.


See above.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> As a matter of MY "artistical"* opinion, Sir:
> 1. Generally, SS bracelet is not the best thing to wear with brown, beyond a certain level of dress in terms of "effort".
> 2. As for Black dial per se with a brown suit: This is in the grey zone; More info is needed to give a more definite answer. Tie, shirt, attitude, physique, facial hair, if any, the entire package, so to speak. In easy terms: if you're an Italian race car driver or financier or artist with a good build, and know how to spend money, then most likely, you will be able to not only pull it off, but provide a textbook example of it all, wearing with a tie of deep mustard yellow + black dots.
> However, speaking generally, it is NOT recommended. Nonetheless, a man - like myself - with a refined sensibility for color and form ought to be able to work around this easily.
> 3. No black dial with lighter colors.


You sir, have been drinking!


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

Please share your thoughts on pilot watches. I am thinking of getting this type of watch (pics taken from web). It is a pilot type B uhr. I want to use it as weekend watch.

My dilemma. Could it work as a dress watch in a suit if I put a crocodile strap?


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

The seconds sub dial is a no go for a Flieger Baumuster B.


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

flori78 said:


> My dilemma. Could it work as a dress watch in a suit if I put a crocodile strap?


No.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> You sir, have been drinking!


Indded I have, sir.
And that reminds me. Quoting from memory...

Lady: "Sir! You are despicably drunk and very objectionable!"
Churchill: "So I am, madam.... so I am. You, on the other hand, are very ugly. As for me, by tomorrow, I shall be sober."

:rodekaart


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

stuffler said:


> The seconds sub dial is a no go for a Flieger Baumuster B.


you are right sir. What flieger would be good enough as a dress watch in your opinion? I am thinking always to have a nice dress strap on it.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Indded I have, sir.
> And that reminds me. Quoting from memory...
> 
> Lady: "Sir! You are despicably drunk and very objectionable!"
> ...


My favorite Churchill quote:

"You can always count on Americans doing the right thing- After they've tried everything else"

Second favorite:

"Sir, if you were my husband, I would give you poison!"

"if I were your husband I would take it!"


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

flori78 said:


> you are right sir. What flieger would be good enough as a dress watch in your opinion? I am thinking always to have a nice dress strap on it.


So, you're asking if a watch styled after those worn by military combat pilots can be worn for a socially formal occasion? Hmmm. The answer is yes, if you're in uniform.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Originally Posted by *flori78*  
_/// What flieger would be good enough as a dress watch in your opinion? I am thinking always to have a nice dress strap on it. _////

Metlin: _So, you're asking if a watch styled after those worn by military combat pilots can be worn for a socially formal occasion? Hmmm.* The answer is yes, if you're in uniform. *_

Moreover, you would do disservice to your flieger watch by putting a "dress" strap on it. You gain nothing in terms of "dress-uppability," and only lose the original military flavor of the watch by emasculating it.

Keep the flieger the way it was meant to be worn - on a solid, thick strap; and get a dress watch of you need one.

If you're on a budget, may I suggest: Seiko SRP021 or 022. 
With sapphire crystal. Unbreakable, accurate, and all-purpose dress. And very decently priced at the moment. Under 300.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

ItsMuskyTime said:


> I love this thread, & I have to say I'm sorry it hasn't gotten much attention lately. I personally believe that there are certain rules of dress, & while you're not obligated to follow them, you should know what they are before you break them.
> 
> I have a question about dial face colors. I've read this whole thread, & while it was touched on, I didn't feel that it was fully explored. I understand, & tend to agree with, the concept that one should match leathers, for example: brown leather band with brown leather belts & shoes, & black leather with black leather. A stainless steel bracelet should go with either, but what about a ss with a black face? Can this be worn with brown belts & shoes or should it only be worn with darker colors? I have to admit, I feel a little off when I wear a ss & black faced watch with light colors & brown leather accessories. Also, if you shouldn't wear black faced watches with brown belts, what could you wear a black faced watch on a brown leather band with? I find myself drawn to this combination, but would like to know if it can be pulled off with lighter colored clothes, brown belt & shoes. I'm not sure if anyone is still watching this thread, but I wouldlove to know if there are any fashion rules regarding this, or if anyone has any opinions on it.


I'm not sure that it matters enough to worry about it. Any watch on a steel bracelet is informal enough that it's not really appropriate either way. But it's not inappropriate enough for me to hold you in contempt. ;-)


----------



## malkoun1 (Dec 20, 2011)

Raza said:


> I'm not sure that it matters enough to worry about it. Any watch on a steel bracelet is informal enough that it's not really appropriate either way. But it's not inappropriate enough for me to hold you in contempt. ;-)


So are all steel bracelet watches regarded as informal? If one were to be faced with the choice of buying one watch to go with different colored suits, what would you guys advise?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

malkoun1 said:


> So are all steel bracelet watches regarded as informal? If one were to be faced with the choice of buying one watch to go with different colored suits, what would you guys advise?


Sigh, OK, one more time:
The more extensive answer is in there somewhere - please take the time to read.

Summary:
1. There are different levels of formal / informal.
2. In general, for higher levels of formal, you are _advised_ to NOT wear a watch on a bracelet, but on a leather strap that matches your shoes and belt, which in turn are coordinated with the suit in question.
So, yes, a gentleman should own more than one watch.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

FAC said:


> Hello WUS, interesting thread you got going on.
> 
> I just received my first real watch (had a Casio rubber watch when I was 6, haven't had one since) and I'm really happy for it.
> It's a Certina DS Action, 40,5 mm, Quartz (yes I know, but it's my first watch so please bear with me), 200m waterproof, etc. Link: Certina Swiss Watches - Time Maker Since 1888 - DS Concept - A Company of the Swatch Group
> ...


A bit late to the dance I imagine, but thought I'd chime in...

First, nice-looking watch- I'm sure it wears great with your uniform.

Regarding the (formal) gala, I don't know the customs in your neck of the world, but if you were a young man attending a gala around here, I would suggest the oft-suggested black leather band with few if any complications. That said, the bar is lower for HS students than for their fathers, so your attractive watch would likely do fine with a tux. 
*
That *said, something about _aesthetics _is worth mentioning. Beauty, form, symmetry... although there are cultural differences in the presentation, there are some Universal Truths, and one of them leads to the superiority of a black leather band with a black tux. Sometimes the viewer Gets It (the reason why s/he is having a positive reaction), sometimes not. Ever see a car or a flower arrangement or the stitching on a shirt or a website and have an immediate positive or negative reaction to it, but you don't know why? Aesthetics. I believe you will be seen as sophisticated, more attractive, maybe older, etc. sporting a classic style, regardless of whether the viewer has any understanding or regard for aesthetics. So although you would certainly not look out of place at the gala with your Certina, there might be an advantage to wearing a nice, formal watch- 'helps to round out the package, so to speak.

No reason to buy a new watch for the occasion, btw. Ask your father if he has a watch for the occasion that you can borrow. If he appreciates the aesthetics and the tradition (and I'd bet that he does), I think he might appreciate (on multiple levels) that you asked.


----------



## Brendan12 (Mar 18, 2012)

Sartorial elegance advice needed! Can i wear a vacheton constantin with hawaiian shirts and thongs (flip flops, not...)? And does dark blue or light plum suit a 2HB pencil better? I find a pencil imparts a sense of renaissance man about me, like winning Jeopardy or being audited. Thank you.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Brendan12 said:


> Sartorial elegance advice needed! Can i wear a vacheton constantin with hawaiian shirts and thongs (flip flops, not...)? And does dark blue or light plum suit a 2HB pencil better? I find a pencil imparts a sense of renaissance man about me, like winning Jeopardy or being audited. Thank you.


I take it you are planning on attending a wedding ceremony in Hawaii? If so, have fun and give our best to the bride and groom!

The Aloha Shirt is a style of dress shirt originating in Hawaii (and thus commonly referred to as a Hawaiin shirt) and as such is perfectly acceptable for you to wear at a formal function in Hawaii such as a wedding along with your VC. You will want to pair your classic Aloha floral print shirt (preferably in subtle beige or light blue) with khaki or linen trousers, with groomsmen wearing leis (garlands) to match those of the bridesmaid's dresses and/or bouquets. Both the bride and groom wear all white--typically a loose, flowing white gown for the bride, and a linen shirt and pants also in white, with a colourful sash (often red) around the waist for the groom. Traditionalists can wear a suit in beige or ivory linen; seersucker is OK, too. If the big event is taking place on the beach, it's no fun crossing sand for men or women in dress shoes or high heels, respectively. Accordingly, flip flops should be made available, so that people can get to where they need to be (wedding party to the podium, guests to their seats), then switch back out to their shoes. Best to save the thong for your honeymoon, assuming you've a body like Tom Selleck did in Magnum PI that is (if not, well, a little laughter never hurt anyone, much ;-)).

As to which suit with a pencil, that's your call, but don't forget your pencil pocket clip and, if concerned about being audited, might also want to bring along a pocket calculator and perhaps a flask of whisky. But if you're going for the "renaissance look" perhaps you might elect to go with a Victorian costume complete with a sword, and enjoy a snifter of brandy or cognac instead. Much like the idea of wearing a thong and flip-flops with a Aloha/Hawaiin dress shirt and VC, should at least be good to inspire a few laughs (and what in turn the brandy etc. is for).

Oh, and as to what to wear as an accoutrement to your Renaissance costume, why a pocket watch of course!

Cheers.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Nice job Wolf, slappin' that smarty pants down! 



Sea-Wolf said:


> Oh, and as to what to wear as an accoutrement to your Renaissance costume, why a pocket watch of course!
> Cheers.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Brendan12 said:


> Sartorial elegance advice needed! Can i wear a vacheton constantin with hawaiian shirts *and thongs (flip flops, not...)*? And does dark blue or light plum suit a 2HB pencil better? I find a pencil imparts a sense of renaissance man about me, like winning Jeopardy or being audited. Thank you.


Thank you for your clarification.


----------



## Brendan12 (Mar 18, 2012)

But what happens if i don't wear
matching pants?! What happens?! Ooh, the stress is terrible!


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Brendan12 said:


> But what happens if i don't wear
> matching pants?! What happens?! Ooh, the stress is terrible!


I often show up to work without any pants. It unnerves my enemies.


----------



## natron20 (Jul 24, 2010)

Perhaps you Fashionistas can help me out with a question I've been struggling with.

What do you think about rose gold worn with a casual outfit? By casual I mean a plain yellow, green, blue, polo with khaki shorts and slip on canvas shoes for summer. In winter, plain blue jeans, long sleeve button up, with Chuck Taylor's. Considering a Hamilton Viewmatic with white face and rose gold case, fittings but I rarely have a reason to dress up so I do not want to invest in a piece that won't look right with my usual wardrobe.

Appreciate any thoughts!


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Metlin said:


> I often show up to work *without any pants*. It unnerves my enemies.


I know all about it!
My dear childhood friend (high school), D - now a powerful lawyer, and Defender of truth, justice, and the American way for the weak - and I used to play squash together. 
D was psychotically competitive (with his projected image/ideal of his own self), and would resort to anything to reach excellence.
If he thought his game wasn't up to par, he would loudly keep the score in German:that in itself was a bit unnerving. "Sieben-Acht!"

And if that didn't do the trick, he would pull his pants down to expose a good chunk of his derriere whens serving. That was just dirty dirty playing. No sportsmanship at all, the di*k.

* - For those who don't play squash: The server stands in FRONT of the receiver.


----------



## Brendan12 (Mar 18, 2012)

Probably unnerves your friends too. Actually, a semi-nudist wouldn't have any...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Was gonna help ya, but I'm not a fashionista, so...
But it sounds fine.

BTW, this thread is NOT about "fashion." If anything, maybe about "style" - as it relates to the concept of "propriety" - which is... what?

This thread is about what society (not any one person) considers "sartorial propriety" as already dictated by (possibly arbitrarily originated) history and convention.
Why wear pants at all? Why not a skirt (if you're a man)? 
No convincing answers will be forthcoming - at least, not from those members who are most knowledgeable, and have been most helpful. Best wishes!



natron20 said:


> Perhaps you Fashionistas can help me out with a question I've been struggling with.
> 
> What do you think about rose gold worn with a casual outfit? By casual I mean a plain yellow, green, blue, polo with khaki shorts and slip on canvas shoes for summer. In winter, plain blue jeans, long sleeve button up, with Chuck Taylor's. Considering a Hamilton Viewmatic with white face and rose gold case, fittings but I rarely have a reason to dress up so I do not want to invest in a piece that won't look right with my usual wardrobe.
> 
> Appreciate any thoughts!


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

I have a big rose gold watch that I mostly wear casually. It's 44mm and sports a 7750, so it's thick too. I generally don't wear it to the office. 

Actually, I generally don't wear it. It was a gift and isn't really my style. I prefer 40-42mm at the office, if at all possible, on a NATO strap.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Hey! You have something good started here. Let me expand on it a bit.

*I have a big rose gold watch that I mostly wear casually. It's 44mm and sports a 7750, so it's thick too. I generally don't wear it to the office.

Actually, I generally don't wear it. It was a gift and isn't really my style. I prefer 40-42mm at the office, if at all possible, on a NATO strap.*

In fact, I never wear it at all. 
Truth be told, I don't even own this watch. Never even see it.
What am I saying? I don't even have wrists. I lost them while waterskiing when I was a kid. I don't know, they just fell off.
Aw, OK, so I've never gone waterskiing. Maybe it happened while skydiving. The point is, I can't wear watches. I don't even like them. Naturally, I don't HAVE any watches - why would I?
ALL RIGHT! Alright! So I have a couple. But I use them mostly for intimate encounters, if ya know what I mean. Besides, I am blind, so I couldn't even see what time it is even if I COULD wear watches, which I don't unless they're gold. And casual. And thick. :-!


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Jeffrey303 said:


> As usual, I am against ANOTHER sub-forum. WUS has now so many subforums, that I have lost contact with several WUS friends, because of time inability to read them all.


Sir, my hats off! 
By stating that you've 'lost' (track of) friends, you imply that you've actually managed to MAKE friends in the short space of only 6 posts!!

I will see about starting a special sub-forum just for you: _Lost Friends Found_.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Sir, my hats off!
> By stating that you've 'lost' (track of) friends, you imply that you've actually managed to MAKE friends in the short space of only 6 posts!!
> 
> I will see about starting a special sub-forum just for you: _Lost Friends Found_.


You're slipping Chronopolis. You forgot to point out that he would have eventually lost them all anyway.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> You're slipping Chronopolis. You forgot to point out that he would have eventually lost them all anyway.


Sigh. 
It made me sad to think that even after 2,000 + posts, I still have no friends here.
I wish I could be as ballsy... to think that I can't locate my "friends" solely due to an excess of subforums.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Where the hell did ulackfocus go? I haven't seen him on the forum in a long time.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Will_f said:


> You're slipping Chronopolis. You forgot to point out that he would have eventually lost them all anyway.





Chronopolis said:


> Sigh.
> It made me sad to think that even after 2,000 + posts, I still have no friends here.
> I wish I could be as ballsy... to think that I can't locate my "friends" solely due to an excess of subforums.


This is touching. Not unlike a Penn State locker room, if I might add.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Metlin said:


> This is touching. Not unlike a Penn State locker room, if I might add.


Good one. I'm going to have to see if I can fit that phrase into a meeting or two today. One of my colleagues graduated from Penn State so I'm sure he will appreciate it. If not, it's time he started working on closure.

What were you saying about friends again Chronopolis?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> Good one. I'm going to have to see if I can fit that phrase into a meeting or two today. One of my colleagues graduated from Penn State so I'm sure he will appreciate it. If not, it's time he started working on closure.
> 
> What were you saying about friends again Chronopolis?


Penn State? What a small world. 
Had a friend working there.
Good times.
Wonder what's happened to him?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

I went to Penn State!


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Raza said:


> I went to Penn State!


State College: Nice town, actually.


----------



## LegendaryNBK (Jun 11, 2012)

Does it matter what wrist a man wears his watch on? I always wear mine on the left wrist but I am a casino dealer and I damage my watches on my left side, was thinking about switching to the right wrist but didn't want to look gay or anything etc...


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

^ It doesn't matter which wrist you wear it on--if it's more comfortable and prevents damage, then feel free to switch. 

Seems we wear it the way we do because old hand-winds were easier to wind that way, most people being right-handed. Since the advent of autos (and quartz), it doesn't matter although the "norm" of wearing it that way continued to stick. Something also to be said to wearing a watch on one's non-dominant hand so far as it seems more protected that way and/or simply more comfortable for right-handers; this, unless one is left-handed in which case the opposite would arguably be true. Some watchmakers produce "lefts" (movement reversed) to accomodate left-handed people in turn, which is worth mentioning. Accordingly, it comes down to wearing your watch on whichever wrist feels the most comfortable to you, so feel free to switch. 

Cheers.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

LegendaryNBK said:


> Does it matter what wrist a man wears his watch on? I always wear mine on the left wrist but I am a casino dealer and I damage my watches on my left side, was thinking about switching to the right wrist but didn't want to *look gay *or anything etc...


Sir, _*looking gay*_, and _*being gay*_ are two different modes of being a person.
Since you imply you are NOT gay, and do not wish to be taken for one, I should point out: other people will see you the they way they want to see you, period. Life is short, and one can put in only so much effort (unless one is a politician) to present the "right" look, that is approved by others.

I recommend: work on being more confident in your masculinity and heterosexuality to be able to find amusement in sporting the "gay look" every now and then, just as adults sometimes dress up as clowns or bunnies to amuse children (and themselves) without worrying they might do injury to their status as adults.

PS: Being stylish, I enjoy wearing stylish rings, and regally colorful ascots during the cooler months. Doltish and ignorant people have told me that they thought that meant I was gay. :roll: 
There is only so much one can do for ignorant and doltish persons, except to suggest that they go do this|
(I might add: Ladies and precocious girls, on the other hand, find me rather dashing - as made embarrassingly obvious by their body language. But then, I am also kinda witty and charming in my speech. b-))

Me? I 'm a raging, flaming lesbian trapped in a man's body.:-d


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> I recommend: work on being more confident in your masculinity and heterosexuality to be able to find amusement in sporting the "gay look" every now and then, just as adults sometimes dress up as clowns or bunnies to amuse children (and themselves) without worrying they might do injury to their status as adults.


Or, you could just wear a tasteful name tag saying, "I'm not gay"


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

^ lol, Chronopolis. And good advice. 

Confidence is of course key, and the more one is confident with their own sexuality, then the rest as they say doesn't matter: live and let live, in the words of Paul McCartney. Ah, but when it comes to earings, does anyone here remember that silly trend of the 80s? When men had one but not both ears pierced? One ear meant non-gay, the other meant gay, don't remember which and never really cared, but I suppose it meant something if a man had his ear pierced and chose the wrong ear, worried that he'd send the wrong message should he go to a gay bar and no one approached him, I suppose. 

Today, a lot of fuss seems to be made about the colour pink in North America. Across the pond, British men wear pink shirts, and always did--a pop of colour in an otherwise sea of grey suits. Very masculine, and very stylish thing. People really do need to feel comfortable in their own skin, having nothing to do with colours, which wrist to wear ones watch or even piercings. (Although, that trend in terms of the "general masses" is over, unless you're a pirate or a goth, I suppose, in which case kids today get many peircings in both ears, both the boys and the girls means their goth and into piercings. Nothing less, nothing more). 

Cheers.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Sea-Wolf said:


> ^ lol, Chronopolis. And good advice.
> 
> Confidence is of course key, and the more one is confident with their own sexuality, then the rest as they say doesn't matter: *live and let live, in the words of Paul McCartney. *
> Cheers.


Off topic:
I think you're thinking of the song: "Live and let DIE."

A sound attitude toward life and living (which include dying). 
An anthem against the unwise practice of life supports - which I abhor the use of after a reasonable length of time. (1 month max.)

Nothing wrong with letting things, people, and animals die when it's time to go.


----------



## LegendaryNBK (Jun 11, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> Sir, _*looking gay*_, and _*being gay*_ are two different modes of being a person.
> Since you imply you are NOT gay, and do not wish to be taken for one, I should point out: other people will see you the they way they want to see you, period.


I think you guys misunderstood how I meant to use the word "gay". What I was saying is that by switching wrists I didn't want it to appear "off" or out of the norm for a right handed person. By no means was I trying to insult anyone of any certain sexuality or of lesser masculinity. I just wanted to make sure it was acceptable by dress code standards you gentlemen have been discussing in this thread.

As for the results of my first day switching to my left wrist, I kept feeling as though I had misplaced my watch. I've become so used to it being on the other wrist that subconciously my mind was telling me it wasn't on either wrist. I guess it'll take time getting used to. After a full days work though my new Tissot PRS200 didn't get a single scratch on the braclet and was well protected


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

LegendaryNBK said:


> By no means was I trying to insult anyone of any certain sexuality or of lesser masculinity.


Aw, I don't mind if you did.
It's a hobby of mine, actually, to insult men of lesser masculinity. Girly men. Ja. ;-)
As my wife sez: what's the point of being a man if you're gonna be girly? :-! 
(She has at times, in anger, accused me of NOT being a REAL man. She fights dirty. :-x )



LegendaryNBK said:


> As for the results of my first day switching to my left wrist, I kept feeling as though I had misplaced my watch. I've become so used to it being on the other wrist that subconciously my mind was telling me it wasn't on either wrist. I guess it'll take time getting used to. After a full days work though my new Tissot PRS200 didn't get a single scratch on the braclet and was well protected


I've tried wearing my watches on my right said, and I thought it felt fine. What was annoying was, I'd raise my LEFT wrist to see the time, only to see there was no watch on that side, so I'd have to immediately raise my right wrist. :-x
If you can imagine it - a guy doing a double take with both hands just to see the time - it's just silly. o|
So I stopped wearing mine on my wright wrist.:roll:


----------



## Brendan12 (Mar 18, 2012)

Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Brendan12 said:


> Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


No. It's whatever wrist you prefer. Generally people wear it on the non dominant side to subject the watch to less wear and tear, but I occasionally switch sides if I injure my wrist.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Will_f said:


> No. It's whatever wrist you prefer. Generally people wear it on the non dominant side to subject the watch to less wear and tear, but I occasionally switch sides if I injure my wrist.


Myself as well, though it does take some getting used to. This, because I've been wearing it on my non-dominant wrist since forever (as most right handers do, explained above as to the reasoning/purpose behind same historically speaking). In a similar vein, left-handed people by contrast most likely feel more comfortable and that their watch is better protected when they do similary--i.e., wear it on the reverse wrist, meaning the right wrist for them.

OFF TOPIC:
As to men be they gay or non-gay exaggerating so-called feminine qualities by for e.g. dressing up in women's clothing so as to on purpose not appear masculine at all--and over-exaggerating the whole "dress up" thing beyond any stereotype from any era, no woman I know being like that either (gay or non-gay, living or dead), by all means feel free to laugh. In France and other places it's called "la cage aux folles"--men (gay or non-gay) pretending to be show girls, only exaggerating everything to the extreme, and meant to be funny for purposes of entertainment, poking fun of pretty much everything so it's entirely OK to laugh at same (as that's what entertainment is all about, and always was, and the actors taking off their make-up and costumes at the end of the show, leaving the dressing area as real men be they gay or non-gay, same as those who played i.e. Cats in the show "Cats" removed their whiskers, etc. at show's end as well).

Anyone who works in the music and entertainment industry will know both gay and non-gay artists, both men and women. When it comes to gay men, most of them the girls simply swoon over. (Although Justin Beiber is the flavour of the month/heart throb when it comes to teenaged girls today). The teenaged fan base could care less what wrist those artists wear their watches on, or even if they wear a watch at all. (It's not an artist/actor's watch the young ladies are interested in, yes? 

