The London Lounge

This is neither new, nor nearly as complete as I should like. I was asked recently to locate it in my archives and thought it might provoke a new question or two.

Answers to some shirt fit questions asked over the years by many members of various fora. This is not an "Investigative Research" presentation. It is more of an "Op-Ed" piece in that it quite freely mixes in my opinions with my knowledge of shirtmaking. As such, feel free to take what you like and disagree with the rest!

NOTE: ORIGINAL QUESTIONS ARE SYNOPSIZED IN ITALICS. ANSWERS ARE IN REGULAR TYPE.

A lot of rhetoric is devoted towards what goes into making a great suit. We talk about the best shirt makers out there, but we never have discussed the specifics that go into making a great shirt--one that stands out from something one would purchase from Jos. A. Bank, Polo, etc.
What are the trademarks of the best shirts? How are stiff collars constructed? How long are the sleeves (to where on the wrist are they measured)? How long does a shirt hang? How slim is a shirt relative to the body (especially important for slim individuals)? Buttons? How much needlework is constructed by hand? When considering different custom shirt makers, what questions should one ask and what subtleties should one note?

Trademarks of the best shirts would include:
1] Small, consistent stitching varying between 14 and 30 stitches per inch
2] Exclusively single-needle tailoring**
3] Patterns being matched, not only in the obvious places like pockets and front center, but also from the yoke to the sleeve** and from the sleeve plackets to the sleeve. In the case of plaids, I would add matching the horizontal design from front to back whenever possible.
4] No overabundance of fabric anywhere if the shirt is M-T-M or bespoke
5] Mother-of-Pearl buttons
6] Color-matched buttonholes & sewing thread
7] Buttons continuing down the front until another would not fit if the spacing were consistent
8] A split yoke
9] Sleeve placket buttons
10] No gussets
11] No 6-8 stitch-per-inch faux handwork
12] A sleeve length which is as specified on the tag after the 12th laundering.
** unless a handmade Neapolitan style


Stiff collars are made so by the hardness of the interlining. Cheap interlinings can be 'hard' when new but become rapidly soft after laundering. A Good quality interlining will remain stiff no matter how many launderings have been done. The decision as to fused or not should be yours. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Most importantly, these should be explained to you and you should know in advance which method will be used.
Sleeve length is actually quite simple. As a general rule, the shirtmaker should construct the sleeves so that they hang to a point 4.25" above the tip of the thumb. The tailor should use 4.75" as the rule. If both follow these rules, the requisite 1/2" will show. This is for a man 5'10" to 6' tall with normal length arms. Naturally, proportional adjustments in the 1/8's and 1/4's can be made for variance in height, arm length, and stature.
There are distinct disadvantages to hand sewing. Accuracy, evenness and number of stitches per inch are three. Unadvantaged cost is another.
A well made shirt will measure 30" of more (preferably 32" or more) from the top center of the shoulder to the bottom of the hem in both front and rear.

How high should the armholes be? 1 inch from underarm? Is there an ideal width and taper of the sleeves?
What is the ideal angle (if any) between the sleeves and the body when the shirt is laid flat? (if the angle is too small the sleeves would be constricting, if too large, then cloth bunches under the arm in the natural position, is this correct?)
For customers with very large drops (above 10 inches), are (rear) darts needed or rather all excess fabric around the waist can be taken in at the side seams? Would the latter affect negatively the 3-dimensional balance of the shirt? For large or prominent pectorals, are there any "tricks" to improve the fit around the chest?
Regarding construction, are armholes that show 1 row of stitching over the yoke better than those that show 2 rows, or viceversa (under the assumption single-needle stitching is used)?

The armholes should be as high under the arms as is comfortable to the wearer. The 1-inch you mention is a good starting point. On my personal shirts, I have about 3/4". On more corpulent individuals, the distance tends to increase.
The ideal taper of a sleeve is about 25-35%. There is no ideal width as this depends upon muscular construction and usage of the shirt.
Although we don't think of "angle" when designing sleeve/body joining as there are other considerations, anything more than 65 degrees would be out of the ballpark.
The chest to waist drop you mention of 10" is about the maximum that can be handled by the average seamstress/ster. Above that most would need darts. Some extremely talented patternmakers and sewers can handle 14-15" drops with a bit of elbow grease. Waist suppression, properly handled, should not affect the balance of the shirt. "Properly handled" is a combination of a wide array of factors which take a great deal of experience to handle concurrently.
Yes, there are 'tricks' for fitting large or prominent pectoral muscles. But you wouldn't really want me to give away the whole store, now would you?!?
If single-needle stitching is used, there will be two rows of armhole stitching but only one will be visible from the exterior. The single-needle type is best.

1 inch for the shirt... okay how far should the armhole be from your underarm on a suit jacket?