Main thing when it comes to wearing one's watch is that it's comfortable, and glad to hear the switch is working for you, NBK. And by all means, feel free to laugh at the "la cage aux folles" all you want--it's the whole point of those shows, being a form of entertainment and has been for oh centuries, and why it is the whole thing is exaggerated, etc. and therefore it is is funny, yes? Not unlike slap-stick humour, which once again is meant for a good laugh.

Cheers.

NOTE: reason I say the music and entertainment industry mainly is because in that industry, comprised of artists and creative types, including finance and law, etc., sexuality simply is not an issue, as compared say to the "sports" industry where there are indeed gay tennis players, gay hockey players, gay footballers (both soccer and North American foot ball), etc. but where irrelevant characteristics such as one's sexuality only recently became just that--irrelevant. Society is getting more confident in itself and as a whole, I think. A good thing. That said, athletes on the ice, field, court, etc. don't wear watches, although they do tend to line-up same as actors, etc. to enter into advertising contracts so as to be ambassadors for a great many brands, yes?


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

Brendan12 said:


> Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


Probably... IF they also happen to be left handed. :roll:


----------



## Brendan12 (Mar 18, 2012)

Crumbs! My dad worked in the entertainment industry. I am a bit concerned that he is a closet homosexual. If he is, so be it. What does it matter?


----------



## AngryBaconGod (Nov 11, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> I've tried wearing my watches on my right said, and I thought it felt fine. What was annoying was, I'd raise my LEFT wrist to see the time, only to see there was no watch on that side, so I'd have to immediately raise my right wrist. :-x
> If you can imagine it - a guy doing a double take with both hands just to see the time - it's just silly. o|
> So I stopped wearing mine on my wright wrist.:roll:


I can see how things could get dodgy if you had a pint in the other hand.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

AngryBaconGod said:


> I can see how things could get dodgy if you had a pint in the other hand.


Yeah that too.

Maxwell Smart used to spill his drinks on people like that.
I do that too sometimes - deliberately. 
Just a dang good way to annoy people without getting all inyerface and sheat.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> State College: Nice town, actually.


Eh, it really isn't. It's 40,000 kids squandering their time surrounded by miles and miles of farmland. It's nice when you're there, but I have no delusions about it and now that all my friends have long since graduated, I never see myself going back there, unless my brother has a kid that then ends up going to Penn State.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Raza said:


> Eh, it really isn't. It's 40,000 kids squandering their time surrounded by miles and miles of farmland. It's nice when you're there, but I have no delusions about it and now that all my friends have long since graduated, I never see myself going back there, unless my brother has a kid that then ends up going to Penn State.


Of course YOU don't like it: you're still a young man!
But I'm now war/work/world/whoring weary, and the idea of miles and miles of farmland sounds good.
Minus the squandering young punks, though. 
Kinda sick of them too. 

I know the place because I went there a few times to visit a colleague at the school.
A long long tedious drive from Philly. Now I miss even _that._


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

Chronopolis said:


> Of course YOU don't like it: you're still a young man!
> But I'm now war/work/world/whoring weary, and the idea of miles and miles of farmland sounds good.
> Minus the squandering young punks, though.
> Kinda sick of them too.
> ...


I miss that drive. I used to do it at odd hours to avoid the traffic. It was fantastic to be alone and free behind the wheel of a car for that long.

Now I drive at the fringes of rush hour (slightly earlier than the real rush hour in the morning and slightly later at night) to get to a job I hate and drive through Phillies traffic and other ******** like that with the rest of the crushed souls. The only thing I miss about college is the freedom of time I had.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

Raza said:


> I miss that drive. I used to do it at odd hours to avoid the traffic. It was fantastic to be alone and free behind the wheel of a car for that long.
> 
> Now I drive at the fringes of rush hour (slightly earlier than the real rush hour in the morning and slightly later at night) to get to a job I hate and drive through Phillies traffic and other ******** like that with the rest of the crushed souls. The only thing I miss about college is the freedom of time I had.


No offense intended, but I hate Philly and it's traffic. I try to avoid it at all costs.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

rjustice21 said:


> No offense intended, but I hate Philly and it's traffic. I try to avoid it at all costs.


Outside Phillies and Eagles games, the traffic isn't bad. And the city is great, though we could use a cleanup. It's getting better, but there are some areas that definitely need some work. No other city in the country outside of California that I'd rather live in.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

It does have some good stuff. I just went to a concert at the Electric Factory. Enjoyed that.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

Raza said:


> I went to Penn State!


I'm sorry.


----------



## torontobluered (Feb 21, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Hey guys,

I find myself wearing more button down shirts recently for casual dress. Do I need a leather band watch to go with them? or is a bracelet fine? I really like my watches on bracelets but it just seems to me that leather would look better...but I figure it's fine since it's casual anyways?


----------



## torontobluered (Feb 21, 2011)

Hey guys,

Could have sworn I already made a post but I don't see it...so hopefully I don't end up double posting lol.

I'm wearing a lot of button down shirts for casual dress recently and I feel as though a leather band would look much better than a bracelet. Both are ok for a casual outfit right? I have a few watches on bracelets that I like a lot but I feel as though it wouldn't be quite right to wear them with button down shirts.

The same way I feel leather bands would look strange when worn with a short-sleeve shirt lol...

Would like to hear your thoughts on this matter!


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Great choice of name, BlueRed, and can't help but notice the absence of Orange. 

All fun aside, when it comes to smart casual attire (button down shirts, cardigans and henleys, etc.), being a classic look, a strap I agree is the way to go. Love to get into the richness of the brown hues in terms of belts, shoes/boots and straps also (then, I am a classic sort myself). One could get away with a bracelet [particularly in the hot summer months where the heat of the outdoor sun and humidity (causing one to sweat, etc.) can have detrimental effects on the leather], one does not typically wear a henley, etc. in such weather conditions but, rather, short-sleeves when outside, etc., with a bracelet being perfect for that in turn (I agree); this, along with more casual shirts and sweaters such as your standard crew in cooler weather when worn with blue jeans. (Though a strap looks just super when worn with button-down summer linen shirts, etc. and/or with chinos, khakis--classic, really 

Wonderful how in merely swapping out straps/bracelets, one can so easily dress up and/or dress down their watch, isn't it? I think so, too!

Cheers


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

I too generally prefer bracelets. For casual wear bracelets are fine, though many of my bracelet watches get leather bands swapped on periodically to change the look. The exception being my diver. Diver on leather kind of defeats my favorite part about divers.


Will


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

torontobluered said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Could have sworn I already made a post but I don't see it...so hopefully I don't end up double posting lol.
> 
> ...


I wear the same style of clothing for work. I wear both leather straps and metal bracelets. Probably 75% it is leather though.


----------



## anothernewphone (Jul 4, 2012)

If James Bond wore a Seamaster on a bracelet in a tuxedo, why can't I? ... maybe it has something to do with his license to kill.

I'll stick to my TAG Heuer Carerra for dressy occasions.


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

torontobluered said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Could have sworn I already made a post but I don't see it...so hopefully I don't end up double posting lol.
> 
> ...


If you're wearing it casually, either should be fine.


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

*Contrast stitching with a suit*

I have a conundrum of sorts. Actually, it's more an internal struggle then a conundrum but I digress...

I wear suits to work everyday (finance, unfortunately) and I've always had my own rules about dress. I find myself breaking one of my rules and now I'm stuck between shame and liberation. I recently acquired the Longines Legend Diver; a piece I've been waiting and pining to get. The watch is beautiful, outfitted with a black synthetic strap with contrast off-white stitching. Being a new watch (now two weeks old), I haven't taken it off my wrist and therein lies the rub.

One of my personal rules has been "no-contrast stitching with suits". I feel that contrast stitching is for casual wear and, for me, should stay that way. But how can I not keep this beauty on my wrist? Decisions, decisions. Keep in mind that I know this "struggle" means absolutely nothing in the scheme of things and that a simple solution would be to put it on a leather strap sans contrast stitching (leather straps on a dive watch are for another time). But let's forgo common sense for the time being, as so many of us do when it comes to the world of the WIS...

*I'm curious as to what others think of this and what your own rule might be?*

PS: Another rule of mine which I'm breaking is the "no-dive-watch-with-a-suit" rule but I think the LLD transitions well and frankly, I don't care.

View attachment 803695

View attachment 803696


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Contrast stitching with a suit*

It's always a case by case thing, not a category thing.
Your LLD is clearly far far less "DIVERish" than many others that are justly popular in the DIVER WATCH section: Zixen, Helson, Steinhart, etc.

As for the stitching, yeah, it is "casual", and you already know that, so...
But then, with some suits in certain colors/patterns, worn casually, and with not a little sprezz, the LLD on that strap might be just the thing. 
It really all depends on the confidence with which you flaunt your style. 
One can do everything right (by the book), and still look like crap, if lacking that right confidence.
The mystery of charisma.



various121 said:


> I have a conundrum of sorts. Actually, it's more an internal struggle then a conundrum but I digress...
> 
> I wear suits to work everyday (finance, unfortunately) and I've always had my own rules about dress. I find myself breaking one of my rules and now I'm stuck between shame and liberation. I recently acquired the Longines Legend Diver; a piece I've been waiting and pining to get.
> One of my personal rules has been *"no-contrast stitching with suits".* I feel that contrast stitching is for casual wear and, for me, should stay that way. But how can I not keep this beauty on my wrist?
> ...


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

*Re: Contrast stitching with a suit*



various121 said:


> I have a conundrum of sorts. Actually, it's more an internal struggle then a conundrum but I digress...
> 
> I wear suits to work everyday (finance, unfortunately) and I've always had my own rules about dress. I find myself breaking one of my rules and now I'm stuck between shame and liberation. I recently acquired the Longines Legend Diver; a piece I've been waiting and pining to get. The watch is beautiful, outfitted with a black synthetic strap with contrast off-white stitching. Being a new watch (now two weeks old), I haven't taken it off my wrist and therein lies the rub.
> 
> ...


I think your watch looks fine with a suit, as Chronopolis mentioned. I don't personally like the contrast stitching however, if the watch is worn this way - it does look too casual, and a bit jarring. If you switched the strap over to one without contrast stitching it would work much better IMO.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

*Re: Contrast stitching with a suit*

I think it looks fine, in fact, I think the suit in NY is all wrong especially when in finance, and that you should better enjoy your watch by ditching the suit for a nice dive suit whilst swapping out the Oxfords for flippers and the brief case for an air tank. Maybe even ditch work early and head for the sandy shores of Coney Island, etc. or, if you really want to enjoy your watch then why not take an extended weekend say by not showing up on a Friday at all and head out to the Vineyard instead. After all, it really is all about the watch and not appearances when meeting clients face-to-face, right? ;-)

This, assuming you meet clients face-to-face, in which case you already know the answer (whether you care or not, it's still the answer . Unless of course you're a "wunderkind" and can for a time at least get away with it--but only for so long as the boss thinks you're the hottest thing since sliced bread as opposed to "toast". (Remember, though: the wunderkinds with the birkenstocks tend to be relegated to the backroom most places, where clients don't actually see them, and never will and this is particularly so in conservative workplaces into which finance and banking fall, no? True, Bond got away with his Sub though he knew it was all wrong, then, he was also a spy (intel) and not in finance, so not the same not to mention a fictional character, right? 

Of course, if you are not in NY but in NJ ... (You already know the answer  ).

Cheers


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

various121 said:


> *I'm curious as to what others think of this and what your own rule might be?*
> 
> PS: Another rule of mine which I'm breaking is the "no-dive-watch-with-a-suit" rule but I think the LLD transitions well and frankly, I don't care.


I'm too upset to talk right now! Shame!

Will


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: Contrast stitching with a suit*



bhall41 said:


> I think your watch looks fine with a suit, as Chronopolis mentioned. I don't personally like the contrast stitching however, if the watch is worn this way - it does look too casual, and a bit jarring. If you switched the strap over to one without contrast stitching it would work much better IMO.


I agree with this.


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

*Re: Contrast stitching with a suit*



various121 said:


> I have a conundrum of sorts. Actually, it's more an internal struggle then a conundrum but I digress...


Ah, this just feels right.
View attachment 804615


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

*Re: Contrast stitching with a suit*



Sea-Wolf said:


> Maybe even ditch work early and head for the sandy shores of Coney Island, etc. or, if you really want to enjoy your watch then why not take an extended weekend say by not showing up on a Friday at all and head out to the Vineyard instead.


I might have to follow this piece of advice and head out to my friends place in the Hamptons a littler earlier than planned on Friday. That is to say, for the sake of surrounding my watch with the proper atmosphere, of course....


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

various121 said:


> Ah, this just feels right.
> View attachment 804615


Very handsome watch.

Will


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

^ I agree! Very, very nice. Equally at home with a suit in the workplace or when out for dinner say in the Hamptons. ;-) 

Cheers


----------



## johanssonscarlett (Sep 6, 2012)

View attachment 813161

How many watches do you own? One? Two? If you are like most individuals, you tend to wear the same watch, day after day, with little thought of how it looks with your attire or how well it functions with the activities you are participating in. You may not have known it, but there is a right watch for each occasion and each type of ensemble you choose to wear.
Yes, that's right. Gone are the days when one watch could be worn with everything. If you want to maintain a stylish appearance, you have to know what watches work, and which don't. Luckily for you, we are here to help. Today we are going to discuss how to determine when certain watches are appropriate and how to match them to your attire.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

johanssonscarlett said:


> View attachment 813161
> Gone are the days when one watch could be worn with everything. If you want to maintain a stylish appearance, you have to know what watches work, and which don't. Luckily for you, we are here to help. Today we are going to discuss how to determine when certain watches are appropriate and how to match them to your attire.


Feeling a lil verklempt...

I see that my labors have not been in vain; that I have succeeded in creating a thing of value that will continue to contribute to the advancement of science, culture, horological propriety, and foppery in general, against the never-ending encroachment of barbarism.


----------



## Patsbox7 (Jul 22, 2012)

My rules your rules is how I am. As long as it doesnt clash like red checkers on green stRipes I say color outside the lines on that. Look up my recent posts on the watch and car combos and to each is own in my book.



Chronopolis said:


> I was just reading the very interesting thread
> *U.S. Attitudes/ Sales Regarding Swiss Watches*
> 
> and I noticed how it got hijacked within seconds to that undying (and seemingly unkillable) issue of what to wear with what; who's free do dress like whom; whom to bonk, what to eat/drink/say while wearing a Timex, Rolex, Spandex etc.
> ...


----------



## Patsbox7 (Jul 22, 2012)

Isnt that why we are here? To express what we think sets us apart? If u werent a WIS you would be the guy wearing a timex and driving a prius cause it was the most logical decision, and not on these forums on Satuday night. 
Oh yeah, and the timex guy has 200k extra just for a rainy day... Yah, thats my dad... :/ COME ON, AT LEAST SHOW OFF A LITTLE!!!??


Chronopolis said:


> I was just reading the very interesting thread
> *U.S. Attitudes/ Sales Regarding Swiss Watches*
> 
> and I noticed how it got hijacked within seconds to that undying (and seemingly unkillable) issue of what to wear with what; who's free do dress like whom; whom to bonk, what to eat/drink/say while wearing a Timex, Rolex, Spandex etc.
> ...





Patsbox7 said:


> My rules your rules is how I am. As long as it doesnt clash like red checkers on green stRipes I say color outside the lines on that. Look up my recent posts on the watch and car combos and to each is own in my book.


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

Would you wear a pilot watch like some IWC models as a dress watch with a suit?


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

I think IWC pilots (especially the 3 handed versions e.g. Mk XV and XVI) while not strictly speaking dress watches, are smart enough to wear with a suit, especially on a leather strap, with no contrast stitching of course


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

flori78 said:


> Would you wear a pilot watch like some IWC models as a dress watch with a suit?


I would not.
But then, I am weird.
This question has been asked and answered many times over already.
Depends on the OCCASIOn (degree of formality), so it depends on the KIND / STYLE of suit. Etc.

But no matter the occasion, if I don't have a watch that costs as much as an IWC, I'd be just as happy (and confident) to wear a sub 500 German (like an Aristo Dessau) that will do the job neatly and without fuss. I would be more mindful of coordinating the watch with my suit: color, etc. 
One of my fave dress watch is a small quartz number, gold-plated, that cost me under $100. When I need it, it serves me fine.

Some people assume that if a watch starts out expensive enough, it can go anywhere. Sigh.

Well, it _can_ - everywhere where people of little or no discernment and/or breeding gather. A hollywood party, for example. Or any gathering filled with people who made a LOT of money in their own lifetime (kudos), but with no family history of seeing much money.* 
You see a lot of this sort of thing in countries with only recently developed economies. And, among such people only money talks, so THIS is where people will, and SHOULD wear the most expensive watch they can get - see the most recent WATCH TIERS thread - and wear it loudly.

* - this lack of tradition of wealth - and thus natural ease with it - among those who only recently became rich, will afford one the funny but pathetic sight of people wearing their ill-fitting suits (also very expensive) that come with that 'prole gap' behind the neck, while gulping down their $2,000/bottle wines, as if they were really thirsty.

But in better circles, people are not terribly impressed with toys - they've seen them all, maybe own many of them, and so are a bit tired of ogling them on others.
So, they do not judge by what you're wearing so much as by what you are wearing WRONG, or NOT wearing (if that even), and thus tend be more interested in discussing ideas and events, rather than trying to second guess how much money you make.

Therefore, if ever invited to a gathering at that level of social intercourse, it is actually more appropriate, if not advantageous, to wear a watch that matches your suit. And station. In short, the less loud the better. No bracelet. And do match the leathers.

But all this is, of course, for nought if you cannot hold up your side of the conversation in a way that will leave an indelibly positive impression upon others as to the quality your moral refinement and intellectual cultivation, (and if possible, physical prowess as well), not just $$ worth.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> I think IWC pilots (especially the 3 handed versions e.g. Mk XV and XVI) while not strictly speaking dress watches, are smart enough to wear with a suit, especially on a leather strap, with no contrast stitching of course


In contrast to Chronopolis's long winded and rambling opinion, I would say yes with the following provisos:

Diameter appropriate for a watch, not a saucer.
White face will look dressier with a dark suit.
Fine for professional office work, dinner at a fine restaurant or cocktail party. If its a truly formal affair, no.
Don't try this at a snob preserve where you can see them in their natural setting. It's been known to cause them to attack.

Will


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Pilot? Here's the fun (and true) story when it comes to that, assuming proportions (ie, under 40mm and no rotating bezel that is) are "suitable" that is ...

You see, dive watches. The Rolex Sub is a classic. NOT a dress watch, but an elegant tool watch as far as any existed, so as to bump it into "meet the Queen" with DRESS uniform on for inspection, re: HRM British (as well as Commonwealth, like Canada, etc.) that is. And that was the whole part of it as well--i.e., classic, timeless look, and elegant, as much as one could possibly get from what was a tool/sport watch. Problem is, a dive watch and suddenly made it seem ok for others to wear non classic (ile, large, orange, etc.) dive watches, such that professional work places started to look like not a work place but a bloody vactation resort. HR wasn't about to on casual Fridays distinguish between OK vs. NON ok divers, just said no divers allowed. Heck, same thing when it came to capris with women for happens sake--closed toe shoes, no sandals, and NO BLING/loud/etc. jewelry allowed. What is it that men can't understand about that all of a sudden, these rules decades ago made for women, and now suddenly applying to men (as it's not OK for women, which professional women but not men it seems get?). And so, even though the Sub is indeed a classic, and designed that way on purpose, suddenly ALL dive watches came under scrutiny and are in fact all dive watches as a result of "not all are in fact (or ever were, or will ever be) classic" in the professional world now forbidden. Called the slippery slope, you'd think young'uns would know better but they don't, and ruin it for everybody cuz frankly Human Resources (HR) is too dam'd busy to care, as not going to cf all dive watches, only knowing it's a work place, not a resort. And there you go (so hide your Sub at 40mm under your shirt, or leave it at home; the rest, forget about it. It's a work place after all .... and HR don't want to hear it, much less see it, nor are they there to care. Look the part, or not. Your choice, go home or choose another "profession".. like tourinsm or diving for e.g. ...)

Ah, but pilot's watches you say ... kind of like HRM British Navy etc (Sub)., the pilot has a lot of cache. Indeed, anyone here remember Pan-Am? Blue suit (uniform), all the trust in the world. My grandmother (bless her) remembers dressing up to go trans-atlantic flights, not for the average much less the "grey hound" bus wait times of today. Oh, those guys were to be trusted, and looked good in those (uniform) blue suits, yes?  Lots of trust, and why it is one should always choose NAVY when interviewing, btw. (OR grey, as in, tried, tested and true --traditional--works especially too). Under 40mm, on strap and zero contrast? would have to agree it's OK, so long as not formal (ie., not law/business formal/semi-formal attire, etc.). I mean, didn't those Pan Am guys get tons of respect? Pilot watches (IWC, Rolex, etc.) have a lot of cachet as said. But a dress watch per se? You do know IWC makes a lovely Portofino, right? THAT is a proper dress watch. And is for a reason. Just saying ... 

(as in, ok, better, and best .. all depends. IF going to court and/or a wedding etc., answer is NO. If on the other hand flying with a dress-uniform, by all means go! 

Cheers


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Sea-Wolf said:


> Pilot? Here's the fun (and true) story when it comes to that, assuming proportions (ie, under 40mm and no rotating bezel that is) are "suitable" that is ...


Chronopolis, I take back everything I said about being long winded. Sea Wolf: You are most definitely a lawyer of the first order.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Well, we could instead post actual dress codes... longer than in fact what has already been posted (and enforced, people get fired, as expected to read and comply, there being no human right to be sloppy and/or ignore the code), but heck, let's keep it short ... I mean, those that "know" already KNOW, and those that don't get it FAST ...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> Chronopolis, I take back everything I said about being long winded. Sea Wolf: You are most definitely a lawyer of the first order.


Ha! No worries, I knew Seawolf would come along soon enough and make my wind look very short indeed.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

"Brevity is the soul of wit." ;-)


----------



## flori78 (Sep 7, 2008)

Ok, apart of commenting rules here is an example (borrowed picture in this forum).

Will it fit with a suit in a white collar envoirement?


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

It's also what gets people into a lot of trouble--sound bytes being no substitute for a proper story, and without information one can draw no conclusions. But sounds good, and since most people don't "think" anyway why Fox does it, I guess (not news, but entertainment. There is a difference ... 

(Too funny, guys 

As to the watch, check with your HR. Not a proper dress watch with a suit. But if your unit's casual then might be OK, depending on what everyone else there is doing. You'll want not only to look at those beneath and beside you, but also those "upstairs" where you eventually want to be, no? Half the battle is looking the part, so that when it comes to an interview and/or promotion and tenure, they alredy see you doing it.

Cheers


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Sea-Wolf said:


> ... *Half the battle is looking the part,* so that when it comes to an interview and/or promotion and tenure, they alredy see you doing it.


Ain't that right.
All the world's a stage...


----------



## ND2012 (Nov 4, 2012)

I would suggest it is Ok, if brown belt and shoes to match the strap. But I guess it depends on the "white-collar environment".

People tend to dress a little on the less-formal side in western Canada where I'm from. It wouldn't look inappropriate with a suit worn at a daytime event. I wonder if a white face would be more formal.


----------



## O2AFAC67 (Feb 8, 2006)

Entertaining, amusing, and a guilty pleasure reading some of the amazing tripe included in this thread. Ashamed as I am for contributing to it :roll:, below are a couple more gallons of gasoline to toss on the fire... :-d
Best,
Ron


----------



## maxroach (Nov 2, 2012)

I've gotta say...I went to a family event last week where one of the guys in question is a billionaire and is soon flying out to meet PM Cameron. He gave a Rolex as a gift to a family member. Everything was based on traditional style but I think the watch even then could be within an acceptable range of unique style. But this was not business, so again it's context. I still think that there's a context to everything. If your circle/bubble is such that you will be scoffed at or most importantly disadvantaged; then perhaps that's where traditional consideration becomes serious.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

So, what say ye about the IWC Ingeniuer Vintage (particularly the blue dial one)?

View attachment 872623


I RARELY, if ever, have to wear a suit, and when I do, it is even less rare that the occassion is so formal as to require a white shirt.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

~tc~ said:


> So, what say ye about the IWC Ingeniuer Vintage (particularly the blue dial one)?
> 
> View attachment 872623
> 
> ...


Personally, I'd say it's conservative enough and handsome enough that unless you're hanging with old money and attending full on formal parties, you're good to go.

Will


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

I've seen what old money wears -- some of it is pretty disgusting. That watch would look good anywhere, except perhaps a Black Tie.



Will_f said:


> Personally, I'd say it's conservative enough and handsome enough that unless you're hanging with old money and attending full on formal parties, you're good to go.
> 
> Will


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Is polished more formal than matte for a case? I'm thinking Stowa Marine, here...

Marine - STOWA GmbH & Co.KG


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

hanshananigan said:


> Is polished more formal than matte for a case? I'm thinking Stowa Marine, here...
> 
> Marine - STOWA GmbH & Co.KG


Considered by many to be so, and I tend to agree.
But I myself do not think it makes THAT much of a difference. 
A matte finish case would certainly be nothing compared to wearing any of the ARABIC number model.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Thank you Chronopolis. Good add regarding Roman numerals. Though I never understood that rule and/or common counsel, truthfully.


----------



## brummyjon (Jan 27, 2010)

Metlin said:


> I've seen what old money wears -- some of it is pretty disgusting. That watch would look good anywhere, except perhaps a Black Tie.


Well there is plenty of 'old money' here in the UK. The problem is it often comes with inbreeding, low IQ and an inflated sense of self worth. Don't get me wrong, I would like some of their money, but I think it has more merit if you've earned it yourself.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

hanshananigan said:


> Thank you Chronopolis. Good add regarding Roman numerals. Though I never understood that rule and/or common counsel, truthfully.


Silly rule, yes, and I have no trouble admitting that.
But since most rules made in civilization are silly, what'd be the point of griping about one more?

The general concept is simple, and it is this:

'Formal' in the true sense of the word (not just any suit and tie), implies one is attending 
a function that has NOTHING to do with the daily grind.
One is indeed attending a gathering that is entirely symbolic, and is thus enjoined to remove 
ALL references to the harshness / brutality of reality, which everyone knows so well.
(Which is also why political speeches at the Academy Awards, weddings, etc are so bloody tacky.)

So that means, the cumbersome, hard to read-at-a-glance Roman numerals are preferred over Arabic numbers - only because 
we use the latter for commerce and calculation, etc. Whereas, the Roman numerals are today entirely either decorative or symbolic.

And no "tool" watches - divers, pilots, chronographs, etc, unless one is indeed a member of those professions 
that require the use of such watches, and the function is one that celebrates the accomplishments of any one of those said groups.

Again, the main idea being: You're at a function that is symbolically a gesture of stopping time, an evening of truce in the name of all that is good about civilization and noble aspirations.
Thus you are expected to show POLISHED over MATTE, since polished also implies leisure, refinement, etc, as that shows it was made for the purpose of demonstrating that you could afford the luxury of having someone polish them 
for you (as they did with silver way back when); and, that you're in a place of refinement where everything is soft and/or smooth, 
and thus you cannot possibly scratch the thing.

It's such a simple rule, and for the most part so agreeable that it is disappointing that 
so many people feel they're being dragged to the gallows when asked to abide by it. 
Would it kill people if they could NOT wear their G-Shocks and T-shirts and sneakers for one evening?


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Wonderful reply, Chronopolis. I have always found it awkward to ask my personal assistant to polish my watches, shoes, knob, car, etc. but you have given me the confidence to do so in the name of tradition and maintenance of cultural infrastructure. How could I have been so blind for so long!


----------



## David777 (Dec 12, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I am trying to find out who makes watches for Maserati. I was told Bulgari, and also IWC.
Did they have more than one maker?
Specifically I am interested in this watch listed as a prototype that did not go into production:

Maserati Dress Watch Unique Self Winding Prototype Silver Black | eBay


----------



## H3RRINGTON (Dec 13, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Hey all,

I'm a new member. Been browsing the forums for a while now. Trying to get the lay of the land if you will. I figured this would be a great place for my first post.

Im currently serving in the USAF and as expected work a desk. I was wondering what type of watch I should be wearing with my everyday garb. (Battle uniform) I currently wear my Nixon Quatro. I keep my Bulovas and Citizens for nicer occasions or blues Mondays. Just wondering if I could inquire as to whether I'm totally wrong for the piece I currently wear or not. I'm pretty new to collecting and would love to be steered in the right direction.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

H3RRINGTON said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I'm a new member. Been browsing the forums for a while now. Trying to get the lay of the land if you will. I figured this would be a great place for my first post.
> 
> Im currently serving in the USAF and as expected work a desk. I was wondering what type of watch I should be wearing with my everyday garb. (Battle uniform) I currently wear my Nixon Quatro. I keep my Bulovas and Citizens for nicer occasions or blues Mondays. Just wondering if I could inquire as to whether I'm totally wrong for the piece I currently wear or not. I'm pretty new to collecting and would love to be steered in the right direction.


I recommend a high quality watch similar to this one:

View attachment 903577


Will


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



H3RRINGTON said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I'm a new member. Been browsing the forums for a while now. Trying to get the lay of the land if you will. I figured this would be a great place for my first post.
> 
> *Im currently serving in the USAF* and as expected work a desk. I was wondering what type of watch I should be wearing with my everyday garb. (Battle uniform) *I currently wear my Nixon Quatro*. I keep my *Bulovas and Citizens for nicer occasions* or blues Mondays. Just wondering if I could inquire as to *whether I'm totally wrong for the piece I currently wear or not. *I'm pretty new to collecting and would love to be steered in the right direction.


First things first, Thanks for serving our country. 
Second: Not much info to go on, so gonna make some general observations / recom's.

1. No, there is nothing wrong with your NIXON for the position you occupy. You're in the military. If your commanding officer / chain of command has no problem with it, then by definition, there is no problem. Period.

2. BULOVAs and CITIZENs: If you're saving them for "nicer occasions" then maybe your working budget is around $500 tops?

3. Will-F's advice down below is excellent - DAMASKO - if ya wanna get an excellent 'tool watch' that is also perfectly in line with your line of work, even if a little out of reach $$$ wise.

Other than that, there isn't much to add. Maybe you might like to look at these brands: ARISTO, JUNKERS, ZEPPELIN.


----------



## Angelo534 (Dec 13, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

It's not my call. Contact Ernie if you want.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Angelo534 said:


> It's not my call. Contact Ernie if you want.


Wow, that's an amazing post.

Only 8 posts in and already dropping names? 
And clarifying the exact scope of your "responsibilities" on this forum?
Like yer style!


----------



## H3RRINGTON (Dec 13, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Thank you for the reply. I fear you may have just helped spend my next few pay checks. I love your brand recommendations.


----------



## tolanm (Jan 30, 2013)

Hey guys,

I find myself wearing more button down shirts recently for casual dress. Do I need a leather band watch to go with them? or is a bracelet fine? I really like my watches on bracelets but it just seems to me that leather would look better...but I figure it's fine since it's casual anyways?


----------



## Perdendosi (May 10, 2012)

I can't imagine, in general, that a bracelet would be inappropriate with button downs. IMO, bracelets are appropriate for everything except the most formal occasions.



tolanm said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I find myself wearing more button down shirts recently for casual dress. Do I need a leather band watch to go with them? or is a bracelet fine? I really like my watches on bracelets but it just seems to me that leather would look better...but I figure it's fine since it's casual anyways?


----------



## Raza (Jul 21, 2010)

tolanm said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I find myself wearing more button down shirts recently for casual dress. Do I need a leather band watch to go with them? or is a bracelet fine? I really like my watches on bracelets but it just seems to me that leather would look better...but I figure it's fine since it's casual anyways?


I'd prefer to wear leather with a suit and I dress business casual everyday and generally wear leather, but I don't find it to be a rule. I think a bracelet with business casual clothing is fine. Shirt, tie, sweater, loafers, khakis is my normal "uniform" of the season. Two days ago I wore my 45mm Revue Thommen dive chrono on a bracelet, yesterday I wore my 44mm PVD Magrette chrono on leather, and today I'm wearing my Speedmaster on leather. Most people who do wear a watch tend to wear bracelets daily to the office.


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

tolanm said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I find myself wearing more button down shirts recently for casual dress. Do I need a leather band watch to go with them? or is a bracelet fine? I really like my watches on bracelets but it just seems to me that leather would look better...but I figure it's fine since it's casual anyways?


You don't need leather, a bracelet works. Best would be alternating; I wear a leather strap or bracelet dependent on my mood really. The watch itself matters more (aesthetically) than the strap/bracelet when it comes to suits.


----------



## Lemper (Jun 18, 2012)

various121 said:


> You don't need leather, a bracelet works. Best would be alternating; I wear a leather strap or bracelet dependent on my mood really. The watch itself matters more (aesthetically) than the strap/bracelet when it comes to suits.


Do you think a bracelet is even a good idea when it comes to suits?


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

Lemper said:


> Do you think a bracelet is even a good idea when it comes to suits?


No. Leather for suits.


----------



## Skitalets (Oct 22, 2008)

Lemper said:


> Do you think a bracelet is even a good idea when it comes to suits?


Bracelet is fine with suits--millions of men wear watches on bracelets with suits every day.


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

Lemper said:


> Do you think a bracelet is even a good idea when it comes to suits?


Depends on the bracelet but most are fine for suits. Some will tell you that you should not wear bracelets with suits, only leather, but being in a suit and around suits five days/nights a week (finance), I can tell you that in real world application, a bracelet is fine.

That being said, a leather strap will definately refine your look when compared to a bracelet. If you have the option, I always suggest buying a watch with the bracelet and then buying after market leather straps.


----------



## H3RRINGTON (Dec 13, 2012)

gotsol said:


> So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


No


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

gotsol said:


> So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


A matter of great and passionate debate. It's a very attractive watch, but IMHO whether you can wear it with a suit or formal dress depends on the situation and the culture. I've never been in a situation where it would be a problem. In more formal places than Alaska (where I live) there might be those who would think it gauche for very formal occasions.

If in doubt (for example, you are invited to a Royal Ball at Windsor castle), leave it at home.


----------



## various121 (Jun 30, 2008)

gotsol said:


> So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


Tremendous faux pas of the first order? No, only if you wore it to a black-tie event (tuxedo) and even then people still debate. Everything else is based on the biases of who you're asking.

Half the people I see with a Sub wear it daily with a suit. If I owned a Sub, it would probably end up in my daily rotation with my suits as well.

Those that know the rules know how to break them, as knowing is the difference between style and ignorance.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

various121 said:


> Half the people I see with a Sub wear it daily with a suit. If I owned a Sub, it would probably end up in my daily rotation with my suits as well.
> .


I wear mine regularly, but almost never with a suit. Of course I almost never wear a suit.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

gotsol said:


> So after reading this entire thread, am I to conclude that to wear my as-yet-unbought Rolex Submariner 14060M with a suit, let alone a tux, would be a tremendous faux pas of the first order?


Yes, but you would have A LOT of company.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> I wear mine regularly, but almost never with a suit. Of course I almost never wear a suit.


Or, maybe you never wear nuthin but yo cut-off long johns, you sexeh thang, you.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Or, maybe you never wear nuthin but yo cut-off long johns, you sexeh thang, you.


And a Sub is totally appropriate in such attire. I frequently get noticed by passerby.

Will


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Two-tone prolly? To match yo unmistakably "two-tone" long johns, if ya know waddamean. 



Will_f said:


> And a Sub is totally appropriate in such attire. I frequently get noticed by passerby.
> 
> Will


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Two-tone prolly? To match yo unmistakably "two-tone" long johns, if ya know waddamean.


Three tone yo. I am way cooler than two tone.

Will


----------



## fevew (Feb 7, 2013)

Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

fevew said:


> Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


Where the heck did you get that Idea? In any case, It's not true.


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

fevew said:


> Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


Hmmm... I wear mine on my right wrist due to preference. Happily married to my beautiful wife.


----------



## s.erickson87 (Aug 4, 2012)

fevew said:


> Do gay men really wear watches on their right wrist? My dad always did that, but I thought it was due him being left-handed.


It was always my belief that _generally_ one wears their watch on the non-dominate wrist so as to not beat it up as much...


----------



## Lemper (Jun 18, 2012)

~tc~ said:


> Yes, but you would have A LOT of company.


I think it greatly depends on where you live.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

You guys are cracking me up over here; thanks!

As to the question re: bracelet or strap, strap is more formal as has been said, and formal/semi-formal (including business formal) occasions call for same. Unless you're in banking, law or in investment (retail as opposed to institutional side), etc., and yours is a more relaxed, casual enviroment, then bracelet is fine. If you've an important meeting or something on any given day, switch out to strap. Otherwise, it's fine.

As to a Sub with two-tone long john's? Heh. Heh. Did you guys know that there actually "IS" such a thing? (well, sort of  )



Cheers


----------



## alexels (May 14, 2011)

Hi, I apologize, but I simply couldn't go through 50 pages of friendly banter and various, although somewhat random, watch related discussions to find the answer to my question. Google didn't help either. So here goes.

I would like to know what is considered ok, recommended and a total no-no to wear with a white dialed watch, with blue trimmed hands (CFD0E001W | Orient Automatic Watches & Reviews | Orient Watch USA - I will be wearing it with different straps, so I'm not limited to the bracelet or the brown leather strap). Is it ok if I wear a black hoodie with that watch? How about a suit and tie with a shirt that is neither white nor blue? Will it work with black jeans and a Messhugah rotting, screaming faces T-shirt? How about casual office attire?

I simply want to know what is considered good watch etiquette when it comes to white dial watches, in a variety of situations.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

That watch seems a bit dressy for a hoodie or jeans/t-shirt, but would be great with "casual office" or a suit IMHO


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

alexels said:


> I simply want to know what is considered good watch etiquette when it comes to white dial watches, in a variety of situations.


I've got a couple white dialed watches and my experience is that they're pretty flexible as long as you avoid shades of beige- Doesn't seem to ever look good. They really pop with a dark business suit.

IMHO the Orient Millenium is a good all rounder. Sort of like a reasonably priced Datejust, it goes with most clothing styles. It's a little dressy, but not too flashy so it can get away with casual and dressed up. Put it on a nice leather strap and it's an inexpensive but stylish dress watch.

Will


----------



## mingsy (Jan 22, 2013)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I wear a casio f-91w adn ca-53 at the office sometimes. its light and comfortable and has no worries of getting scratched.

is this wrong?


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



mingsy said:


> I wear a casio f-91w adn ca-53 at the office sometimes. its light and comfortable and has no worries of getting scratched.
> 
> is this wrong?


Wear what you like and what you feel comfortable with. Those watches aren't generally what a person would wear with business attire, but if it suits you, go for it.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Mingsy, depends on your office and what it is you do for a living.

In the university, you will see a great many in the science and math department wearing predominantly quartz and also some cool funky digital watches, then, they also wear lab coats (and in the dental and medical schools, they wear scrubs!). In insurance, those who work on the phones in a call center likewise doesn't matter so much, as they don't meet clients face-to-face; depends on position, actual work involved, etc. but many regardless still like to dress well as in "smart casual" , including a dress/sport-dress watch on strap(be it quartz or mech). Like all things, it depends. But if you are required sometimes to wear a suit, then you will want a proper watch to go with that suit which the Casio is not (but if you're not required to wear a suit a lot, then you need not spend a lot on a dress watch either. Check out the HMT (India) Sona for e.g., with a dress watch being a staple in every man's wardrobe, or should be in any event).

As to being comfortable? Yes, can be comfortable in your jogging suit when you get home after a long day at the office, right? 

Cheers


----------



## eddiesleftfoot (Oct 27, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I've not read the 50-odd pages but I get the general gist of the posts and what strikes me is that the posters form the USA are far more concerned about the right watch for the right occasion, yet here in the UK (and many of you guys see us as being very formal, stiff upper lip types) I don't see that distinction. I have worked in business for nearly 30 years and worn a variety of watches from very formal dress watches to my Orange Monster, and always worn a suit, yet never had a comments about what was on my wrist.


----------



## firithmorgulion (Apr 12, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



eddiesleftfoot said:


> I've not read the 50-odd pages but I get the general gist of the posts and what strikes me is that the posters form the USA are far more concerned about the right watch for the right occasion, yet here in the UK (and many of you guys see us as being very formal, stiff upper lip types) I don't see that distinction. I have worked in business for nearly 30 years and worn a variety of watches from very formal dress watches to my Orange Monster, and always worn a suit, yet never had a comments about what was on my wrist.


this

i think that there are more people in the usa thinking, if you waer a suit u *have* to wear this "special" kind of watch, then on other places in the world

and i think, the rules that fit the states are not the rules that fit other parts of the world


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

eddiesleftfoot said:


> I've not read the 50-odd pages but I get the general gist of the posts and what strikes me is that the posters form the USA are far more concerned about the right watch for the right occasion, yet here in the UK (and many of you guys see us as being very formal, stiff upper lip types) I don't see that distinction. I have worked in business for nearly 30 years and worn a variety of watches from very formal dress watches to my Orange Monster, and always worn a suit, yet never had a comments about what was on my wrist.


Eddie I think it may depend on where and in what environment you work in the UK? I'm an Aussie who for a couple of years worked in the City of London. There I was struck by the sartorial 'rules' which, while largely unspoken, nevertheless seemed to apply quite rigidly. Those rules included no brown shoes and no shirt pockets. While I cant recall anyone commenting on my watch (a sports watch, shock horror) I can well imagine some of those 'stiff upper lip types' muttering insults about uncouth Antipodeans under their breath!


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Depends on what one does for a living and where one resides in North America. A police officer has different needs than an executive, etc. Other parts of the world are in fact more conservative when it comes to attire than most of North America, the North East (Toronto, NYC, Montreal, Boston, etc.) excepted.

And if you are in law, banking, a member on the board of a public company, etc. then you care and regardless (and in law there is and remains a dress code, to be found in the Rules, which is what others such as bankers, etc. look to for guidance as well: why? Professionalism).

Barristers wear robes in Canada (but not the wigs or Albert slippers as our British counterparts still do. Full court dress with proper dress shoes, though I did once appear before a federal Judge wearing cowboy boots--his court, his rules and he is from Alberta where they wear cowboy boots and cowboy hats with their suits, pairing it with a nice dress/dress-sport watch such as Piaget, Rolex, JLC, etc. which was on his wrist, too. ; )

When appearing before the Queen's Bench as Counsel, you dress as if meeting the Queen herself. Same when it comes to banking, etc. who meet clients face-to-face, too. Germany? Very conservative as well, and even more so than most of North America (same when it comes to the business district proper in London, etc. , where you don't see trainers either). Even a casual stroll through a university having a law and business school attached will readily show that Law and also MBA business professors dress far better than those in the math and liberal arts departments, but even in the latter (non-professional) schools I myself have observed that profs in the EU tend to dress better than their North American counterparts as well. Profs should not look like their students, something TAs quickly learn if they are actually going to be taken seriously by the class. (They learn, but sometimes need to spell it out. 

A watch is an accessory to one's wardrobe, and one selects such accessories to suit. To put it another way and in short: optics are everything, having an air of professionalism when a professional is of the utmost importance, and people size you up whether people want to hear it or not based on one's appearance, always have. What one wears shows one's judgment, or complete lack thereof, and ability to assess the circumstances (namely, importance of the matter and/or event) they are in as such. (It being about the matter and/or event and not by contrast someone's own peculiar idea of "fashion sense" or, how does one say: it is not all about "ME, ME, ME" but "THEM" or "IT"  ). Dressing the part is half the battle, and knowing where you are is very important as well -- i.e., public vs. private, there is a difference and while "fashions" come and go, classic is timeless and professionalism never goes out of style. Indeed, there are many cases of Judges refusing counsel an audience on account of their breach of the dress code (judges do that, and I know one who actually tossed the whole galley out for lack of respect--everything from fidgeting with their watches and/or other devices to chewing gum, interfering with the proceedings and utter disrespect for rules and institutions, so out to the corridor they were all sent). Rules govern us all, and "fashion" or "comfort" are not an excuse for a breach of the rules. 

That said, watches are classified for a reason (dress, sport, etc.) -- categories which properly describe the goods, and what their intended purpose is thus for, which is proper and makes perfect sense.

Cheers


----------



## Lemper (Jun 18, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Sea-Wolf said:


> Depends on what one does for a living and where one resides in North America. A police officer has different needs than an executive, etc. Other parts of the world are in fact more conservative when it comes to attire than most of North America, the North East (Toronto, NYC, Montreal, Boston, etc.) excepted.
> 
> And if you are in law, banking, a member on the board of a public company, etc. then you care and regardless (and in law there is and remains a dress code, to be found in the Rules, which is what others such as bankers, etc. look to for guidance as well: why? Professionalism).
> 
> ...


Great input, thanks!


----------



## theksti272 (Sep 19, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

You have given the best suggestion regarding Swiss Watches.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Sea-Wolf said:


> Depends on what one does for a living and where one resides in North America. A police officer has different needs than an executive, etc. Other parts of the world are in fact more conservative when it comes to attire than most of North America, the North East (Toronto, NYC, Montreal, Boston, etc.) excepted.
> 
> And if you are in law, banking, a member on the board of a public company, etc. then you care and regardless (and in law there is and remains a dress code, to be found in the Rules, which is what others such as bankers, etc. look to for guidance as well: why? Professionalism).


One of the better answers I've read. Where I live a dress code is almost non-existent, though lawyers are certainly better dressed than the vast majority. My watches reflect the standard of dress for my location and profession in that they are mostly casual "tool" watches.

Working in the same profession in North East US I would wear a suit and tie and I would wear a watch that was suitable, such as a Seiko SARB, Omega AT or Rolex Datejust (depending on budget)

Will


----------



## evmedievalol (Mar 10, 2013)

Pics would be more nicer than describing what you wore..


----------



## Coler (Mar 28, 2009)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Sea-Wolf said:


> Barristers wear robes in Canada (but not the wigs or Albert slippers as our British counterparts still do.)


Nobody wears those slippers. Very few wear wigs.



Sea-Wolf said:


> When appearing before the Queen's Bench as Counsel, you dress as if meeting the Queen herself.


Actually the Court Room garb of a British (or Irish) barrister originated on the Death of Charles II in 1685 and has nothing to do with what you would wear to meet the Queen, even if it was her Bench you were appearing before.


----------



## Watermark (Mar 25, 2013)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Sea-Wolf said:


> Depends on what one does for a living and where one resides in North America. A police officer has different needs than an executive, etc. Other parts of the world are in fact more conservative when it comes to attire than most of North America, the North East (Toronto, NYC, Montreal, Boston, etc.) excepted.
> 
> And if you are in law, banking, a member on the board of a public company, etc. then you care and regardless (and in law there is and remains a dress code, to be found in the Rules, which is what others such as bankers, etc. look to for guidance as well: why? Professionalism).
> 
> ...


While I agree you should dress the part and be respectful to all situations please tell me your view on charity events?

I don't know what part of the world you are from but in the NW United States and probably everywhere in the US too much time and funds are spent on the event than the cause.

Women and Men will wear new suits. Dresses that cost 100s or 1000s of dollars but when it comes time to donate only a select few actually spend more than a few hundred. Very select few in the 1000s

I feel it would be more important to wear flip flops t shirts and shorts to an event and everyone pony up just the clothes money theyve spent to make themselves LOOK THE PART
which drives me nuts.