Something comes first - either the shirt or the suit. In either case, one should be made to accommodate the other. The first one made (usually the shirt) should accommodate the wearer. If this is done, the suit should be 1/4" to 1/2" below the shirt. If the suit armhole is higher than the shirt, it will pull the shirtsleeve up.


For casual shirts, or semi-formal shirts worn without a tie, what is, in your opinion, the ideal placement of the second button on the body of the shirt, counting from the top? Usually, sans tie, shirts are worn with the collar and 1st buttons undone, so the 2nd button dictates the amount of chest exposure. Too much exposure may look too "gangsta", especially under a sportscoat.
If relevant to fit, under what circumstances would you advice in favor of center box pleat, side pleats, or plain back? It seems to me that for large drops a plain back ( with darts) is the best-fitting solution, whereas for modest drops, pleats provide some extra fabric needed in the waist area.

Regarding fit, there are a few key ingredients. Most importantly, the shoulder slope MUST be accurate. The yoke is the "hanger" from which the entire shirt drapes. If it is not made to properly lie upon the shoulders, no other corrections to make the front & back fit are anything more than a butcher job. Slope is a simple measurement. Laying a tailor square across your shoulders and parallel to the floor, measure the distance down from the square at the end of your shoulders. 2.5" is the average. I've seen everything from 1" to more than 4.5". If this is not properly designed into the angle of the top of the front and of the back, then you will have wrinkles. They will run either from the point of the shoulder downward and toward the center or from the neck downward and outward toward the underarm. I despise either and believe that this is fitting point number one! Similar wrinkles must be eliminated from the back of the shirt.
The next normally egregious error is balance. When the shirtfront is opened. the two front centers should hang absolutely parallel to each other. I cannot tell you how to correct this if it is wrong, as there are a myriad of possibly necessary alterations.
The third thing you should look for involves the correct balance between the rear and the front. Wrinkles will occur along the side seams if the back is either too short or long in relation to where the front and rear side seams meet. These wrinkles will run at an angle to the floor. The usual correction here is to lengthen or shorten, as necessary, the distance from the rear of the yoke to the bottom of the rear armhole.
Another error, which I consider unforgivable, concerns the manner in which the correct sleeve length is arrived at. This should be accomplished by allowing the correct amount of fabric between the shoulder and the cuff. Sadly, it is often done by making the cuff small enough to sit in the correct location on the hand and leaving scads of additional fabric in the sleeve.
Please note: I acknowledge that there is great disagreement in this area. Personally, I prefer the appearance of a completely smooth sleeve from shoulder to cuff. Others, among them our own Mr. Alden, the oft-quoted Mr. Flusser, and our in-house Robert's Rules of Order, Mr. Anton, prefer to see a gathering of fabric just above the cuff, considering this not only a styling preference but, as well, a solution to the 'too-short-sleeve' debacle. Bear in mind, however, that in recent months Mr. Anton has begun to realize the error of his thinking and now has a few shirts sans gathers.
Finally, there is body dimension. The shirt should be neither too tight nor too loose. There are advisory guidelines in this matter. The average well fitting shirt is what we term 7-6-7. In other words, there are 7" more fabric in the chest than the actual chest measurement. Likewise, 6" additional in the waist and 7" in the seat or hips. This rule applies to Model Size (15.5"/34"). A very slim shirt would be 5-4-5 and a loose shirt 8-7-8. Importantly, though, these numbers rise dramatically as the size goes up. A 17.5"/35", for example, should be between 8-7-8 and 9-8-9 just to be well fitting.
Very importantly, these are only the major fitting areas. Front to rear placement of the neck hole, size of shoulder blades, stooping, differing left and right dimensions, pigeon chestedness, curvature of the spine, overdeveloped lats, paunch, wide variations in front and rear point-to-point dimensions ... the list goes on and on. There is no way to cover all of this in less than a book so you'll just have to wait.

Moving on, I disagree with your assertion that casual shirts are usually worn with the collar and first button undone. I place the first front button 1.5"-2" down from the collar on casual shirts. I expect this button to be buttoned. If it is not, the collar will usually fall out to the sides and look quite improper. On the other hand, if I am making a shirt designed to be worn sans cravat I shall use a different type of collar design entirely ... one which is meant to be worn open ... and which is designed with the strength to lay properly without being dependent upon the shirt's first button. These shirts usually have an interlined facing on the inside of the front center designed to make the front "roll" out to the collar line - somewhat like a lapel.
Pleats are Never necessary for fitting. They are strictly style attributes. As such, have your way with 'em! If you like them, have them made. If not, then not. Unless the drop is more than 13"-14" and you have a good shirtmaker, darts are also merely a styling option.


How high should a collar rise on the neck? Is there any rule of thumb? I know that a shirt collar is supposed to rise one inch higher than the collar of the jacket (at the back of the neck). Should it rise half-way between the bottom of the neck and the Adam's apple?
Armholes? Please elaborate on the correct sizing. Properly sized armholes seem to be something one can only find through bespoke-quality shirts.