Appropriate or not excess in some situations should be overriden by the possibly Children's Hospital or Shelter that is truly in need of the funds vs some over dressed couple trying to impress with a new dress and suit

My 2 cents


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Watermark said:


> While I agree you should dress the part and be respectful to all situations please tell me your view on charity events?
> 
> I don't know what part of the world you are from but in the NW United States and probably everywhere in the US too much time and funds are spent on the event than the cause.
> 
> ...


Charity events are an excuse to party and feel righteous about it. Of course people are going to dress up for the event.

If your primary goal is to donate as large a percentage of your disposable wealth as possible to a worthy cause, why not just phone it in?

Will


----------



## Watermark (Mar 25, 2013)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Will_f said:


> Charity events are an excuse to party and feel righteous about it. Of course people are going to dress up for the event.
> 
> If your primary goal is to donate as large a percentage of your disposable wealth as possible to a worthy cause, why not just phone it in?
> 
> Will


Its about showing enthusiasm for a cause. Party or not.

Enthusiasm should spark donations.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

You are most welcome, Lemper.

As to Court Dress in England and Wales, whilst it is somewhat modernizing (beginning in some places to look a bit more like Canada and Australia, but not quite yet), having dispensed with the slippers for the House, etc. (Tony, wasn't it?), they didn't extend many of these changes to barristers at the time. I know there's been great discussion back and forth regarding modernization, especially as it relates to those wigs (imagine they're quite hot and itchy), which in some cases have been made optional as of late, I understand; however, also understand (and have witnessed) that a great many barristers do in fact wear them still and, last I heard, the criminal bar are rather adamant about maintaining them, no? (Traditionalism, professionalism, courtesy/respect/order/Etc., the list goes on, dating back centuries!). Now, I also understand they didn't care if Tony wore flip-flops when at the Beach or otherwise but not when on official business or meeting with HRM Elizabeth II, etc., right?  As to dressing to meet the Queen, we do in fact do so in Canada --our Courts (being the Queen's Bench, King's Bench in times of a male monarch) do not date back to the 1600s, more like 1867 under HRM Victoria who oversaw Canadian, Australian, etc. independence; though our Court (and business) dress has modernized since then, whole point being that we are a rather conservative lot, being "officers of (HRM's) Court" (swear an oath to defend HRM actually, still do that on this side of the Pond), taking our professionalism quite seriously in fact (albeit modernized insofar as we long ago as in not just last year or so dispensed with those wigs, etc. but everywhere still in open court with few exceptions such as family court and/or proceedings involving witnesses of tender years (small children) we are fully robed, with proper dress shoes, trousers and dress watch as well (as if to meet the Queen herself, indeed!). Lawyers do not robe in the USA, though judges still do, but they do wear business attire (some jurisdictions are more conservative than others, with rules of dress being rather strictly enforced in NY for e.g. which, in all honesty, isn't really all that different than the rules of Ontario except and only they don't wear robes, thus taking the matter most seriously, too). But as to tracing court dress, dates back before the 1600s actually though that may have been when the wigs came into general use by barristers and judges alike, remember reading something about that and hats / head dressings as well (you might be right about that). Otherwise, in terms of England itself, judges have been dictating code as far back to the 1300s (at least), and long before that in Rome (Europe), which has always and still has its codes. (Those robes arguably date all the way back to the 4th Century for e.g., trading to tunics and the Church which adopted much of its vestments from Roman judges, since pronouncing on laws while controlling access to education (thus the professions) as well, and why robes are also a part of convocation, though the tunic (as is worn in the Germanic-Roman legal system) itself traces back to ancient times, but I digress).

Point being and once again: one dresses for the occasion and/or one's "office" if you will. Reason also why police officers wear uniforms, who have different needs yet still in "uniform" same as professionals do (albeit a different uniform of course, still, a uniform and while a dress watch no more works for a police officer than a large rugged sport watch would work for a lawyer or a banker--different careers demand different uniforms, but still uniforms per se). Why? Apart from technical requirements of the job in question, uniforms overall tend to engender trust and respect ("an air of professionalism") when in public, etc., and the "message" one sends by means of how they are dressed starts the second one sizes you up based on appearances, whether we like to hear it or not as said (thus, prior to opening one's mouth as it were). Accordingly, all form of "gaudy" is to be avoided, as it's unbecoming not to mention distracting as well in terms of professionalism and in some careers down right dangerous (many labour safety codes require employees remove excess jewelry, etc. as can get caught in machinery for instance). But as to "looking the part" -- depending and always on where one lives and what one does for a living, when in Rome, right? But, really, the rules as such (some being stricter than others, all depends once again) when it boils right down to it, as it pertains to "professional appearance" (especially when it comes to court and professional business dress) all have the same purpose behind them which is to avoid "gaudy" -- take simple black robes for the clergy as but one example, as in no colours. (Somebody no doubt wore a pink tunic with large yellow polka dots or something and thus ruined it for the bunch, black and only black from thereon in, heh. Just kidding, but only somewhat insofar as rules while not carved in stone aren't open to every individual's peculiar notion of "fashion sense" or lack thereof either, and why such rules came into being in the first place--namely, to avoid that. (That said, rules do and must adapt as one would look silly wearing C 4th Tunics in modern court rooms no doubt, and terribly distracting to say the least though I am sure they looked perfect for the time period in question, of that I have no doubt).

And that speaks to the charity issue, doesn't it, Watermark. Those whose primary cause is to donate who truly care about the cause do in fact phone it in and/or make appropriate provisions in their will as such, with you and Will I agree. Others look forward to the event itself, paying 1,000s for a seat at the table and of course are expected to --and do in fact-- dress up for it, which is proper as Will also says (and if people are having a good time while raising money for a worthy cause, if that is what it takes to get people out and excited about a cause so as to raise money for charity, then this is a very good thing is it not? Still about the cause, everything revolving around that, right? Just saying).

Cheers


----------



## akasnowmaaan (Jan 15, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



eddiesleftfoot said:


> I've not read the 50-odd pages but I get the general gist of the posts and what strikes me is that the posters form the USA are far more concerned about the right watch for the right occasion, yet here in the UK (and many of you guys see us as being very formal, stiff upper lip types) I don't see that distinction. I have worked in business for nearly 30 years and worn a variety of watches from very formal dress watches to my Orange Monster, and always worn a suit, yet never had a comments about what was on my wrist.


The USA is dominated far more by the types who wear what they want and damn the critics. It's part of our frontier, individualistic, cowboy heritage. I'd call them the 90%+ of watch owners.

The ones you see posting in this thread are the self-selecting group who probably come across as more intense because there is almost no support for the level of concern with etiquette they wish to have outside the moneyed elite on the East coast. They care, and don't have enough ......s for it.


----------



## kngspook (Dec 22, 2010)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



eddiesleftfoot said:


> I have worked in business for nearly 30 years and worn a variety of watches from very formal dress watches to my Orange Monster, and always worn a suit, *yet never had a comments about what was on my wrist*.


I don't mean to pick on you specifically, and this isn't even specific to this debate, but I often see arguments of the form "I've done X and no one said anything.", and I just want to point out one thing: just because no one said anything to your face, doesn't mean they didn't judge you, doesn't mean that what you did won't alter one of their decisions later, or even that they won't say anything to someone else later.

For a wide variety of reasons, ranging from their shyness to a desire not to embarrass you in public to them wanting to believe that they themselves are not judgmental people, people will _frequently_ not speak up when they see something that they perceive as out of place, unusual, wrong, or even jarring (not that I'm suggesting that anything you guys are doing is or isn't any of those things). This is particularly true when the something in question is considered "superficial", which appropriate dressing standards often are, particularly when it's as tied (at least by perception) to wealth.

Therefore, I firmly believe the "well, no one said anything and therefore it has had no impact on people's perceptions" argument is fatally flawed.

But other than that, do carry on.


----------



## Scotsmen (May 17, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

52 pages - man I thought we were all watch lovers rather than dedicated followers of other people's fashion / perceptions.

I say wear what you want on your wrist (unless dangerous) and enjoy your passion


----------



## eddiesleftfoot (Oct 27, 2012)

Fair enough. Maybe in true English style they are secretly thinking "what a ghastly man, look at his vulgar watch" whilst smiling politely at me 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## rjustice21 (Jun 29, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Scotsmen said:


> 52 pages - man I thought we were all watch lovers rather than dedicated followers of other people's fashion / perceptions.
> 
> I say wear what you want on your wrist (unless dangerous) and enjoy your passion


No one has said otherwise.


----------



## Scotsmen (May 17, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



rjustice21 said:


> No one has said otherwise.


Clearly I can't read then


----------



## LesserBlackDog (Jun 24, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I have a question - one which that doesn't involve the pairing of watches and attire, per se, but it's a topic on which I would like to solicit the opinions of those who understand and respect the conventions of appropriate attire.

I recently acquired a gently-used Ball Ohio, a watch that is either about as close to a dress watch as a sports watch can get, or as close to a sports watch as a dress watch can get. In any case, it's not a pure dress watch but not especially sporty by today's anything-goes, "dress diver" standards. The dial is a matte silver, not a pure white, for whatever that's worth.

View attachment 1109613


I'm currently wearing the watch on the stock bracelet, which is certainly nice, but not really to my taste aesthetically. It's a bit shiny and a bit bland. I would like to change it to a strap.

The obvious choice would be dark brown or black croc-grain, or some other understated leather strap. The problem is that I'd like to wear this watch as often as possible, and my summer lifestyle isn't necessarily conducive to good leather care... I do a lot of sweating and am in and around water, mud, plant goo, fish guts, and other assorted gunk with some frequency.

My question is whether a simple, black, natural rubber strap would look offensively wrong with this style of watch, or if the watch is just sporty enough that a simple sports strap might just work. Would a rubber strap on this watch be the equivalent of wearing Gore-Tex hiking boots with a worsted wool business suit, or more like a pair of brogued leather boots with a rustic tweed sportcoat?

The rubber strap I have in mind is the Hirsch Pure, which is much more lightweight and comfortable than many of the bulky rubber straps available.

View attachment 1109611


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



LesserBlackDog said:


> I have a question - one which that doesn't involve the pairing of watches and attire, per se, but it's a topic on which I would like to solicit the opinions of those who understand and respect the conventions of appropriate attire.
> 
> The rubber strap I have in mind is the Hirsch Pure, which is much more lightweight and comfortable than many of the bulky rubber straps available.
> 
> View attachment 1109611


Gorgeous watch LBD. My personal opinion is that a black rubber strap would generally not work with a watch as dressy as that one but the Hirsch Pure looks like it might be an exception.

I say try it out. Worst case, you blow a few bucks on an inexpensive rubber strap.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Honestly, I think it looks like a cheap, imitation-leather band. If you are looking rubber I'd be thinking a bold, textured rubber strap that no question looks like it was meant for resisting frog poop. Maybe one that is contoured to fit the case. No suggestions at present, but I did see a sweet Abel chrono with such a strap recently on a wruw thread.

Personally, I think i would rather leave the Ball at home or glove compartment with a nice leather strap and wear a different watch in the field.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Was thinking about something the strap on this Chopard:
View attachment 1111728

But I dunno. That Ball second hand and other features really make it hard for me to see this watch as less than elegant with a touch of sporty.


----------



## LesserBlackDog (Jun 24, 2011)

I bought the strap and wore the watch on it for a few days. Unfortunately, while it was very comfortable and fairly good-looking, it did end up looking basically like a black leather strap, which isn't the look I was trying to go for. Fortunately I have some other watches with the same lug width so the strap won't go to waste.

The problem with trying those sportier straps is that I am very particular about length on my rubber straps (I have very small wrists and almost all rubber straps run super long anyway) and the Hirsch Pure is one of the few nice rubber straps I've found that comes in a shorter length. Oh well. 

Got the watch on brown croc now. I ordered a navy HD NATO strap to see if maybe that will work better than the rubber. I always thought my Hammy Jazzmaster looked surprisingly good on a neutral-colored NATO strap, and the Jazzmaster is a fairly similar style to the Engineer II Ohio.


----------



## dewood (Jul 27, 2013)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Will_f said:


> Gorgeous watch LBD. My personal opinion is that a black rubber strap would generally not work with a watch as dressy as that one but the Hirsch Pure looks like it might be an exception.
> 
> I say try it out. Worst case, you blow a few bucks on an inexpensive rubber strap.


+1 agree with no plain rubber strap with dressy


----------



## Sergi0 (Aug 8, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

I was expecting this thread to have more pictures of people with outfits and watches to match but I was wrong. I think that many members prior have stated the obvious that certain watches are expected with certain outfits in certain work environments. I think one would need to use discretion when wearing a sports watch with a suit and is a banker at a meeting.

I think it is totally environment dependent when it comes to wearing a certain watch with your certain outfit. In the office, (depends on the office) I have seen people wearing non-matching watches with their outfits and have seen colleagues do double takes but did not once mention a word about it. I think you need to be aware that people do not go out of their way to mention these things as it is your own responsibility to know the dress code of the office (or at least ask around - or better yet observe).

I also think that having a versatile watch goes a long way to buying a whole bunch of watches to suit the occasion. Perhaps, budget-allowing minimizing a watch collection to three main functions can help (dress, casual, favorite-versatile watch).

This thread is interesting though as many people have different opinions on what is acceptable. The irony is that some guys are just not that great at dressing up or dressing appropriately and getting advice from some of these guys in the forum can lead an unsuspecting reader to believe everything that person states.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Okay, I get matching metals and leathers. I don't usually wear gold watches, but I do have a couple of gold buckles to match my yellow gold vintage watches. I also have a fairly subtle two-tone buckle for my gold-capped Omega Constellation. However, what I don't have is a buckle to wear with my rose gold Doxa vintage watch. I love rose gold, but how do you match it to a buckle? I can't find any rose gold buckles out there, so what are people doing when they wear a rose gold watch? "Jailing" (i.e. walking around with their pants below their butt)?

BTW, I have a yellow gold wedding band and I don't bother matching to that. I got married before I started collecting watches and worrying about such things as accessorizing.


----------



## eddiesleftfoot (Oct 27, 2012)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Someone actually did a double take over a watch?? Really??

Ridiculous.


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

Chronopolis;4193766... said:


> I, for one, think the idea of wearing a suit with a G-shock opens up myriad of intellectually challenging directions. Questions concerning hierarchy, order, rebellion, individualism, conformity, decency, modernity, tradition, etc are all there... wrapped in the wrapper of "taste" and "personal style".


I must say your opening post for this thread isn't quite what I thought I'd see.

As for sartorial choices among one's threads and one's watches, I tend to fall on the more traditional side of things. Which is to say, barring some specific reason to opt for whimsical in the situation one'll be in:

Formal: Simple, uncluttered (nor more than three hands and if one must, a date); white/silver, gold metal, black dials, or dark blue if one is wearing a blue-black dinner jacket; thin. Something with a "days of yore" look will also work. For me, Calatrava 5120 is it, but anything of its ilk (style and elegance wise, not necessarily price) is fine too, for example, Rolex Cellini or Rolex Prince, Hamilton Ventura (fine if one is 35 or younger), Breguet Classique (black band preferred, but metal is okay) Cartier Tank (black strap), any similar watch bearing diamonds on the face, but no Rolex Oyster-style watch. 


Upscale Business Attire (i.e., Fortune 500 boardrooms, Senate chambers, The White House, _et al_): More or less the same as formal, and anything not jewel covered that one might have worn for formal will work in this situation. This is where most Rolex Oyster-styles are very appropriate, but a Submariner or YM isn't. Obviously there are exceptions, for example, finds oneself in Feadship's boardroom, I see nothing wrong with wearing a Yachtmaster. Or, if one is a the pilot and has been asked to appear in a meeting of principals, some of whom one just flew to the destination, wearing one's pilot watch is just fine. I like to wear my Royal Oak for these types of situations, but just about anything that's designed to do nothing but tell time and perhaps the moon's phase will be fine here so long as it's not cartoon colored. I don't think a G-Shock or Deep Blue belongs here for the most part, yet at for a meeting at Disney, a Mickey Mouse watch would still be fine. If you are an active military officer who serves mostly in action, rather than behind a desk and in a meeting of generals, a military style watch will be okay. 
 Obviously, if one is the CEO, President, Prince, etc., one can set one's own rules for the fact is that it's most likely the other folks present will be there at your behest, and not the other way around. Indeed, regardless of one's social or political standing, in any situation where one is the ranking participant, one is always free to do as one chooses. Lastly, Now, though the two environments described above are ones where I think it matters that one use good judgment and exhibit some reserved taste and restraint. However, most folks don't ever, or at best rarely, find themselves in such places and company, so for most folks, guidelines like mine above probably don't matter. So let's think about places were most folks might reasonably find themselves.


General Business Attire (anyplace were suits are required, but the majority of folks present won't be ultimate decision makers): Pretty much anything that doesn't look like something a person who's yet to reach the age of majority would wear is fine. Here too, however, I would suggest eschewing strictly purpose-built watches such as divers and military offerings, but wearing such a thing would hardly be a problem. That said, if one is wearing a Rolex Sub to work, but one wouldn't wear a $200 watch looking very similar to the same venue, I would ask why? Because it's a Rolex? I don't need an answer, but I will say that if that's what one does, I would think it little other than just being showy, bragging if you will. 
It is in part to suggest one avoid appearing ostentatious that I will nearly always -- barring there being a specific purpose -- recommend to a person buying their first expensive watch that they choose something that is suitable for one of the two prior circumstances. It's impossible to be thought flamboyant or peacocky wearing, say a Date-just or Altiplano, with your suit because the watch is unquestionably appropriate to the attire. On the other hand, arriving to sit the day out in your cubicle with a Submariner or Daytona on all day has to at least to some extent beg the question, "Why," when it's obvious to everyone you aren't going diving or race driving that day.​

Country Club Casual (C3) and Parties: This is the realm of no restraint. Whatever works for you will be just fine. 
Business Casual: Here you can almost wear anything. I would advise not wearing anything super elegant like the Calatrava 5120 (but the Calatrava 5127 or a Rolex President would be fine), or anything with jewels on the face or band or that is generallly standout-ish or otherwise "blingy." 
Sporting Events where you are a competitor: If a purpose built watch is appropriate, wear it. Otherwise, just avoid choosing something overly dressy. 
Going about the mundane tasks of daily life: Just about anything that's appropriate to whatever you wear when you do these things. (see above). 

So having written the stuff above, I think it's worth keeping in mind the followiong:

If you appear somewhere wearing an inappropriately casual or formal watch, so long as you aren't also a gate crasher, nobody's going to throw you out. It's your personality or brains that earned you the right to be there, not your watch. 
If you give off the air of being wealthy, people will expect you to wear appropriately styled "stuff" (watches and clothing) 
If you regularly wear watches or jewelry that are inconsistent with the time and place in which you wear them, you can expect sooner or later some sort of comment, other than "I like your watch," that you may not really want. 
All things being equal, your watch isn't what you should want folks, especially folks who don't, or barely, know you, to notice about you. Some passerby in the hallway, or relative stranger in a meeting, at the club or office may notice your Audemar P., Glashutte, Piaget, VC or JLC and comment positively on it, but unless they too are a "watchie," they will likely have no idea that you spent a large sum for it, and that's as it should be. I would advise that if one is going to wear high-end watches when moving among the general public, the comparatively unknown ones are a better pick. Wear your Pateks, Cartiers, Rolexes and Omegas when you will be in places were everyone else will also be wearing expensive watches, or at least their finest watch. 

OP, you wrote about wrappers of taste and personal swank. I think everyone has taste, but sometimes the tast. I also think that where one finds oneself socially must guide what's appropriate and what's not. As far as personal style goes, I think there are plenty of options to exhibit that and still be situationally correct. For example:

Modern Style:


Formal: Piaget Altiplano. Basic version or square (with or without seconds), Double Jeu, Lapis face, or Grey enamel (GOA36082), Movado Museum Watch, Hamilton Ventura (if ever one needed evidence that what's old is new again, the Ventura fits) 
Boardroom: Piaget Polo, Piaget Altiplano (basic square or circle), AP Jules Audemar (15157, 15120BC), Omega Constellation, Movado Museum, Rolex Day-Date II (black face, black numerals, white hands), Rolex Danaos XL (black and white face), Rolex Cellinium, Rolex Prince 
General Business: Any boardroom watch, Kobold Spirit of America, JLC Memovox (this is nifty because it has a diveresque bezel, but the bezel actually holds the numerals for the hours), U-Boat 1001 
Whimsical Style (Note: often a strap will do the trick to achieve whimsy)

Formal: Jacob & Co Caligula or Royal, several of the watches listed in formal above, Arnold and Son HMS Dragon, Arnold and Son Perpetual Moon. By my guidelines, however, I'd have to grant that technically speaking, showing up in a tux and wearing a divers watch wuold also be called whimsical, expecially if it's not in a traditionally formal color, say your green Rolex Sub, but then if there's something else green -- say your malachite or emerald studs and links, and your black and green stockings and green bow tie -- it could be made to work. 
Although again, I'd still wonder why (just to myself, for there's nothing to gain for either of us by my voicing it), given that you can afford emerald jewelry you don't also have some sort of green themed, understated, elegant thin watch, be it an expensive one or not. For the fact is that you didn't just that morning learn you were going to a formal event and surely, affording emeralds and a Submariner, you could have, at a minimum, picked up a low priced watch sporting green that had the right character for formal wear. Moreover, had you done so, I would applaud your whimsy, for in such a case, the whimsy is the point, not the gradeuer of the adornments that used to achieve it.​

Boardroom: Cartier Ballon Bleu, Piaget Altiplano with non-standard dial color/pattern, Arnold and Son Moon Meterorite and almost anything else A&S make that's not just a straight forward watch. 
General Business: Omega Planet Ocean (orange bezel, fine; orange band, not so much), any number of models from U-Boat (Classico or U-42, among others), any of the A&S suggestions above. I especially like the U-Boat and A&S choices for this category because it's whimsy without flaunting expense. 
So, there you have it. My thoughts on what watch to wear and when. I'm sure not everyone will agree with or follow my approach, but I can be sure that anyone who does need not spend any time thinking about whether their watch and sartorial pairings are in appropriate. Moreover, I'd add that guidelines like these are for two groups of folks, one very small and one larger:


The person whose guidelines they are. That's the small group. 
People who just don't have a good sense about matters style and therefore, in their own circles, fashion leaders. 
If one really does have good style sense and good taste (the two aren't the same), one can make one's own rules and one's choices will be thought chichi rather than gauche.

All the best.

Cheers,
Tony


----------



## eamonn345 (Sep 29, 2013)

What are your thoughts as to when a tt sub should be worn?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

eamonn345 said:


> What are your thoughts as to when a tt sub should be worn?


What are YOUR thoughts as to actually reading the thread? A thread that is overwhelmingly likely to have had this same question as yours already asked, (ad)dressed, answered, tossed, slapped, roasted, baked, and served several times over?


----------



## tony20009 (Sep 25, 2013)

eamonn345 said:


> What are your thoughts as to when a tt sub should be worn?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


If you were addressing me, I reply, anytime one finds oneself in water and too on any other typical occasion, yet remaining modest, less formal than a posh boardroom or formal affair. Indeed, however, I suspect there be found a time and place where any casual watch could rightly, but rarely, find a place among finery, and thus, a plebeian keeper duly court with kings. So too might come cause for Patek to down from lofty perch and ride wrist among the wretched, wonton world. Though either case may on some day be seen, such sights are, like penury to a prince, or monetary magnanimity to mendicants, dwellers in novelty not normalcy.

All the best.


----------



## brummyjon (Jan 27, 2010)

tony20009 said:


> If you were addressing me, I reply, anytime one finds oneself in water and too on any other typical occasion, yet remaining modest, less formal than a posh boardroom or formal affair. Indeed, however, I suspect there be found a time and place where any casual watch could rightly, but rarely, find a place among finery, and thus, a plebeian keeper duly court with kings. So too might come cause for Patek to down from lofty perch and ride wrist among the wretched, wonton world. Though either case may on some day be seen, such sights are, like penury to a prince, or monetary magnanimity to mendicants, dwellers in novelty not normalcy.
> 
> All the best.


Where does wonton come into it? 









CWC - Junghans Max Bill - Seiko - Longines - Cartier


----------



## isitagainstthelawtoargue (Sep 13, 2013)

This is a simplistic approach:

Weekend watch: Diver

Weekday watch: Thin chronograph

Dress watch: Thin tank.

Down and dirty watch: A watch that you know can be worn in the worst conditions and you w

For me this consists of
1. Weekend: Longines Hydroconquest
2. Everyday: Baume and Mercier Capeland S. Chronograph
3. Dress: EBEL Brasilia Automatic
4. Down and dirty watch: Casio G Shock Original


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

The watch a lawer should wear while on the job should be one that exudes power yet does not elude style. Lawyers need to be stylish, while at the same time give the perception of power. They should have a bespoke suit, and wear a watch such as this Tissot T-Classic Desire. It's small, but that's okay since it doesn't distract from the perfectly tailored custom suit. The roman numerals add to both the style and power you are going for.

View attachment 1253910


----------



## Dave S (Sep 17, 2012)

Question about casual office style.
Today was dress down friday, so in flamboyant style I wore my Seiko Orange Monster. 
I paired this with a bright orange fleece jumper, same colour as the watch face, navy blue jeans, and Asic trainers, with orange trim, including the bouncy sole bit.

Well matched?

Dave


----------



## Fi33pop (Aug 5, 2013)

Dave S said:


> Question about casual office style.
> Today was dress down friday, so in flamboyant style I wore my Seiko Orange Monster.
> I paired this with a bright orange fleece jumper, same colour as the watch face, navy blue jeans, and Asic trainers, with orange trim, including the bouncy sole bit.
> 
> ...


I guess dress down Friday means different things at different workplaces. I would dress down, but so far down as to be below sea level where I'll feel the need to wear a diver!


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Dave S said:


> Question about casual office style.
> Today was dress down friday, so in flamboyant style I wore my Seiko Orange Monster.
> I paired this with a bright orange fleece jumper, same colour as the watch face, navy blue jeans, and Asic trainers, with orange trim, including the bouncy sole bit.
> 
> ...


I think we'll need a picture for a full evaluation.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

johnj said:


> The watch a lawer should wear while on the job should be one that exudes power yet does not elude style. Lawyers need to be stylish, while at the same time give the perception of power. They should have a bespoke suit, and wear a watch such as this Tissot T-Classic Desire. It's small, but that's okay since it doesn't distract from the perfectly tailored custom suit. The roman numerals add to both the style and power you are going for.
> 
> View attachment 1253910


Well, you're probably new here [edit: not that new] so I guess I better be blunt: Your taste is good but your prioritization is backwards. No self respecting WIS would wear a $250 watch if he could afford a bespoke suit. More likely he'd by a decent off the rack suit tailored to his needs and spend the savings on a nicer watch. Why? Because that's what WISers do.


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

Wasn't suggesting the Tissot. I only used it for the visual.  BTW, it's 34mm. Patek would be the one you want if you can afford it. The Tissot is a very good homage though.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Dave S said:


> Question about casual office style.
> Today was dress down friday, so in flamboyant style I wore my Seiko Orange Monster.
> I paired this with a bright orange fleece jumper, same colour as the watch face, navy blue jeans, and Asic trainers, with orange trim, including the bouncy sole bit.
> 
> ...


Dude, just custom an orange suit from your haberdasher/tailor and you can wear your OM every day! [URL]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XGBdz9Dt_k8/TGqv0QeFj0I/AAAAAAAAADY/Mk3UDxQyNrg/s1600/orange+suit.jpg[/URL][ /IMG]

For reference: [URL]http://mirror.uncyc.org/wiki/Orange_suit[/URL]


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

johnj said:


> The watch a lawer should wear while on the job should be one that exudes power yet does not elude style. Lawyers need to be stylish, while at the same time give the perception of power. They should have a bespoke suit, and wear a watch such as this Tissot T-Classic Desire.


Power? You're thinking of generals, executives, and politicians.

Lawyers should exude authoritativeness, not authority. And they should demonstrate success, though that rarely means ostentation. They function by persuasion, not command.

But Roman numerals exude tradition, not any of the above. It's a conservative choice, but only to those who know watch history.

Rick "who owns several watches that cost less that this Tissot that would fit under the sleeve of a bespoke shirt, and not call attention to themselves" Denney


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Lawyers, Politicians and Military Generals? Sounds like some kind of test as in, of these three professional occupations, which one is dissimilar to the other two such that it does not belong in the same category as the others?

Let's see: while a great many senior politicians and in particular world leaders, such as Canadian prime ministers and US presidents both past and present, are drawn from the practicing bar (lawyers), or at the least trained in the law (law school graduates, who likely passed the bar of a state or province but went onto a career in politics instead of as an alternative to the actual practice of law). Same is simply not true of military generals, with few exceptions. Going thus with the generals.

On the other hand, when seen from the view of their roles, as to what the 3 actually do, then I'm going with lawyers as being different from the other 2. This, insofar as generals and politicans both devise and carry out strategies and plans, retaining a lawyer qua lawyer to assist them in doing so, for counsel and advice, but it is they and they alone who act upon the advice and decide what to do with it (in which case, politicians and generals are legal clients of the lawyer, such that they are not the same).

Ah, but if we see this question as one of "power", let's see. There is no higher authority in the land than the Supreme Court which can--and has--issued marching orders to presidents, etc., and its decisions are the law (followed by the lower courts/judicial hierarchy-- pecking order). Judges are of course senior lawyers, having been elevated from the practicing bar to the bench. In addition, presidents and senior politicians along with government officials and staff seek advice from specialists--i.e., lawyers and military generals (although generals report to the president, the president seeks out their advice on military matters, hence they have specialized knowledge, too). Generals also and likewise issue marching orders (military hierachy--pecking order). Accordingly, could be argued that of these 3 that it's politicians who are the "odd man" out. (Keeping in mind also that, unlike politicians who are elected, judges and generals are not, so a difference there, too). But if this were about watches and the differences--this being a watch board after all!--then military generals once again are the answer, seeing as unlike lawyers and politicians who wear watches as an accoutrement to their wardrobe (appearance in public sends a message to the public, whatever that particular message may be), generals do not deal with the public and moreover like police discussed above wear a watch as a tool (so back to them again, I agree! ).

Like the hands on a watch itself, can go around and around the dial all day with this one! (Kidding, just having some fun). But all fun aside, a $250 watch on one who can afford a bespoke suit (which includes Barrister's attire, robes and waist coats, etc. by the way) simply will not do. Heck, law school books cost more than that, as does a monthly subsciption to an electronic legal data base. Don't even get me started on the costs of licensing, membership/practice dues or practice insurance!!

[Think: Rolex DJ (very popular and long-standing with good reason, with executives, senior politicians, diplomats, etc. too), and other dress watches of course such as JLC, Piaget, Patek, Breguet, VC, etc. Dress watches in a classic sense. As if off to meet the Queen, as above said. (Typically, those who meet with the Senate or PM/Pres, Board of Directors, etc. are there at THEIR invitation, at their leisure NOT yours; IF granted an audience before the Court, likewise it's the judge's court, not yours, and you want the judge to do something for YOUR CLIENT, right?  ). ]

PLEASE NOTE THAT, if a brand new entrant to the profession or something, however, then a Tissot, Hamilton, Baume & Mercier or ANY number of OTHER affordable/semi-affordable dress watches (classic, traditional sense, on strap) are fine. NO BODY expects you to wear a Patek or anything like that when first starting out, though certainly not wrong if you just so happen to have one and do. (Another hint: dressing like the partners and big clients will be noticed, meaning you'll actually get to meet the clients sooner rather than later if look the part, assuming your work product and demeanour are up to par. That said, no matter how good your work product is--even if a wunderkin--you'll NEVER meet a client of the Firm or go to court on their behalf if your appearance/image is off, but if truly a wunderkin might be lucky and get relegated to the backroom--i.e., research, where clients can't see you  . So look around, take notice, and do as your supervising attorney(s) and the partners do!)

Dressing professionally gives people credibility--it shows you care about your appearance and take the job seriously as has been said. Expected traits for professionals working in the law are as follows: trustworthy, mature, authoritative, knowledgeable, organized, detail-oriented, efficient, confident, and formal, among others. Therefore, for both women and men alike, the accepted (and highly recommended) attire is and will be characterized as follows: traditional and authoritative (classic and tailored, conservative cut), trustworthy, knowledgeable and reliable (predictable use of line, colour and texture, etc.), organized and efficient, with an attention to detail (this is also where your watch choice comes in, details matter: one should always look polished, put together and professional).

Notable Exception: entertainment lawyers can get away with a little "bling" like diamonds on a Rolex Day-Date President or AP Royal Oak if that's what their successful clients wear during a meeting with them (just not when appearing before a judge on their behalf). Why? Lawyers need to present themselves in a manner that makes their audience relate to them -AND-- fits their audience's perceived image of someone in their role.

Cheers


----------



## Dave S (Sep 17, 2012)

OK, I dont have the actual attire picture, but it was this jumper and trainers, but with with Navy blue jeans:



paired with my new Orange Monster (thats the same jumper):



To much, or superbly matched?

Dave


----------



## zhan (Nov 21, 2009)

Lawyer with a 250 dollar tissot ? I wouldnt trust him even if he does pro bono for me...

Every lawyer I've had all had gold rolexes and I think that's a standard amongst them perhaps? 

You need to give the client the perception that you are successful and wearing cheap stuff tells me you are struggling to pay the bills 


Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Precisely WHY we groom them, Zhan. 

Used to be that the "boys" and "girls" knew better, already groomed but alas. Casualisation of society in North America not to mention (in North America, and rather proud of this in fact) that MERIT goes a long way here and always did, based on intellect and perseverance in fact, such that kids off the farm--young men and women both--with the grades, etc. as opposed to the connections / family (still helps, let's be honest here, but not the be-all, end-all here as in some places, in North America merit is what counts) . Thus, get if worthy to go to law and medical school here, and change their "stars" (what North America is and has always been about: land of opportunity, right to pursue happiness, go as far as your talent, etc. allows, based on merit not what your grandfather did, and that's great, isn't it? I think so, too!). Only problem is, sometimes, not exactly "groomed". Though most "get it" by the time they actually graduate law or med school, some don't. What articles-of-clerkship and internships are for of course; a process. If you the client aren't convinced in their abilities, then won't retain them, simple enough and makes sense--appearance sized up before they even open their mouth or breif case, yes? After all, it's only YOUR hide (business success before the share holders and/or investors, family "jewels"/offspring--aka visitation and/or custody, etc., and/or liberty and freedom i.e. crim allegations, etc. that's on the line, right? If not convinced, frankly, well within your right as the client to go elsewhere and why it is that the attorney-client privilege exists, not to mention your Constitutional right to retain/hire an attorney of YOUR choice, provided you can afford it that is. (Otherwise, you might qualify for Legal Aid in Canada -or- in the USA a public defender will be appointed for you ... Pro Bono you say? Well, in light of their clients, know better than to take off their watch when washing their hands and leave it laying around--true, presumption of innocence and EVERYONE is INNOCENT until PROVEN otherwise in a Court of Law, but you know, some did it, right? So don't be leaving that nice watch just laying around.  ). 

Same when it comes to a patient meeting a surgeon, whom you must trust to actually get you off the table, do their utmost best, so that you actually breathe, walk and live once they are done operating on you.  . Sooner the "new recruits" get that, sooner off they'll be. Same thing goes for the future execs, senior politicians and diplomats, assuming they actually see themselves being successful in their desired role, that is: ever meet an angry group of stock holders at the annual meeting, never mind if a pre-IPO company a "shark" or angel financier? BEST get their confidence, and keep it or else. (Like I said, Zhan, image is everything, without which there's no need to speak b/c since, without that initial confidence, no body will pay much attention to what you have to say when you actually open your mouth, no matter the wisdom/power of your words, and why it is--and let's get back to basics here-that generals have stars on their uniforms, and judges with their robes have special sashes so as to distinguish them from lawyers, whereas lawyers (and senior politicians, etc.) have their IMAGE. (OK, lawyers have recognition of course along the way, such as special letters after our names and so forth, beyond the JD/LL.B.--and title of "ESQ" in many places, such as LL.M (specialization) and in Canada most jurisdictions the QC distinction (Queen's Counsel), with all who are called to the bar, regardless of experience/seniority, being OFFICERS of the Court--taking an oath to defend the Constitution (and HRM the Queen in Canada, having already said and will repeat that it's HRM's Courts, and off to meet the queen herself when off to court one goes). Must look the part, obviously. And above all else, to have a reason to go there in the first place, instill CONFIDENCE in our clients, right? Couldn't possibly agree with you more (spoken like a true client of legal services, which I have no qualms in believing at all. And EXACTLY. Enough said!  ).

As to the Rolex gold watch you are most observant, and right. It is a favourite, and with very good reason. The true "from Beach to Boardroom" watch, always was, still is, and if you will "mother" of all modern wrist watches. (If you are not a WIS and have only one nice watch then THAT is the one to have; that said, if a WIS like I am, then on top of that have others of course, which I do, though am a firm believer that without a Rolex gold Date/DJ/Etc. one's dress watch collection quite simply is NOT complete (never mind hisorically important watches, which that line-up is). Then, what can I say: LOVE dress watches actually, go so well with my robes and/or my suit!  

Details, really. And what as has already been said professionalism is all about. Or, to put it another way: whole world is a stage; appearances/image matters, and always did. 

Cheers

BTW, Dave: good thinking re: leaving your Gold Rolex or Patek along with your nice suit at home though, with the new springs, etc. Rolex (parachrom) and Patek (silicon, developed equally by itself, Rolex and Swatch R&D, though Rolex wasn't satisfied with it hence went on to develop its own parachrom, though that silicon while not as nice as the parachorm is to be sure pretty nice, too), can be forever confident had you brought along your Rolex DJ or Patek Nautilus, no problems. Don't come in orange, though the new Rolex EXP II does--orange GMT hand! Has Rolex' brand new patented shock system, too!! Fine for business travel, pilots, explorers and casual "Fridays" perhaps (white dial, that is), but not with a formal/business-formal suit.  As to the original orange monster, that would be Doxa Dive Sub (dive watch of course, finding via tests that orange was more visible in murky water and why they came out with it, with DOXA having a history in sport & rec diving as well, actually helping Rolex in fact test the HEV that Rolex invented and patented for military and pro, commercial divers -- i.e., US Navy Sea-Lab and COMEX, sat diving, which HEV first appeared on the Rolex SD, itself a modified Sub, with Doxa releasing its version for sport & rec, with Rolex' blessing OF COURSE (what working together is all about!). Might want to check it out.


----------



## zhan (Nov 21, 2009)

Sea-Wolf said:


> Precisely WHY we groom them, Zhan.
> 
> Used to be that the "boys" and "girls" knew better, already groomed but alas. Casualisation of society in North America not to mention (in North America, and rather proud of this in fact) that MERIT goes a long way here and always did, based on intellect and perseverance in fact, such that kids off the farm--young men and women both--with the grades, etc. as opposed to the connections / family (still helps, let's be honest here, but not the be-all, end-all here as in some places, in North America merit is what counts) . Thus, get if worthy to go to law and medical school here, and change their "stars" (what North America is and has always been about: land of opportunity, right to pursue happiness, go as far as your talent, etc. allows, based on merit not what your grandfather did, and that's great, isn't it? I think so, too!). Only problem is, sometimes, not exactly "groomed". Though most "get it" by the time they actually graduate law or med school, some don't. What articles-of-clerkship and internships are for of course; a process. If you the client aren't convinced in their abilities, then won't retain them, simple enough and makes sense--appearance sized up before they even open their mouth or breif case, yes? After all, it's only YOUR hide (business success before the share holders and/or investors, family "jewels"/offspring--aka visitation and/or custody, etc., and/or liberty and freedom i.e. crim allegations, etc. that's on the line, right? If not convinced, frankly, well within your right as the client to go elsewhere and why it is that the attorney-client privilege exists, not to mention your Constitutional right to retain/hire an attorney of YOUR choice, provided you can afford it that is. (Otherwise, you might qualify for Legal Aid in Canada -or- in the USA a public defender will be appointed for you ... Pro Bono you say? Well, in light of their clients, know better than to take off their watch when washing their hands and leave it laying around--true, presumption of innocence and EVERYONE is INNOCENT until PROVEN otherwise in a Court of Law, but you know, some did it, right? So don't be leaving that nice watch just laying around.  ).
> 
> ...


I believe it should be second nature, you cant groom people to do a certain thing or act a certain way.
Thats why some doctors drive hyundais, while their colleagues are driving bentleys.
Its not because they arent successful, its just they werent born with the same awareness genes.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Dave S said:


> OK, I dont have the actual attire picture, but it was this jumper and trainers, but with with Navy blue jeans:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you can rock the clothes, the OM is fine.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Thank your for your succinct post. Much clearer now. 



Sea-Wolf said:


> Lawyers, Politicians and Military Generals? Sounds like some kind of test as in, of these three professional occupations, which one is dissimilar to the other two such that it does not belong in the same category as the others?
> 
> Let's see: while a great many senior politicians and in particular world leaders, such as Canadian prime ministers and US presidents both past and present, are drawn from the practicing bar (lawyers), or at the least trained in the law (law school graduates, who likely passed the bar of a state or province but went onto a career in politics instead of as an alternative to the actual practice of law). Same is simply not true of military generals, with few exceptions. Going thus with the generals.
> 
> ...


----------



## eamonn345 (Sep 29, 2013)

Chronopolis said:


> What are YOUR thoughts as to actually reading the thread? A thread that is overwhelmingly likely to have had this same question as yours already asked, (ad)dressed, answered, tossed, slapped, roasted, baked, and served several times over?


Jog along dude. No need for any rudeness. There's enough internet trolls as there is..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

^ Indeed that is TRUE, not all can be groomed, but most dare I believe CAN be helped. 

Cheers

PS Will, so long that we are clear.  (love it, and so true, isn't it? Some think too much. Just do!).


----------



## ev13wt (Oct 21, 2013)

Never wear a watch more expensive than the person you are dealing with in business.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

ev13wt said:


> Never wear a watch more expensive than the person you are dealing with in business.


Probably good advice unless your business is selling watches. Every watch SA I've ever met seems to be rocking a third of my annual income on his/her wrist.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

ev13wt said:


> Never wear a watch more expensive than the person you are dealing with in business.


That'd absurd! Very, very few of the public wear a watch, let alone an expensive one.


----------



## ev13wt (Oct 21, 2013)

geoffbot said:


> That'd absurd! Very, very few of the public wear a watch, let alone an expensive one.


I would guess this entire forum is less than 1% of people in the world wearing "expensive" watches. So who wears the other ones?

I am just saying it's a psycological advantage in business. To quantify it, any watch under 5000 is probably fine. I'm talking about showing up at a parter company / customer in a Ferrari instead of a bmw, merc or lexus. It can send a wrong message.

But it depends on the type of business, just like Will_f said.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

The people on this forum represent a very, very small percentage, indeed (might say we not only like watches, but that we're watch crazy around here), but in terms of "expensive" that isn't the case, and it's all relative, depending on where one lives in the world, what tax bracket they are in and what they do for a living, etc. In the EU, Europeans are much into art and fashion than in the US--and that also means and it's plain to see merely on visiting that Europeans enjoy nice clothes, fine wine, good food and art which includes watches, nice watches ("expensive" watches) are routine fare. Not so in the USA where most people (Joe and Jane Average) do not really care about watches, much less spend anything on them (where 1,000 or more for a watch is considered "too expensive" but won't have a second thought about dropping thousands on in-home entertainment systems, big screen TVs and electronics, latest greatest I-Pod because last month's is so last season, etc.). Different culture, and where unlike in the EU people go out for dinner, actually take a lunch break and go out for lunch, enjoy galleries and the performing arts, etc., much more aware of "public" vs. "private" realm and therefore also dress better, enjoy fashion as well (always did), Americans by contrast tend to stay home and entertain themselves but, when they do go out, enjoy loud entertainment--big screen TVs unlike in the EU are to be found everywhere. Canada as Euro-America is in between, depends very much where you are in Canada in turn. Meantime, most of the world's wealth is concentrated in the G-8/OECD economically advanced, democratic nations; while China, Brazil and India are quickly developing, thing is, most people in those nations do not have hot and cold running water, much less proper sewer systems, cable and other things which we in the "Western World" take for granted. So, no, not everyone in the world can enjoy a nice watch, nor is it exactly a priority in their lives either. In Africa, where they don't even have food security in many parts, hardly do they care about such things, or at all. That said, back to North America: lawyers, doctors, politicians, diplomats, bankers and finance, etc. all have nice (read: "expensive") watches, not a problem and is part of the uniform as already said many times, and bears repeating once more. Go to Wall Street or Bay Street, and you'll see nice watches EVERYWHERE (it's a given). In Alberta, ranchers and the like also have nice watches, just don't see them wearing their gold Patek if you visit them when out on the range, as hardly is a nice dress watch meant for that, nor could it take any such abuse either. Anymore than you'll see Rolex Submariners on the wrist of a lawyer or judge if viewing the court proceedings from the public galley either. Nice watches, a time and a place for both. Thing is, most people out there and regardless who have and enjoy nice watches aren't likely to have a large wardrobe of them, a couple being more than enough same as they aren't likely to have the whole and entire gambit of every available electronic gadget imaginable in the market place, or a bazillion big screens in their houses either. Most 2-car garages containing just that-2, not a collection to be found hiding there either. Different people are into different things, different hobbies and collections if at all in turn. (Yes, we are a rather special group, aren't we? I think so. For some, it's an endless journey, never quite satisfied and constantly flipping; for others, it's about a collection so as to have and enjoy a nice wardrobe of different choices whereas for others it's about the auction, a collection enjoyed in the present yes but equally if not more about future value and hold). But if you wear a suit, a dress watch is proper, and a dress watch is or should be a staple in every gentleman's wardrobe no matter what. How often you wear it--or if you even like watches to begin with--tends to dictate what one is willing to pay for it. So, too, does the fact of what it is that one actually does for a living. Always has, always will and if in public as a matter of course must look the part, since the dawn of time, hasn't changed and won't. (Doesn't mean one needs a large wardrobe/collection of course, but personally I think life with just one would be boring. But that's me and I'm into watches, of course!  ). Cheers (Note: for some reason, unable to enter paragraphs on my device; posting anyway and may clean it up later so as to make it easier in terms of reading comprehension. And no, I'm not rushing out to buy some latest, greatest gadget; have all that I "need" and besides, would detract from the watch budget, as if THAT is going to happen! :-d ).


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Sea-Wolf, did you miss the lesson on paragraph spacing at school?  No offence intended but block text without appropriate paragraph spacing is unappealing.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> Sea-Wolf, did you miss the lesson on paragraph spacing at school?  No offence intended but block text without appropriate paragraph spacing is unappealing.


Sea Wolf is a lawyer. I think it was a condition of graduation from school that he perfect the art of obfuscatory writing.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Will_f said:


> Sea Wolf is a lawyer.[/QUOTE
> 
> So am I


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> Will_f said:
> 
> 
> > Sea Wolf is a lawyer.[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

While I charge by the unit most of my clients are professional litigants who appreciate brevity. I'll leave it at that!!


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

Brevity? Professionals must always and are expected to look the part. Is that brief enough for you? If you are in any way shape, way or form involved whatsoever in litigation, in any capacity, then you well know this, unless you like being turfed out of court rooms (which judges do). All been said before, and those who don't like to hear it, too bad. There are only 2 types of people in this world: those who know, and those who don't. If the latter, especially young people desirous of one day seeing themselves in the professions, etc., but not themselves from a family of professionals so as to have been personally groomed, they need to know and will "get it" for the sake of their own future. As to the rest, those who don't know and don't care to know, that's their problem now isn't it? If they don't care enough about their own appearance, etc., then why should I or anyone else care either. Paid by the minute, haven't been around much as of late as I am really very busy, no time for hobbies as of late; I am not a style consultant, and in which I have zero interest in being either, nor am I in need of one, or at all. Knowing these things since birth. Many here likewise don't need such counsel, but many others do. All been said before, hasn't changed any and won't. Can cry about it all they want. Carry on, then.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> While I charge by the unit most of my clients are professional litigants who appreciate brevity. I'll leave it at that!!


Didn't mean to offend. I was attempting humor without a net. In my defense I had a glass of bourbon in one hand, which made typing difficult.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Sea-Wolf said:


> Paid by the minute, haven't been around much as of late as I am really very busy, no time for hobbies as of late; I am not a style consultant, and in which I have zero interest in being either, nor am I in need of one, or at all.


That's what I'm talking about! Legal writing at its finest!


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Will_f said:


> Didn't mean to offend. I was attempting humor without a net. In my defense I had a glass of bourbon in one hand, which made typing difficult.


No worries - I realised that your tongue was planted quite firmly in your cheek. Spirits can do that!



Will_f said:


> That's what I'm talking about! Legal writing at its finest!


In semi-seriousness, there has been a worldwide movement in English speaking jurisdictions to encourage lawyers to adopt plain English. In 1936, Fred Rodell, a professor of law at Yale University, argued that there 'are two things wrong with almost all legal writing. One is its style. The other is its content. That, I think, about covers the ground.'

The use of so-called legalese, characterised by long sentences, high abstraction and general abstruseness, is diminishing in the legal profession. I personally see this as an unmitigated good, although your comments suggest a peverse fondness for the 'art'!


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

bhall41 said:


> The use of so-called legalese, characterised by long sentences, high abstraction and general abstruseness, is diminishing in the legal profession. I personally see this as an unmitigated good, although your comments suggest a peverse fondness for the 'art'!


I work in a profession where we are trained to use terse, active voice communication to the greatest extent possible. That generally means short sentences, well organized paragraphs, and lots of bullets. Occasionally I find myself missing the lyricism the English language is capable of.


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

Will_f said:


> I work in a profession where we are trained to use terse, active voice communication to the greatest extent possible. That generally means short sentences, well organized paragraphs, and lots of bullets. Occasionally I find myself missing the lyricism the English language is capable of.


That's an interesting observation. Getting away from legalese does not however mean losing sight of the art of communication and indeed persuasion, where required. The use of business jargon, replete with so-called 'weasel words', annoys me as least as much as legalese. Don Watson, a speech writer for former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, has writen an amusing book on the subject.


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

The English language, of Germanic origins and subsequently Francisized, is indeed not only capable of lyricism, but alive and well in the legal and other professions, I do assure you; as are formalities and the rules of dress ("dress codes" in the vernacular), and this "plain English" argument has nothing to do with Watches and Attire, being the subject of this thread, nor does it mean what some would have you believe either. I would suggest that, if you think that any of the above contains "legalese" or at all, then you have yet if ever to see a standard form commercial contract, or any such thing at all.  Writing and persuasion are indeed a term of art, and in this nation among a great many others are, I do assure you, alive and well. That being said, and in theme *with *this thread (highlighted for emphasis), is it truly any surprise that a politician, when out and about meeting with the general public in some general public forum, should be advised by his or her media handler to use short words and quick, snappy sentences otherwise known as "sound bytes" in media parlance, thus tailoring his speech to the audience at-hand, else find that jist of his message--if indeed there be a point to his message at all--would in the vernacular fly like an airplane right over their collective heads? Just as one dresses for the occasion, one tailors their speech to the audience at-hand (and that he's very likely wearing a suit with a nice dress watch while doing so remains the norm, with a caveat once again about there being some differences in culture and expectations among different places in the world being pertinent here, as everyone here knows by now or well should). And this brings us to differences in educational standards which exist around the world as well, and what are chiefly responsible for much of what some of you are complaining about. Yes, the lack of a quality public education in some places in the world (these nations well know who they are) is most troubling, has been for some time and, according to school teachers continues to deteriorate for many reasons, least of which is the Internet, and which is itself an illusion. It is not a substitute for proper research or knowledge, and while real collections containing real information and knowledge are available online, they are access restricted, meaning that they are not available to the general public. Speaking of research, fact is, most people in the world barring a proper education do not know how to conduct research these days, wrongfully believing that a mere google search or the wiki is fine, when it is not, and school children in this country among others well know this; those who try to pass the Wiki or other such search off in an effort to satisfy the requirements of an assigned research essay or project receive a "goose egg" should they even try. Another problem in some places around the world today, in addition to the above noted problem of education or, rather, lack thereof is some places as already said is the displacement of reason which is based on sound judgment and "thinking" with "feelings" these days. "Feelings" have no place in the court room when arguing a complex and important matter before the Court and fielding questions from the Bench, at a stock holders meeting when explaining to a bunch of angry investors at an annual meeting why it is that you, as a director, allowed the company and thus their shares to tank, or in the operating room when performing delicate heart surgery on a patient, where quite simply in all such situations as but examples, there being a host of others of course, no body cares how you "feel" about it, nor will you gain any sympathy if you cry. There being an old saying, while popular, seems on point, and is as follows: "if you can't handle the heat, you have no business being in the kitchen" or something along these lines. Yet another saying, and which is likewise on-point, reminds us that, if you wish to play ball and enter the field, then you do so and play by the rules. Accordingly, and as such, no body cares about how you "feel" about the dress code of a profession or establishment, where such codes exist; either you follow it, or you don't get in. It's that simple, and crying about it won't change a thing, so don't even try. The rest of us who are in, who look the part, etc., really do look great and assure you that we are indeed having a very good time!  (BTW, For the record, and unlike Australia, Canada and the EU does not really care what it is that the US may or may not be doing in terms of language, etc. Canada has among the very best schools in the world and our bar --including legal education requirements, etc.--were established before that of the US insofar as modern legal education and requirements trace from the Law Society of Upper Canada, which program was established rather immediately by then British citizens, many of them United Empire Loyalists, following the American Revolution, and such program was firmly based on the respect for the rule of law, institutions, etc. including property; this, so as to ensure among other things that nothing like that would ever happen here. Do feel free to read up more about all that should you desire, as it has nothing to do with watches though most definitely tied to professionalism, rules of conduct and formalities, which include the "Dress Code" and our respect, at least in this country, for legal traditions and institutions. That has not changed. As to members of the general public showing up sometimes in court dressing inappropriately, chewing gum and/or with the cell phones--judges shake their heads, then clear the court room so as to remove distractions and get on with the important business of deciding cases -- Note: still unable for whatever reason to enter paragraph breaks from this device. Will clean that up at some point, making it easier to read, but that hardly has anything to do with what is actually written, or at all; indeed, by German educational standards, where pages go on and on for days, without a sentence or other break, this in terms of the English language is but child's play!  ) ).


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

All that's well and good, Sea Wolf, but what did you just say?


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

SeaWolf, it's good to have you back. 

Rick "takes some pressure off me" Denney


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Rdenney said:


> SeaWolf, it's good to have you back.
> 
> Rick "takes some pressure off me" Denney


I'm not sure I can handle you two and Tony20000000009 at the same time...


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

What does any of this legal BS have to do with what watch to wear with a tux vs jeans?


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

~tc~ said:


> What does any of this legal BS have to do with what watch to wear with a tux vs jeans?


Why? You have a question about what watch to wear that wasn't answered in the first 300 posts?


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

~tc~ said:


> What does any of this legal BS have to do with what watch to wear with a tux vs jeans?


You do not like ? Skip and ignore.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Ok Seawolf: I converted it to non-legalese. 



Sea-Wolf said:


> The English language is capable of lyricism and used in legal and other professions. I believe this "plain English" argument has nothing to do with Watches and Attire. If you think that any of my previous posts contain "legalese" then you have yet if ever to see a standard form commercial contract.
> 
> Writing and persuasion are indeed a term of art, and I do assure you, it is alive and well. That being said, and in theme *with *this thread, is it truly any surprise that a politician when in public, uses short words and quick, snappy sentences (sound bytes)? The politician is tailoring his speech to the audience at-hand.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Will_f said:


> Ok Seawolf: I converted it to non-legalese.


BTW, don't lawyers routinely write 'briefs'?
The irony...


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> BTW, don't lawyers routinely write 'briefs'?
> The irony...


Why - because they actually wear boxers?


----------



## Dave S (Sep 17, 2012)

geoffbot said:


> Why - because they actually wear boxers?


What is the correct watch for that attire?


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Dave S said:


> What is the correct watch for that attire?


Breitling Navitimer.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> BTW, don't lawyers routinely write 'briefs'?
> The irony...


I don't know if I've ever seen a brief, but most of the briefcases I've seen would have no problem holding a 500 sheet ream of paper. Perhaps they should be called reams instead, which would fit into American vernacular quite well and works with the other definition (a tool to enlarge holes) and sensation occasionally experienced by those who have been caught up in the US legal system of being reamed.

That said, a lawyer in his boxers should definitely be wearing a Ball Deep Quest or Casio Mudman, depending on the occasion and social situation, but especially if he's in his boxers and delivering a good ream- er, I mean brief.


----------



## JefeJP (Nov 18, 2013)

bhall41 said:


> No worries - I realised that your tongue was planted quite firmly in your cheek. Spirits can do that!
> 
> The use of so-called legalese, characterised by long sentences, high abstraction and general abstruseness, is diminishing in the legal profession. I personally see this as an unmitigated good, although your comments suggest a peverse fondness for the 'art'!


I came here to take a break from studying from my Law School exams because I got tired of all the writing and the style of writing... and lo and behold... a conversation about legalese. o|


----------



## bhall41 (Sep 28, 2010)

JefeJP said:


> I came here to take a break from studying from my Law School exams because I got tired of all the writing and the style of writing... and lo and behold... a conversation about legalese. o|


Please accept my abject apology in that case 
Good luck with the studies.


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

geoffbot said:


> I'm not sure I can handle you two and Tony20000000009 at the same time...


The post of the week, for me. Ric


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

This might just be the best thread anywhere on WUS. I've yet to read a single post that makes any sense, and to my mind that makes it a collective work of genius.

Carry on, chaps...

Ric


----------



## JefeJP (Nov 18, 2013)

bhall41 said:


> Please accept my abject apology in that case
> Good luck with the studies.


Don't worry about it! I found it funny more than anything else.


----------



## maverickmonk (Nov 27, 2013)

Alright guys, a lot of this has been on what to wear with suits, tuxedos etc, but I have a different question:

Thin, dressy watch (like a bambino, or a Bauhaus style watch, not an "official" dress watch) on plain black leather, with a casual button up and dark jeans. Too dressy a watch or no?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

maverickmonk said:


> Alright guys, a lot of this has been on what to wear with suits, tuxedos etc, but I have a different question:
> 
> Thin, dressy watch (like a bambino, or a Bauhaus style watch, not an "official" dress watch) on plain black leather, with a casual button up and dark jeans. Too dressy a watch or no?


No. These designs were "just watches" back in the day, when people wore such watches with everything. Jeans and a sport shirt allow the widest variety of watches, it seems to me, and can work with everything from a post-war pie-pan on black alligator to a chunky diver on a multi-colored bracelet. I have worn everything in my collection with dockers and a sport shirt. That clothing is used for so many different types of situations that we have to tailor the watch for the situation more than the clothes. I wear divers and sport chronos for outdoor barbecues or sporting events, or something with more finish (e.g. Brasilia or Zenith) for evening casual parties, when the same nice jeans and sport shirt might work for both.

Shoes are a good indicator. If sneakers or a lugged sole are acceptable, so is a sport watch. If the event requires shoes with smooth soles, I wear something shinier and more finished. Events with polished leather shoes that have leather soles get dressy watches (though not necessarily formal dress watches that I would insist on when wearing a tux). I don't cringe as much when I see a G-Shock with a suit as I do when I see black sneakers, lugged hiking shoes, or boat shoes with a suit.

Rick "tired of seeing adults dressed like children, but frequently enough guilty of it" Denney


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Rdenney said:


> No. T*hese designs were "just watches" back in the day*, when people wore such watches with everything.... That clothing is used for so many different types of situations that we have to *tailor the watch for the situation* more than the clothes.
> 
> *Shoes are a good indicator*. If sneakers or a lugged sole are acceptable, so is a sport watch. If the event requires shoes with smooth soles, I wear something shinier and more finished....


And... thats a wrap-up.
Remember people, there different DEGREES of 'formal.' A suit alone will not get you everywhere. Well, certainly not in a way that will elicit admiration, and inspire emulation from those who aspire to embody the meaning of civility in the context of civilization. 
But whateva. Dress as you please, and enjoy watching Rome burn.



Rdenney said:


> "tired of seeing adults dressed like children, but frequently enough guilty of it" Denney


Friend, do not feel guilty over merely being tired. It's not your fault. 
Seeing childishly dresses adults is actually exhausting. ;-)


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

maverickmonk said:


> Alright guys, a lot of this has been on what to wear with suits, tuxedos etc, but I have a different question:
> 
> Thin, dressy watch (like a bambino, or a Bauhaus style watch, not an "official" dress watch) on plain black leather, with a casual button up and dark jeans. Too dressy a watch or no?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Bauhaus watches should be worn with a pair of spectacles and of course that de rigeur thoughtful expression. If you're unfortunate enough not to have to wear spectacles then squint a bit and pretend you've just that moment mislaid then.

Screen shots from the Junghans website shows the above to most excellent effect. Note that the poor lady really *has* misplaced her spectacles.

Sadly, getting the black and white atmospheric look has become impossible in the modern world of colour. Choose monochrome clothes instead, and dye your hair black. Or grey. Or black with grey sideburns.

Glad to be of help.

Ric

View attachment 1319006


View attachment 1319007


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Wut Ric sed. Don't forget the turtleneck.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

WRONG!
It's like this: ;-)

View attachment 1319019




Ric Capucho said:


> Bauhaus watches should be worn with a pair of spectacles and of course that de rigeur thoughtful expression. If you're unfortunate enough not to have to wear spectacles then squint a bit and pretend you've just that moment mislaid then.
> 
> Screen shots from the Junghans website shows the above to most excellent effect. Note that the poor lady really *has* misplaced her spectacles.
> 
> ...


----------



## sonick808 (Nov 7, 2013)

What would be the best watch for a 40 year old, that looks 20, that acts 10, wears pokemon shirts, paints his toenails brown, routes internet datagrams for a living, wears khaki cutoffs, adidas flip flops and carries concealed ? Which watch would go best with this presentation ?

I forgot, it also needs to mesh with Dunhill pipes and top shelf single malts. I may be a freak but i'm still a gentleman


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

sonick808 said:


> What would be the best watch for a 40 year old, that looks 20, that acts 10, wears pokemon shirts, paints his toenails brown, routes internet datagrams for a living, wears khaki cutoffs, adidas flip flops and carries concealed ? Which watch would go best with this presentation ?


Visodate.


----------



## sonick808 (Nov 7, 2013)

geoffbot said:


> Visodate.


whoah, good call. That was my first horological consideration 2 weeks ago when I bought a black Visodate. Considering a band change though, the 'leather' strap included seems a bit thin. Thanks for your consideration


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> WRONG!
> It's like this: ;-)
> 
> View attachment 1319019


Spectacles, thoughtful expression. Where was I wrong?

Ric


----------



## maverickmonk (Nov 27, 2013)

Chronopolis said:


> WRONG!
> It's like this: ;-)
> 
> View attachment 1319019


I think I've got the face down, but do I have to paw at my manbreasts like this? I do suppose it would be a good way to show off my exquisite taste. Need to make sure I get a manicure first...

In all seriousness, thanks guys. I'm very, very rarely in a suit, so it's good to know a watch like that will be best suited for the middle ground

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> WRONG!
> It's like this: ;-)
> 
> View attachment 1319019


Hang on, those aren't his own hands. He'll be wearing a Tag Heuer, then.

Ric


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

maverickmonk said:


> Alright guys, a lot of this has been on what to wear with suits, tuxedos etc, but I have a different question:
> 
> Thin, dressy watch (like a bambino, or a Bauhaus style watch, not an "official" dress watch) on plain black leather, with a casual button up and dark jeans. Too dressy a watch or no?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I wore my tangente last night to the bar to drink and play darts. I had on jeans a tee shirt and a Syracuse basketball hat. So absolutely not imo. I wear what I want, when I want, where I want.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

sonick808 said:


> What would be the best watch for a 40 year old, that looks 20, that acts 10, wears pokemon shirts, paints his toenails brown, routes internet datagrams for a living, wears khaki cutoffs, adidas flip flops and carries concealed ? Which watch would go best with this presentation ?
> 
> I forgot, it also needs to mesh with Dunhill pipes and top shelf single malts. I may be a freak but i'm still a gentleman


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

sonick808 said:


> What would be the best watch for a 40 year old, that looks 20, that acts 10, wears pokemon shirts, paints his toenails brown, routes internet datagrams for a living, wears khaki cutoffs, adidas flip flops and carries concealed ? Which watch would go best with this presentation ?
> 
> I forgot, it also needs to mesh with Dunhill pipes and top shelf single malts. I may be a freak but i'm still a gentleman


Speedmaster Pro or Submariner - a guy that unique really needs a common watch to contrast


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Swatch System51. Especially if it clashes with the Pokemon shirt. And the holster.


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

gagnello said:


> I wore my tangente last night to the bar to drink and play darts. I had on jeans a tee shirt and a Syracuse basketball hat. So absolutely not imo. I wear what I want, when I want, where I want.
> 
> Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk 4


So sez the fat, flabby, unmuscled, hairy (because he has not earned the word "hirsute"), untanned, middle-aged creep who shows up to said pub wearing a tank top, board shorts (commando style), and flip flops. A gold Rolex won't help. "I wear what I want."

Rick "some people can ignore community beautification standards with less ill effect than others" Denney


----------



## maverickmonk (Nov 27, 2013)

On the topic of Pokemon shirts, I have on multiple occasions been on the verge of buying a Lego watch. Then again, as a 21 year old physics nerd, I'm probably as able as anyone to break the social norms. It's probably expected of me 

Don't worry all. I'm still refraining. Mostly.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LeopardBear (Aug 7, 2013)

Novelty watches are way better than Pokemon shirts, at least.


----------



## sonick808 (Nov 7, 2013)

thanks for all the input  thank you kindly
To maverickmonk and anyone else wondering how outwardly to embrace their inner freak I say: fly the flag. Buy those lego glasses. I saw in this thread or another on WUS someone said "be a gentleman and a gypsy". Indeed. Visodate acquired. Researching vintage Rolex' now. One of those vintage Rolex' with the faded markers is looking real nice. Oris, however, is most appealing to me overall right now as a brand.


----------



## MarcatGSB (Oct 24, 2013)

It's okay to be casual, but don't be casually casual.


----------



## s.erickson87 (Aug 4, 2012)

Rdenney said:


> So sez the fat, flabby, unmuscled, hairy (because he has not earned the word "hirsute"), untanned, middle-aged creep who shows up to said pub wearing a tank top, board shorts (commando style), and flip flops. A gold Rolex won't help. "I wear what I want."
> 
> Rick "some people can ignore community beautification standards with less ill effect than others" Denney


Gonna drink to get that one out of my head


----------



## johntg (Aug 18, 2011)

Rdenney said:


> So sez the fat, flabby, unmuscled, hairy (because he has not earned the word "hirsute"), untanned, middle-aged creep who shows up to said pub wearing a tank top, board shorts (commando style), and flip flops. A gold Rolex won't help. "I wear what I want."
> 
> Rick "some people can ignore community beautification standards with less ill effect than others" Denney


Yea, this is the guy you really want to emulate in life to get ahead.

[video]http://video.adultswim.com/carl/bcs-bad-college-stupid.html[/video]

View attachment 1326496


----------



## sonick808 (Nov 7, 2013)

well well well. With all of the power of my moon brain I would have never expected to find you here, Carl.


----------



## s.erickson87 (Aug 4, 2012)

johntg said:


> Yea, this is the guy you really want to emulate in life to get ahead.
> 
> [video]http://video.adultswim.com/carl/bcs-bad-college-stupid.html[/video]
> 
> View attachment 1326496


 A picture of my grandfather, and not even a caricature.

Funny that's what a former coke dealing hells angel can turn into.


----------



## Shaocaholica (Dec 31, 2013)

I'm looking for some advice on what to wear to work. I'm new to the whole watch wearing thing but I've been reading almost too much about the technicals lately.

Let me describe situation. I work in Hollywood/animation. I'm not a 'suit' by any means. I work in the trenches with the artists but I still like to dress nice to work. The office is basically what you'd see at a really big creative company. People ranging from business formal all the way down to artists and IT in t-shirts and sandals.

I'm not tall, 5'6" but I have an athletic build. 31. Male. I typically wear a slim fit patterned dress shirt with tie. I have a huge collection of vintage skinny ties. Mainly wear dark straight skinny jeans and dress shoes. Warby parker glasses. Definitely not your typical business casual.

I think I'm way too short to wear a big watch. It wouldn't fit under my cuff anyway. I'm pretty sure I'm going to want a slim profile 37-40mm watch. I like mechanical automatics. I'd probably go for a dressier watch but I wouldn't be afraid to wear something that's 'different' although I would want at least 2 classic watches.

Anyway, I just wanted to know what trends and 'rules' are for gold watches and strap types are and with respect to the way I dress/look and my work environment. I'm not looking for hard and fast rules but just what's going on out there as I haven't really been paying much attention until now.

I want to start with a Seiko 5 for sure but I'm not sure what kind of impression I would be giving with different face colors and strap materials.


----------



## Mediocre (Oct 27, 2013)

If you are debating on what you should wear to work, closely observe the people that you respect, the people in positions that you one day hope to attain, and ESPECIALLY the people they respect. You do not have to mock them, but you can make decisions with your observations in mind.


----------



## Shaocaholica (Dec 31, 2013)

Mediocre said:


> If you are debating on what you should wear to work, closely observe the people that you respect, the people in positions that you one day hope to attain, and ESPECIALLY the people they respect. You do not have to mock them, but you can make decisions with your observations in mind.


Well the problem with that is that the people I respect, I respect for other reasons than their taste in watches and dress. I don't mind being the only person wearing a particular style of watch at work. With my description, what would you imagine I would wear? Not that I'm going to do that but just stereotypically. I ask because I seriously don't know. Just want to get some reference points.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

Here is my "ranking" of different strap materials:
Canvas/nylon straps like NATOs are the most casual, however, you can choose colors/patterns that integrate well with your outfit
Rubber can go from super casual up to pretty dressy depending on the strap
Bracelets are a little more dressy than the two options above, and would be appropriate for how you dress. IMHO, bracelet with a suit is pushing it, and definitely not appropriate with a tuxedo (although you will see it all the time).
Leather can span the gamut. Contrast stitching will make it more casual, matched stitching will generally be more formal. Matte finish is more casual, gloss finish more formal. The skin can make a big difference also, with crocodile generally being considered the most formal, however, in the most formal situations, your leathers should match - and I don't see many people wearing croc shoes with a tux LOL.

Which Seiko5 are you thinking of? Most tend to be pretty casual, and not really "beach to boardroom".


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Shaocaholica said:


> Well the problem with that is that the people I respect, I respect for other reasons than their taste in watches and dress. I don't mind being the only person wearing a particular style of watch at work. With my description, what would you imagine I would wear? Not that I'm going to do that but just stereotypically. I ask because I seriously don't know. Just want to get some reference points.


Given your age, and line of work, you are fairly free to to as you please. You can wear anything low key of course. 
But you are an artist, working alongside other artists and creative people.
So, then, you have a lot of leeway as to going low key or high key: But by 'high key' I don't mean gaudy!! Or even expensive, necessarily.
In fact, at your age and position, a very high end watch (unless bequeathed to you) WOULD likely BE gaudy, no matter how tame the design.
But then, so would be a cheap loud watch like a Nixon, Diesel, etc.

Get a decent machine, and dress it up, with some really nice shoes, I say.
Bremont, Christopher Ward, etc makes some very nice, stylish but classy (and youthful!) pieces you don't see often.

You can flaunt a "modest"/ "affordable" watch with the right strap - hand-made leather, NATO, etc, to coordinate with your outfit.
Other artists are more likely to notice first the overall color / form assemblage on the wrist, than any name.


----------



## Shaocaholica (Dec 31, 2013)

~tc~ said:


> Here is my "ranking" of different strap materials:
> Which Seiko5 are you thinking of? Most tend to be pretty casual, and not really "beach to boardroom".


I was thinking of picking up both the SNK and SNZG with SS bracelets and shopping for alternate straps later. I'm also eyeing the SSA023 as a dressier watch for more formal occasions. I figure the SNK and SNZG should get me by at work just fine given that I mostly wear jeans and a blazer and I'm still dressier than 90% of the men there.

I also picked up these used older Seiko 5's for fun:



















But they haven't arrived yet.

Edit: Oh it seems like there's a bunch of different flavors of the SNK. I could honestly wear them all. SNK809, SNK799, SNK361...


----------



## Shaocaholica (Dec 31, 2013)

Chronopolis said:


> Given your age, and line of work, you are fairly free to to as you please. You can wear anything low key of course.
> But you are an artist, working alongside other artists and creative people.
> So, then, you have a lot of leeway as to going low key or high key: But by 'high key' I don't mean gaudy!! Or even expensive, necessarily.
> In fact, at your age and position, a very high end watch (unless bequeathed to you) WOULD likely BE gaudy, no matter how tame the design.
> ...


Thanks! Yeah I think I can get away with -almost- murder with the artists although they aren't fashion blind and will call me out on a oddball watch. However, I do have to frequently sit down with the 'suits' so I pretty much need to make a mark on everyone. I think I'm going to try for the 'hey I think thats pretty classy but what is it?' look first.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

The 799 and 361 are going to be the most "all purpose" designs.

You may also want to search and check out the various "beach to boardroom" threads for some other affordable (and not so affordable) ideas.


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

If you are into skinny vintage ties, that tells me you are going for the whole 60's style thing. But then you show pictures of a TV-dial Seiko 5 that is straight from the 70's--about as different stylistically as two adjacent decades can possibly be. For the 60's look, you can get a small, thin watch on a strap. The late-60's designs can be a little hipper. This is a 1968 Zodiac Hermetic--what people in that day would have called "a watch" rather than "a dress watch". It's 35mm in diameter and about 10mm thick--quite small by today's standards.










Earlier and more traditional designs are also possible, such as this Longines Flagship from the middle 60's:










This is about the same size, and is a hand-wind (though autos were a little more common).

Notice that both of these are on straps, as they would have been when they were new. Gold is a bit passe these days, but mixed with a brown strap it provides a great vintage look, and because the watch is small, it is not gaudy at all.

Watches like these are being made again, in slightly larger sizes. Longines, for example, makes a couple of different versions of their vintage Conquest and Flagship. Here's the current Longines Heritage Conquest:









(pic from a past post on WUS)

Watches like these are available at all price points. Another inexpensive option is the Hamilton Intramatic--a classic 60's pie-pan dial all the way. Of similar design by far more nicely finished (and far more expensive) is something like the Glashutte Original Senator Sixties. There, I've covered that type of watch at price points from a couple of hundred (for a vintage including basic servicing) to the upper four figures.

Watches on bracelets back in those days were "sport" watches, intended for "sportsmen". Sportsmen of the 60's where the sorts who worked in an office, made a lot of money, and played hard on weekends, going deep-sea fishing, or sailing, or spending three weeks in Africa on safari. The classic watch for the sportsman is a Rolex Submariner, but the type is well-represented across all price points (and not necessarily merely by copying the Rolex). I've always felt that bracelets look best with short sleeves. But it depends on the bracelet. A bracelet with thick, rounded, and chunky-looking links is more of a short-sleeve watch than one with thin, close-fitted, and sharp-edged links. The latter would be perfect for any clothing option in California, it seems to me. I've certainly worn my braceleted Zenith with a suit.

The 60's vibe can also go with non-round watches. A classic tank can go dressy or casual, such as:

View attachment 1331310


My wife bought this one for me at a Movado Company Store (Movado owns Ebel, but it is more upmarket and Movado positions it as a premium brand in their portfolio) for under a grand. This watch can do just about any clothing option, unless the occasion demands sneakers or hiking boots, and it's consistent with those vintage, skinny ties. On the natural alligator strap, it's a little too hip for me, actually, but I'm not an artist in California. But I can dream; I'm wearing it today.

None of these are dressy in the way, say, a Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Ultra Thin is dressy.

If you really want a TV dial and don't mind spending a month's wages on it, take a look at the Glashutte Original Seventies. This style of watch is a little harder to find at all price points, unless you go vintage.

Don't think that the Seiko line, as broad as it is, represents all your best options. Seikos are great, and the expensive ones are really great. But there are other choices that can be made.

Rick "perhaps picking up too much on the vintage skinny tie" Denney


----------



## Shaocaholica (Dec 31, 2013)

Rdenney said:


> ...stuff...


Haha thanks for the tips. I wasn't alive in the 60s or 70s and what I know through bad and not-so-bad media depictions isn't all that great. Not that other people around me will know any better anyway. I sorta just try stuff out and see if it works and if it doesn't I move on but this is all great advice I will use as a starting point. I don't know if 'tv dial' watches will work for me but I like the way they look so I'll try them for a bit since I got a few cheap ones. Those TV Seiko 5's were only $30.

I'm also going to try out some 'nicer?' vintage digitals with the all metal cases and front buttons but they are elusive.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

> Rick "perhaps picking up too much on the vintage skinny tie" Denney


I was thinking the same thing: those watches seem perfect. I'll add another easily located Seiko from that era, the Seahorse, which is about 37mm:

View attachment 1331539


If you are looking new, I think there are some Midos (e.g., Baroncelli Automatic M8600.4.18.8; Baroncelli II M8600.3.10.4) and others that would fit the bill.

And Bauhaus design always seems appropriate in the world of artistic types, like Nomos Tangomat and Stowa Antea (see Stowa Antea KS Review | watch reviews on worn&woundwatch reviews on worn&wound).

Of course, if you don't mind a quartz, throw on a Timex Weekender. Although that could be considered sooooo 2009...


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

Orient Bambino would be another good "vintage style" choice


----------



## maverickmonk (Nov 27, 2013)

I love those classic tv box seikos! If you are in a job where "strange" is the norm, be as unique as you want!

Sincerely,
Mr. "I'm going to break down and buy that Lego watch now"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## izegrim (Jan 8, 2014)

Hi,

I'm looking for a daily watch that I can wear daily. My goal is that is is a very versatile watch that I can supposedly wear with anything without thinking too much about it. My first choice is the SS black dial Longines Conquest Classic. My goal is that about anybody who notices might think that it's a nice watch without being judgmental. That's why brands like Omega, Tag and Breitling fall off. To me, someone who wears one demands my attention. Longines not so, but would get some respect.

To clarify, it's meant for jeans and polo, business casual to business dress. I have other watches for more riskful activities.

Is this all just in my mind, or do you agree concerning my view on the Longines Conquest Classic?


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Sure. Grand Seiko is often recommended as well. 

For me, though, "daily wear" includes lots of opportunity for slop, so I personally would not go for a watch with such a low WR rating.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

izegrim said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm looking for a daily watch that I can wear daily....
> 
> ...


What's your budget?

On the affordable end I'd consider Tissot and Hamilton. I'd also consider one of the Seiko SARB models or an Orient Star. Very well made for around $500.

Sinn 556 would be a top choice around $1000, but Longines, Hamilton & Tissot are also good choices and a little bit more would get a Ball.

Nomos or Ball would be my choice in the $2k to $4k range

Grand Seiko is an excellent choice in the $5k range.

Above $5k I'd be looking really hard at Glashutte Original and JLC. Only a watch enthusiast would recognize that you're wearing a top quality watch.


----------



## I gotafevergntlemen (Jan 5, 2014)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Nothing against guys who want to wear a digital watch with a business suit.However it just looks really tacky to me seeing some gentleman sporting a 3000 dollar suit and he is wearing some cheap digital watch on his wrist.But im not here to judge to each his own.To me though digis have their place.Hiking,bike riding the gym etc but not the board room


----------



## I gotafevergntlemen (Jan 5, 2014)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Oops im I bad!!! I would say my everyday wear watch would be a g schock or perhaps a seiko5 or hammy on a canvas strap.But feel free to go with what ever suits you.


----------



## adharness (Jan 7, 2014)

Hi, for what it's worth I'd look hard at Helson, Halios, Orient and the Grand Seiko. Or, if you wanted something a little more unique, try the Seiko Bullhead (the new version) only available in Japan - you can get one imported through Chino watch. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## izegrim (Jan 8, 2014)

hanshananigan said:


> Sure. Grand Seiko is often recommended as well.
> 
> For me, though, "daily wear" includes lots of opportunity for slop, so I personally would not go for a watch with such a low WR rating.



The water rating of 50m bugs me a little bit but as I understand the Conquest Classic is more than capable for that. For instance: my Steinhart OVM is rated 300m, but someone tested the Ocean One up to 800m without failing.

This is going to be a 'nice watch'. I hope I don't bang it around. It gets changed for outdoor activities.

Any of you who have experience with beating a 50m watch around for years?




Will_f said:


> What's your budget?





Will_f said:


> On the affordable end I'd consider Tissot and Hamilton. I'd also consider one of the Seiko SARB models or an Orient Star. Very well made for around $500.
> 
> Sinn 556 would be a top choice around $1000, but Longines, Hamilton & Tissot are also good choices and a little bit more would get a Ball.
> 
> ...


My budget is sub €1000 ( $1.350) and I can get one for the price. That's not much but I'm not looking for a prestige watch. I was considering the SARB033 and SARX015 before the Conquest Classic but you can see the similarities. Also, I love the look of the Rolex Explorer I which you can find in the CC.



adharness said:


> Hi, for what it's worth I'd look hard at Helson, Halios, Orient and the Grand Seiko. Or, if you wanted something a little more unique, try the Seiko Bullhead (the new version) only available in Japan - you can get one imported through Chino watch.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I did. I love the Orient Star Retrograde! But it's hardly a recognizable brand in Europe. I want my 'work watch' (office and meetings) to be inconspicuous but recognizable as a serious yet sensible watch. I have a Tissot Visodate that looks killer to me but the brand is clearly known for it's affordables and quartz watches. A sensible choice but not very serious. Apart from the facts that I like the design of the CC and that it is in my budget I really want my future watch to fly under the radar unless it gets noticed: serious yet sensible.

Thank you for your help. I haven't decided yet. I am not hesitant towards the CC as a product and the design. I am still researching what message it might send to various people. Any further input is welcome.

Kind regards,

izegrim


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Your're probably aware of the Hydroconquest, that has a similar look but 200M WR. I believe it is available in 41.5 and 39mm. There is also a similar quartz model, all around US$1000. I tried it on at a local AD yesterday. A little blingy for my very bland tastes, but a nice watch.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

izegrim said:


> Any of you who have experience with beating a 50m watch around for years?


NASA beat a 30m WR watch nearly to death - the Speedy Pro.  You say you're going to change it for truly hazardous duty, then there's no reason a 30m or 50m WR watch should inherently fail.

Oh, and I have that Orient Star Retrograde and it's an amazing watch for the money. I know what you say about having a "recognizable" watch, but I get pleasure out of showing people this watch and what you can get from an in-house movement for well under a grand. However, the Orient isn't my only watch, so I can see you're point. Put the Orient Star on your buy list for sometime in the future, though.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

izegrim said:


> I have a Tissot Visodate that looks killer to me but the brand is clearly known for it's affordables and quartz watches. A sensible choice but not very serious. Apart from the facts that I like the design of the CC and that it is in my budget I really want my future watch to fly under the radar unless it gets noticed: serious yet sensible.
> 
> izegrim


I think in the sub $1000 marketplace, any watch brand that is well known for quality watches and represents good value is going to have some affordable quartz models. You can find some fantastic micro brands that put out great quality watches in that price range, but only a watch nut will recognize the brand.

Nothing wrong with wearing a high quality quartz either.


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

This is an interesting thread. My take on watch and attire wearing etiquette is that it is changing fast. I work at the offices of a bank in the City of London. On an average day most people are suited and booted however some wear jeans and T shirts. I've even seen folks wearing those running shoes which are so thin that they have individual toes. A very small minority of the suit wearers also wear ties - in fact if you wear a tie people will comment on it.

In terms of watches it seems that anything goes. Until very recently I was wearing one of these to work with a suit and tie:

View attachment 1356830


Is this appropriate with a suit?

I recently bought a Tissot Visodate as I felt that the Seiko looked too cheesy with a suit. However, I've been wearing it on a brown leather strap with a black belt and shoes. It didn't occur to me that in doing so I might be committing a faux-pas. Most people in my father's generation old owned only one watch. Does this mean that they only wore shoes of the same colour as their watch straps? Anyway, now I'm considering buying another watch so I can have one one brown and one on black leather (I wear brown shoes at the weekend). Curse this forum! ;-)


----------



## HPJ (Jan 4, 2014)

Most people make this faux-pas. Then you have the black dial on brown strap dilemma, as it technically is the ultimate chameleon...


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Always etter to always match your leathers than not:










Better than on a black strap with brown shoes/belt imo.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

HPJ said:


> Most people make this faux-pas. Then you have the *black dial on brown strap dilemma*, as it technically is the ultimate chameleon...


Not really a dilemma.
This was covered in the first few pages of this thread.

Short answer: white (or some light color) dial, if / when suit for maximum / optimum flexibility and style.

Black dial with a suit requires a certain air of confidence/attitude, and style, that may not always be appropriate. But YMMV.


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

So is brown strap + black belt and shoes worse than black strap with brown belt and shoes?


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

anaplian said:


> So is brown strap + black belt and shoes worse than black strap with brown belt and shoes?


Same - its just mismatching leathers.


----------



## cambrid (Jan 18, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> I was just reading the very interesting thread
> *U.S. Attitudes/ Sales Regarding Swiss Watches*
> 
> and I noticed how it got hijacked within seconds to that undying (and seemingly unkillable) issue of what to wear with what; who's free do dress like whom; whom to bonk, what to eat/drink/say while wearing a Timex, Rolex, Spandex etc.
> ...


If I can just point out, this type of post should only ever be made whilst wearing a sports/diver type watch. The curious thing is, that it should only be _read _whilst wearing a classic evening watch, but _not _one with a brown strap, _unless_ the reader is wearing a velvet smoking jacket.


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

anaplian said:


> In terms of watches it seems that anything goes. Until very recently I was wearing one of these to work with a suit and tie:
> 
> View attachment 1356830
> 
> ...


In the strictest sense, no it is not. That watch with a suit would make you look like you don't know any better. That is worse than not wearing a watch at all.


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

johnj said:


> In the strictest sense, no it is not. That watch with a suit would make you look like you don't know any better. That is worse than not wearing a watch at all.


Ouch! Thanks for your candour ;-)

I had a sudden realisation a few weeks back - maybe this Seiko looks a little silly with a suit. I then bought a Tissot Visodate - however I'm still committing the faux-pas of brown strap with black shoes and belt. Still, a perfect excuse to buy another watch...


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

anaplian said:


> Still, a perfect excuse to buy another watch...


That's the spirit!

Rick "our work here is done" Denney


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

Rdenney said:


> That's the spirit!
> 
> Rick "our work here is done" Denney


Our work here is *not* done, Rick. There're untold combinations of clothes, watches, leather colours to be considered. What should consider when dressing in neoprene ready for a spell under the Atlantic ocean? What does the well dressed astronaut sport on his wrist? Or combat pilot?

Nay, this thread has yet to run its course.

Ric


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

Ric Capucho said:


> Our work here is *not* done, Rick. There're untold combinations of clothes, watches, leather colours to be considered. What should consider when dressing in neoprene ready for a spell under the Atlantic ocean? What does the well dressed astronaut sport on his wrist? Or combat pilot?
> 
> Nay, this thread has yet to run its course.
> 
> Ric


One convert at a time, M. Capucho, one convert at a time.

Rick "wearing a red on white fine glen plaid shirt from L. L. Bean, chinos with a brown belt, Ecco oiled-leather boots, and a Cartier Santos 100 on a bracelet--is that wrong?" Denney


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

johnj said:


> In the strictest sense, no it is not. That watch with a suit would make you look like you don't know any better. That is worse than not wearing a watch at all.


Unless of course your suit was rainbow colored, you were wearing a fedora with a feather and you are a manager in a temp agency that specializes in extremely short assignments.


----------



## Ric Capucho (Oct 5, 2012)

Rdenney said:


> One convert at a time, M. Capucho, one convert at a time.
> 
> Rick "wearing a red on white fine glen plaid shirt from L. L. Bean, chinos with a brown belt, Ecco oiled-leather boots, and a Cartier Santos 100 on a bracelet--is that wrong?" Denney


Sounds like how Obama dresses.

Ric


----------



## Just Alex (Jan 26, 2014)

I've really enjoyed reading this thread, it's been quite an education! 

My question is this: is it wrong to be "too formal" for any given position? I am looking to change careers from my current one, for which I wear surgical scrubs - into teaching at secondary school. It seems in the UK that the dress code for this career is "business dress" - I have spent some time observing in a school and found this to generally mean slacks, shirt and tie. I have an obsession with 3 piece suits and this is what I wore whilst observing, but I was the most smartly dressed adult there. Is this poor etiquette or a harmless eccentricity? To me I feel that it is a sign of respect for self and others - but I worried about coming off as a bit pretentious!

Just to make this more timepiece related, I would like to pair my workwear with a nice Longines on a leather strap (which will of course match my belt and shoes!)


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Just Alex said:


> I've really enjoyed reading this thread, it's been quite an education!
> 
> My question is this: *is it wrong to be "too formal" for any given position?* ... I have spent some time observing in a school and found this to generally mean slacks, shirt and tie. I have an obsession with 3 piece suits and this is what I wore whilst observing, but *I was the most smartly dressed adult there*. Is this poor etiquette or a harmless eccentricity? To me I feel that it is a sign of respect for self and others - but I worried about coming off as a bit pretentious!


Ah! It so happens I just finished reading an article that speaks directly to this very issue. 

Influence, Persuasion, and Personal Presentation: Why and How to Look Your Best When Interacting with Others | The Art of Manliness

Summarizes nicely the reasons why one just might think twice about dressing any which way as one pleases, IF one wants to make the best of what one's got.


----------



## Just Alex (Jan 26, 2014)

Thanks @Chronopolis - interesting article, lucky coincidence! Looks like a nice website too.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Just Alex said:


> Thanks @Chronopolis - interesting article, lucky coincidence! Looks like a nice website too.


Indeed it is a nice website.
I particularly enjoyed reading Lessons in Manliness: Atticus Finch* - and men of great moral fortitude and inner strength, as opposed to being macho -- as found in literature, cinema, and history.

http://www.artofmanliness.com/2011/02/02/lessons-in-manliness-from-atticus-finch/

* -Atticus Finch, in _To Kill a Mockingbird_.


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

Just Alex said:


> I've really enjoyed reading this thread, it's been quite an education!
> 
> My question is this: is it wrong to be "too formal" for any given position? I am looking to change careers from my current one, for which I wear surgical scrubs - into teaching at secondary school. It seems in the UK that the dress code for this career is "business dress" - I have spent some time observing in a school and found this to generally mean slacks, shirt and tie. I have an obsession with 3 piece suits and this is what I wore whilst observing, but I was the most smartly dressed adult there. Is this poor etiquette or a harmless eccentricity? To me I feel that it is a sign of respect for self and others - but I worried about coming off as a bit pretentious!
> 
> Just to make this more timepiece related, I would like to pair my workwear with a nice Longines on a leather strap (which will of course match my belt and shoes!)


Like anything else that deals with fashion style, it all depends on the situation. A three piece suit is a style that conveys power. This is because you are more buttoned up and covered. If you are a business man, lawyer, or banker then this would be perfectly appropriate. In other situations maybe not so much.


----------



## Tclef (Feb 18, 2014)

I've been working on a music education degree in the US for far too long. From my observations and field placements, I find that while a suit is totally fine for a school over here, most of the teachers go kind of "dress casual." Khakis and a polo shirt is about as informal as they go...unless their a gym teacher; they get to do what ever want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## marc013 (Feb 22, 2014)

johnj said:


> Like anything else that deals with fashion style, it all depends on the situation. A three piece suit is a style that conveys power. This is because you are more buttoned up and covered. If you are a business man, lawyer, or banker then this would be perfectly appropriate. In other situations maybe not so much.


I agree completely with you


----------



## Strange (Feb 26, 2014)

I think that what one chooses to wear on any given occasion has largely to do with how much one cares about others' opinions of them. A slavish sycophant who is desperately trying to suck up to others would be concerned to the point of utter neurosis about every detail of their appearance. On the other hand, one who couldn't care less what others think of them would wear whatever they felt like wearing, the expectations of others be damned. And somewhere in the middle are those who care about others' opinions but at the same time are not afraid of expressing a degree of independence -- their clothing choices would be generally congruent with expectations but might include minor stylistic divergences. Of course, caring or not caring about the opinions of others has to do with one's willingness to abide the consequences of disappointing or offending others. A corollary to this is that if one is going to violate expectations one should do so in full awareness of the potential consequences, and not from ignorance of those consequences.

With respect to the 'rules' of fashion there are a few points to consider. First, they aren't really _rules_ per se, as there is no formal authority defining and enforcing them. I think it makes a lot more sense to regard them as _norms_, since they are tacitly agreed on by the culture in which they arise. It's important to note that when people cite fashion norms they are doing so by fiat -- no one has any real authority in the matter, and thus their claims are based entirely on the right of assertion (_it's so because I say it's so_). The importance of this is that it defines the value of such opinions as arbitrary and subject to personal belief, rather than subject to any objective standards. When someone says 'you can't wear this with that' they are giving you an _opinion_ based on a tacitly agreed on norm, and you should accord such assertions with whatever credibility you believe they deserve, given their arbitrary nature. Second, _de gustibus non disputandum_. In matters of taste reasonable people can and do disagree, and that is entirely as it should be. Finally, while there are objective and demonstrable principles of color harmony, the norms of fashion do not always adhere to these principles. Thus one should be wary of those attempting to substantiate their fashion opinions by citing color theory.

I work with a guy in his mid-teens who has recently discovered the world of men's fashions, and has become a doctrinaire adherent to what he insists are inviolable rules of fashion. Despite his lack of worldly experience and his youthful arrogance he is pretty intelligent and perceptive, and I thus willingly engage him in discussions of dress and such. It never ceases to amaze and amuse me the vehemence with which he holds to his notion of these 'rules', and the degree to which he is unwilling to acknowledge the arbitrariness of them. It makes for some pretty high grade entertainment.


----------



## Tclef (Feb 18, 2014)

Ok guys, this is a lot off topic, but has any one used a safety razor? How dangerous is it? Is the shave that much better? To bring it back to topic, think the shave would look better with an affordable manual winder? What's your favorite with a seagull movement?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

Tclef said:


> Ok guys, this is a lot off topic, but has any one used a safety razor? How dangerous is it?


A safety razor isn't dangerous at all. They work just like the modern 3-5 blade disposable razors. Do you mean a straight razor? Those are best left to seasoned professionals in the barber shop. You can cut yourself real easy with those. Can't be in any kind of hurry when using them.


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

Strange said:


> When someone says 'you can't wear this with that' they are giving you an _opinion_ based on a tacitly agreed on norm, and you should accord such assertions with whatever credibility you believe they deserve, given their arbitrary nature.


Those norms aren't so arbitrary. They come from years of styling cues. There are certain style cues that always work, and work well. If your going to take the effort to dress nice, you want to be put together so that when people see you there will be no mistake that you know exactly what you are doing. People will respond to you differently. As seemingly small a style cue as a wrist watch may seem, it does affect the overall look. A man has a very small set of accesories he can wear, so you must get each one right to get the most style impact.

A good way to learn a lot of timeless style cues is to watch movies that starred Cary Grant. He was the best dressed actor in movies.


----------



## Tclef (Feb 18, 2014)

johnj said:


> A safety razor isn't dangerous at all. They work just like the modern 3-5 blade disposable razors. Do you mean a straight razor? Those are best left to seasoned professionals in the barber shop. You can cut yourself real easy with those. Can't be in any kind of hurry when using them.


Thanks. I did mean a safety razor. Just thinking about trying one. I'll stay away from straight razors and there's no way I'm trusting someone else to do that for me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

While the rules may be unwritten and subject to a considerable amount of interpretation, they are generally understood enough that totally missing it will cause you problems. Your "i don't care what people think of how I dress" is "this person shows no respect for the situation" from the other side when you show up to an interview in shorts and a t-shirt. When I took my interview at the steel mill, I wore a suit, and the interviewer made a comment about it. I replied "well, it's an interview - you wear a suit" and he nodded and agreed - I got the job by the way. I have interviewed people at my current job, and while the guys who show up in polo/khakis may not necessarily be viewed "lower" than those who wear suits, I can guarantee that people who wear suits to interviews will NEVER be at a disadvantage.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Strange said:


> ...one who _*couldn't care less*_ what others think of them...




That - getting it right - alone tells me that you are a man of considerable education. ;-)
Welcome to the forum.




Strange said:


> ... if one is going to violate expectations one should do so in full awareness of the potential consequences, and not from ignorance of those consequences.



That's all we* are sayin'.
That... and "Give peace a chance." :-!

* 'We' being the vague, even a bit occult, coalition of broad-minded (and well-heeled, and better-educated) persons on this forum who wish all to be as free as they like, but also encourage those who ARE ignorant of the potential consequences of being as "nasteh as they wanna be" to think about them a bit more deeply. b-)




Strange said:


> I work with a guy in his mid-teens who has recently discovered the world of men's fashions, and has become a doctrinaire adherent to what he insists are inviolable rules of fashion.... It never ceases to amaze and amuse me the vehemence with which he holds to his notion of these 'rules', and the degree to which he is unwilling to acknowledge the arbitrariness of them. It makes for some pretty high grade entertainment.


It is actually reassuring to know that there is always a steady, if not abundant, supply of congenitally doctrinaire youngsters who will do the work of seeing to the continuity of tradition. :-!


----------



## Tclef (Feb 18, 2014)

Strange said:


> I think that what one chooses to wear on any given occasion has largely to do with how much one cares about others' opinions of them. A slavish sycophant who is desperately trying to suck up to others would be concerned to the point of utter neurosis about every detail of their appearance. On the other hand, one who couldn't care less what others think of them would wear whatever they felt like wearing, the expectations of others be damned. And somewhere in the middle are those who care about others' opinions but at the same time are not afraid of expressing a degree of independence -- their clothing choices would be generally congruent with expectations but might include minor stylistic divergences. Of course, caring or not caring about the opinions of others has to do with one's willingness to abide the consequences of disappointing or offending others. A corollary to this is that if one is going to violate expectations one should do so in full awareness of the potential consequences, and not from ignorance of those consequences.
> 
> With respect to the 'rules' of fashion there are a few points to consider. First, they aren't really _rules_ per se, as there is no formal authority defining and enforcing them. I think it makes a lot more sense to regard them as _norms_, since they are tacitly agreed on by the culture in which they arise. It's important to note that when people cite fashion norms they are doing so by fiat -- no one has any real authority in the matter, and thus their claims are based entirely on the right of assertion (_it's so because I say it's so_). The importance of this is that it defines the value of such opinions as arbitrary and subject to personal belief, rather than subject to any objective standards. When someone says 'you can't wear this with that' they are giving you an _opinion_ based on a tacitly agreed on norm, and you should accord such assertions with whatever credibility you believe they deserve, given their arbitrary nature. Second, _de gustibus non disputandum_. In matters of taste reasonable people can and do disagree, and that is entirely as it should be. Finally, while there are objective and demonstrable principles of color harmony, the norms of fashion do not always adhere to these principles. Thus one should be wary of those attempting to substantiate their fashion opinions by citing color theory.
> 
> I work with a guy in his mid-teens who has recently discovered the world of men's fashions, and has become a doctrinaire adherent to what he insists are inviolable rules of fashion. Despite his lack of worldly experience and his youthful arrogance he is pretty intelligent and perceptive, and I thus willingly engage him in discussions of dress and such. It never ceases to amaze and amuse me the vehemence with which he holds to his notion of these 'rules', and the degree to which he is unwilling to acknowledge the arbitrariness of them. It makes for some pretty high grade entertainment.


I've been studying music for more than twenty years and I love the parallel here. When one goes to college for music (and other studies too, I'm sure) they study a ton of theory. Through all of these classes, they learn rules. Then more rules, and then more rules. Finally, they learn that the rules actually are quite arbitrary. The important thing is that if one is going to break the rules, they need to first learn the rules so that they can break them in a creative and judicious way. This is what people love to see, one who generally sticks to the norm, but deviates in a subtle but cool and quirky way.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jefyulo (Oct 4, 2012)




----------



## kawalaser (Nov 13, 2010)

^^^^


----------



## chili555 (Mar 1, 2008)

Strange said:


> On the other hand, one who couldn't care less what others think of them would wear whatever they felt like wearing, the expectations of others be damned. And somewhere in the middle are those who care about others' opinions but at the same time are not afraid of expressing a degree of independence -- their clothing choices would be generally congruent with expectations but might include minor stylistic divergences. Of course, caring or not caring about the opinions of others has to do with one's willingness to abide the consequences of disappointing or offending others.


Exactly!

Having spent 35 years in the corporate world and 15 of those in the executive suite, if you are coming to me to apply for a management position, discuss becoming an approved vendor, discuss investments and the like, caring about my opinion of your attire is a requirement. Being professionally dressed is an indication that our accounts will be professionally managed. We expect no less.


----------



## AgentVX (Dec 13, 2013)

Tclef said:


> The important thing is that if one is going to break the rules, they need to first learn the rules so that they can break them in a creative and judicious way.


I can't help but feel like I've heard something similar being used as an advertising tagline somewhere....... hmm. :think:


----------



## ats200 (May 23, 2014)

Tclef said:


> Thanks. I did mean a safety razor. Just thinking about trying one. I'll stay away from straight razors and there's no way I'm trusting someone else to do that for me.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Be careful when buying, safety razors have different levels of harshness which means more or less of an exposed blade. You'll want to do a bit of research and get one that's less harsh.

Straight razors aren't all that hard and give a better result but the learning curve is greater.

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tclef (Feb 18, 2014)

Thanks. Been using mine for a couple of months now. It's the best shave ever...oh, and here's a watch. Happy Saturday!









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2014)

I wish the groom (and his mates) at the Wedding I just attended read this. The groom was wearing a chunky chronograph on a thick steel bracelet under his tux sleeve! And this wasn't a question of money or background, both families are well-off and fairly modern.

Even before starting on the hobby, I would've known better.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

So I'm at the beach this week with the family, a beautiful beach in OBX, USA. Happy to be wearing my Scuba Dude. I'm packing up the kid's gear in the cart to slog down the block to the dunes, and of course check out how the Scuba Dude is faring in the reflection of a car window. I look once, then twice, then say to myself, "hmmm.... does it matter that my watch colors don't match my sunglasses?









My initial thought was to find Russian eyewear on eBay to match my Scuba Dude,










but I thought that the result might be a bit, hmm, how do you people-who-can-afford-beachfront-property call it, "on the nose?"

Now you might remember from f71 WRUW last month that I am not one to shirk from the condemnation of the fashion police at times,










but for the sake of my family, I ask of you, *how important is it for one's timepiece to match one's eye wear?*

PS-I'm not ruling out "de longues promenades sur la plage, au naturale," with the wife, if you catch my drift, so I can imagine that the wrist watch and sunglasses will have even more prominence in my otherwise natural state.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Dude. That's a tough question. If I had to guess I'd say if you can pull off the pilot helmet, what ever you wear on your wrist is good.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Will_f said:


> Dude. That's a tough question. If I had to guess I'd say if you can pull off the pilot helmet, what ever you wear on your wrist is good.


Thank you Will! A very pragmatic answer. Wish I could give it a try, but wifey smartly suggested the Mig pilot helmet would be mighty warm on the beach.

Seriously, though, *how important is it to pair the color and metal of a watch with eyewear and other accessories (bracelet, wedding band, cuff links, monocle, etc.)?*


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

hanshananigan said:


> Seriously, though, *how important is it to pair the color and metal of a watch with eyewear and other accessories (bracelet, wedding band, cuff links, monocle, etc.)?*


Only as important as you think it is. Only your self-consciousness is at stake.

Rick "who wears gold rings but (mostly) not gold watches for reasons that can't be superseded" Denney


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

hanshananigan said:


> ...*how important is it to pair the color and metal of a watch with eyewear and other accessories (bracelet, wedding band, cuff links, monocle, etc.)?*





Rdenney said:


> Only as important as you think it is. Only your self-consciousness is at stake.
> 
> Rick "who wears gold rings but (mostly) not gold watches for reasons that can't be superseded" Denney


Indeed, in the end, it is really a matter of YOUR confidence in YOUR sense of STYLE more than it is about "correctness".
The "correct style" is there so as to facilitate all who do not wish to make this decision for themselves, and still look presentable.
But, really, at the end of the day, if you got through without offending or harming anyone, what difference does it make?
Life is short: live it as you see fit.

PS: I don't think Horowitz would have approved of Thelonius Monk's way of playing the piano. 
But... so what? Monk did it his way, and went on to become a giant himself, in a different pasture. 
Knowaddamean?


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

Chronopolis said:


> PS: I don't think Horowitz would have approved of Thelonius Monk's way of playing the piano.
> But... so what? Monk did it his way, and went on to become a giant himself, in a different pasture.
> Knowaddamean?


Heh. My late father used to refer to him as Melodious Thunk before giggling uncontrollably.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> Indeed, in the end, it is really a matter of YOUR confidence in YOUR sense of STYLE more than it is about "correctness".
> The "correct style" is there so as to facilitate all who do not wish to make this decision for themselves, and still look presentable.
> But, really, at the end of the day, if you got through without offending or harming anyone, what difference does it make?
> Life is short: live it as you see fit.
> ...


Reminds me of a story. The late William F. Buckley, Jr., a man known for erudition and also for exploring the limits of a vast vocabulary, was challenged on his use of obscure words. His response was to describe his visit to a concert, where the pianist played some completely inexplicable and (in Buckley's words) "downright _bizarre_" chords. (Buckley was a fine amateur pianist and performed baroque harpsichord works on stage more than once--he would know what he was listening to.) But he never was tempted to suggest to Mr. Thelonius Monk that he should stick to chords more understandable by the masses.

One assumes that had he done so, Monk's advice would have been the same as Buckley's: Keep reading (listening).

I think Horowitz would have been completely pleased with the way Monk played, even if he chose a different path for himself.

The point of my comment was not to challenge the rules, but rather to bring us back to the principles that underlie the rules. The purpose of dressing well is two-fold: 1.) to make a good impression, but doing so requires the person we hope to impress having the same appreciation for and understanding of the rules we are following, which is rarely the case. And 2.) to give us confidence, knowing that we are presenting ourselves as well as possible. Wearing a silver-colored watch with gold rings does not in the least undermine my confidence. My rings are gold because one is a wedding ring and the other a college ring, worn for reasons having nothing to do with style. Wearing a sport watch with a suit would undermine my confidence, while a proper dress watch reinforces it. Wearing a black strapped watch with a brown belt and shoes would eat at the corner of my brain, and even that trivial loss of headroom would be something I would want to avoid in situations where I need all of what I have. It is easy (and fun) for me to avoid those errors, even when I'm the only person in the room that notices.

My confidence is a slave to my own understanding of style guidelines. One cannot be blissfully ignorant unless one is ignorant.

Rick "who would never wear a brown belt with black shoes, either" Denney


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

There was only one time in history when you could dress in the latest fashion trends and it was okay to look hideous, and that was the 1970's.


----------



## Surfrider (Jun 14, 2012)

A good general way of doing it is to match the dressiness of your watch to the dressiness of the outfit you're wearing.


If it's clothes you'd wear to the gym, a G-Shock looks very natural.
If you're going business casual, maybe like a marine watch or toned-down pilot watch would look great, for example.
If you're in a formal setting, go with a dress watch.

If you're wearing brown leather shoes and a brown leather belt, wear a watch on brown leather with a relatively similar color brown or a watch on a bracelet. This isn't fashion-forward, exactly, but I feel as though it's a pretty classic and classy approach where one couldn't really go wrong.

Just one guy's opinion, though. As always, wear what you like. Regardless of what you say about "I don't care what other people think" and that sort of sentiment, how you dress and your style choices are how you market yourself. Or, in other words, how you are viewed and perceived by the world. I don't think one should obsess about it, but I think it's a positive thing to make a good impression.


----------



## madeofducktape (Mar 3, 2014)

If you have this watch










I think you can pull off these shoes


----------



## Beach Hound (Jun 1, 2014)

What ever happened to the simple idea of making it your own. Where what you like (i do wear a dive watch with suits)


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

For those who WANT it or NEED it - to use or to abuse. As you wish.
I'm not affiliated with this link.

Two Quick Rules for Suiting Pattern Combining | Parisian Gentleman


----------



## What is Time (Feb 10, 2014)

Haha this is a funny thread. I've worn my accutron spaceview with a suit on many occasion. Who cares what social convention says about what is acceptable. Watches are supposed to be fun and express some kind of individuality.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

A Spaceview is totally appropriate with a suit IMHO. Case is the right size, no external bezel, simple hand layout, little/no lume. Yeah, the dial is a bit flash, but then so are a lot of others with their guilloche and blingy gold markers.


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

So, leathers should match right - black leather strap, black belt, black shoes?

What about synthetic straps - is it OK to wear a black nylon strap with brown shoes?


How about a green nylon strap with brown shoes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

anaplian said:


> So, leathers should match right - black leather strap, black belt, black shoes?
> 
> What about synthetic straps - is it OK to wear a black nylon strap with brown shoes?
> 
> ...


As the OP, I've read every post. 
Your Q's were answered with clarity and authority (of experience and tradition, not of personal taste) early on in this thread: when it's OK under what circumstances, etc.

If you can't be bothered to read the thread, then it will remain useless to you.


----------



## anaplian (Jan 4, 2014)

Chronopolis said:


> As the OP, I've read every post.
> Your Q's were answered with clarity and authority (of experience and tradition, not of personal taste) early on in this thread: when it's OK under what circumstances, etc.
> 
> If you can't be bothered to read the thread, then it will remain useless to you.


Actually I have read the thread. I don't believe that my questions were answered.

Also, your condescending tone is seriously unappreciated.

On a more constructive note perhaps it would be good to have a sticky with the rules rather than having people read a 500 post thread for answers.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

Since this is WUS and everything needs to be posted 1000000 times so the search function is totally worthless:



anaplian said:


> So, leathers should match right - black leather strap, black belt, black shoes?


Correct. You will never go wrong this way. Metals should match too between the belt buckle, watch, and cuff links, etc.



anaplian said:


> What about synthetic straps - is it OK to wear a black nylon strap with brown shoes?


Nylon straps should only be worn in situations casual enough that you have considerable leeway in defining "proper".
I would still not wear black with brown...



anaplian said:


> How about a green nylon strap with brown shoes?


Yes, if you're not going to match, I would say go with something like green, blue, orange - something that you wouldn't expect to match, or someone wouldn't think "you wore your black shoes watch on brown show day" LOL

Posted from tapatalk


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

I'm wearing this watch today:









...with these sandals:









I somehow doubt that the black Kevlar/nylon strap demands color-matching, for two reasons: 1.) the watch is a casual, sporty design (similar to a watch with a black rubber strap), and 2.) the dress is so casual that pretty much any casual, sporty watch does fine.

I would not wear this watch even with business casual dress, unless I'm in the South and also wearing a short-sleeved sport shirt (appropriate in the tropics, of course). But I would still match shoe and belt color. What looks bad to me are mixes of levels of dress, and for dressier stuff, mixes of colors.

Rick "noting that this thread started with many pages of explanation why such a thread was needed" Denney


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

anaplian said:


> Actually I have read the thread. I don't believe that my questions were answered.
> 
> _*Also, your condescending tone is seriously unappreciated. *_


The gentleman that I am (when I need to be), I hasten to offer you my sincere apologies if you felt that way; that certainly was not my intention. It would kind of defeat the very purpose of this thread, if I or anyone were to use it to be "condescending" to anyone.

But the fact remains that some people on WUS use this and other exhaustively commented threads like a library they do not wish to enter. Such persons are a bit like those who walk up to the librarian and ask: "What are the titles of the plays that Shakespeare wrote?"

I merely wished to encourage you - but not only you - to really make use of this thread is all.

Anyway, I think RDenney has answered your Q.



anaplian said:


> On a more constructive note perhaps it would be good to have a sticky with the rules rather than having people read a 500 post thread for answers.


See, that's the thing: these so-called rules are flexible. Hence the overwhelming amount of verbiage here on the topic. Every and any given situation setting and occasion can alter the "flavor" of the "propriety" that might be called for in one's attire. And judging this, and calibrating one's sartorial response, take some experience, and eventually, confidence - to either abide by, or ignore, the rules.

What makes this thread perhaps a little more useful than some you might find elsewhere is that you get to hear from many with as many examples of situation.
No, you may not find ALL the answers pertaining to EVERY possible situation, but you should be able to connect the dots after a while by culling all the relevant posts.

Example: No black watch / strap with brown shoes 99% of the time, unless you've got something else going on that's so unusual and dashing as to make that combination uniquely stylish.

Best wishes,


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

...


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> The gentleman that I am (when I need to be), I hasten to offer you my sincere apologies if you felt that way; that certainly was not my intention. It would kind of defeat the very purpose of this thread, if I or anyone were to use it to be "condescending" to anyone.
> 
> But the fact remains that some people on WUS use this and other exhaustively commented threads like a library they do not wish to enter. Such persons are a bit like those who walk up to the librarian and ask: "What are the titles of the plays that Shakespeare wrote?"
> 
> ...


Chronopolis, how about a glossary/index/content list of Common Themes in your OP? In your library terms, a card catalog of sorts. Given that the search function (and Google search per site) has limitations, I agree that no one should need to read through 700 posts to get a sense of whether a bracelet may be worn with a prom tux.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

...


----------



## Thomas_Gage (Jul 13, 2014)

Cheers Chronopolis, for officiating (is that the right word?) such a huge forum thread. You seem to be doing it with gracious verve


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> True, there is a lot to slog through here.
> But is that not true of all topics on WUS?
> 
> So, as for doing a glossary, I think there are plenty of blogs on "gentlemen's clothes" that already do that.
> ...


I think we should start an entirely new thread titled: "horological attire, policies and justifications". Then, we should discuss in detail what watch is appropriate to wear in what situation and with what clothes. While we're at it, maybe we should make it a forum sticky.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

...


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

Chrono, you could compile a summary and then ask the mods to post it as a closed sticky. Statements starting with "someone ought to..." generally provokes a negative reaction. 

Even if left open for debate, the salient summary would be in the first post. 

Rick "and then this thread could be unstickied to enjoy a well-earned retirement" Denney


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

Hell, we can't get the mods to enforce a "search and add to existing threads" attitude and merge threads - and you want to propose that they actually adopt a process that would require a considerable amount of work for them?


Posted from tapatalk


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

...


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

~tc~ said:


> Hell, we can't get the mods to enforce a "search and add to existing threads" attitude and merge threads - and you want to propose that they actually adopt a process that would require a considerable amount of work for them?
> 
> Posted from tapatalk


No, I was thinking that option / temporary editorship could be left to the OP, with permission, of course.
Again, this would be ONLY for those threads that are essentially objective info, not exchange of opinions regarding the value of that info.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

No.


----------



## Will_f (Jul 4, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> Hey Will F - haven't seen ya lately around the hood.
> What, did ya win the lottery (or lootery) or som'm? ;-)
> 
> I tried to solicit some opinions about this very matter on Public - but not much response.
> ...


Perhaps it wasn't sufficiently clear I was joking 

No lottery win for me. I bought a macro lens and appropriate camera about a year ago (so I could post awesome pics on WUS). Well, things snowballed and now I've got a second expensive hobby.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

101 Things That Change When You Upgrade Your Wardrobe & Improve Your Style ? Gentleman's Gazette


----------



## Jimmyb93 (Dec 20, 2016)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*

Im a fan of DW as an every day, not need to worry about bumping it kinda watch.

Has anyone here heard of Virtas? Look to be of equal quality, but a pinch cheaper than DW.

Just wondering if anyone had any experience with them?

Appreciate any feedback!

(Photo for reference, taken from virtaswatch dot com (im a new user, so cant link them)


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

*Re: Y not a new sub-Forum? : Watches & Attire*



Jimmyb93 said:


> Im a fan of DW as an every day, not need to worry about bumping it kinda watch.
> 
> Has anyone here heard of Virtas? Look to be of equal quality, but a pinch cheaper than DW.
> 
> ...


Looks like something rick "tricky ricky" harrison would shill. Why not just create a new thread? This one is from 2014.


----------



## LordBrettSinclair (Sep 22, 2015)

Intriguing first post. Are you the brand ambassador or something?


----------



## jupiter6 (Jan 8, 2015)

So how's your marketing job at Virtas going?


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

This once was a very fun thread!

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

hanshananigan said:


> This once was a very fun thread!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


Makes this thread great again! by posting a problem about your socks or som'm. ;-)


----------



## Rdenney (Dec 24, 2012)

Chronopolis said:


> Makes this thread great again! by posting a problem about your socks or som'm. ;-)












What watch should I wear with these socks?

Answer:










Rick "comfortable sport casual" Denney


----------



## Simey (Jun 18, 2015)

Chronopolis said:


> 101 Things That Change When You Upgrade Your Wardrobe & Improve Your Style ? Gentleman's Gazette


94. You start wearing bow ties, and you always want to tie your own

Dear God, no.


----------



## Sevenmack (Oct 16, 2011)

Simey said:


> 94. You start wearing bow ties, and you always want to tie your own
> 
> Dear God, no.


I own five bow ties and love wearing them when it is necessary to do so. But while I know how to tie a bow tie, I've never wanted to learn it; that was my grandfather's doing. And just because you may like wear bow ties on occasion doesn't mean you want to wear them _all the damn time_. Doesn't work that way.


----------