A collar should rise to 1/4"-1/2" below your preferred rear hairline. The longer the neck, the higher the collar. A collar should cover at least 50% of the neck, more if the neck is short. About the lowest rear collar height is 1 1/8" if you want to cover the tie. The highest I make is Tom Wolfe's, which is about 3.5" at the rear. To answer the oft-asked question, yes, it is uncomfortable as hell! The average is 1 3/4"-2" at the rear. The front height is usually 1/4"-1/2" lower than the rear. The rule is that 1/2" of shirt collar should protrude above your jacket in the rear.

A 15.5"/34" custom shirt should have about a 20" armhole. The same shirt in a ready-made size might be as much as 24"-25". This dimension increases and decreases rapidly in proportion to shirt size. RTW manufacturers must fit all from the skinny to the corpulent. On most corpulent individuals, there is excess fat around the front and rear of the arms where they join the body. Hence the necessity for the awful armhole design and the large armhole dimension. Therefore you are correct - it is only on bespoke shirts that the armhole can be correctly sized. Usually, though, it is not. The higher the armhole, the much greater the risk that the shirt won't fit. Most shirt makers will cut it as low as they can get away with.

Regarding body fit & taper, see the answer above to a question on that subject.

May I add this question to the list: what are your favourite stripes and checks?
Of course, this is a truly subjective thing, but still, given your vast knowledge of different patterns, I'm very interested in your opinion.

I cannot answer your question regarding my favorite fabrics in this thread about shirt fitting. Perhaps in the future ...

First of all, thank you very much for taking the time to write the answers and to share your knowledge with us. Very much appreciated!
Regarding the drop and darts, If I understand correctly, the best seamstress/ster would achieve drops of up to 14 in. without the use of darts, whereas a less competent one can only go around it by sewing darts. So basically darts are not a sign of a quality shirt, but just a styling option, just like pleats are. Very interesting.
On the buttoning of casual shirts sans tie, your assertions make sense. Many men unbutton the 1st button and I though this was some kind of rule, good to know this is not necessarily the case. Indeed, collars tend to rest in a sloppy manner with the 1st button undone. What you say about the use of interlining, to provide better lay of the collar when worn open, I find most interesting.
Thanks!
Couple of follow ups:

Quote
2] Exclusively single-needle tailoring
How can this be recognized?

Quote
10] No gussets
I understand that with your methods, a gusset would add nothing to the shirt. On lesser shirts (ie, up to $200!) does a gusset add anything structurally? And I certainly can't imagine that it *detracts*.

Quote
Hence the necessity for the awful armhole design and the large armhole dimension.
I'm sure there are others here with this same problem: I spent too much money on shirts before knowing about this board, and am loathe to simply toss them aside. Can a tailor fix this after the fact? Even if it were to cost, say, as much as a replacement shirt.

One lingering question I've had:

Wearing shirts in the smaller sizes has got me thinking about how a shirt should reflect the proportions of the smaller and slimmer wearer. One of the tricks attributed to the Duke of Windsor's tailor was that he was able to make him look good even if he was on the short side. The magic was simply to keep all proportions appropriate for the Duke's frame.
Is there a guideline/tradition regarding, for example, the front placket width, cuff length and height of yoke ? I've got a suspicion that most RTW shirts will use the same front placket and cuffs for all their sizes. This will leave a short armed 14.5 looking like he's more petite than he really is, with cuffs up to his elbows and the placket covering half of his front.
I'll sneak in another question that I don't expect you to answer, but here goes:
What do you feel about those carved-in-stone rules that Flusser and others state regarding the relation between the shape of a face an its optimal collar type? My view is that it's a lot of manure, except in the extreme cases and 80% of people can wear the collar they like regardless of their facial structure. The outliers, such as those with the longest of faces should perhaps stay away from extreme point collars and people in possession of a few extra chins should perhaps stay away from the full spread collar. I'll admit that the shape of the face is a factor but in most cases, other factors will overshadow it.

Quote
Regarding the drop and darts, If I understand correctly, the best seamstress/ster would achieve drops of up to 14 in. without the use of darts, whereas a less competent one can only go around it by sewing darts. So basically darts are not a sign of a quality shirt, but just a styling option, just like pleats are. Very interesting.

Picture this: You're driving down a straight road (such as the center of the shirt front). You can virtually remove your hands from the steering wheel and the car will basically go straight. Now you enter an S-curve (as in the curve in from the chest to the waist and back out to the hips, then straight down to the tail). Steering is mandatory, no? The sharper and sharper the S-curve, the more you need to steer. Now this: Same S-curve, but the left and right tires have to follow different roads with varying turn radii. That's the road when the drop goes over 10" and the rear waist supression becomes greater and greater than the front waist supression (see red lines on diagram).



You have a steering wheel in each hand. One controls the left tires (shirt front side seam) and the other controls the right tires (shirt back side seam). Couple this with the fact that, because the fabric is cut on a curve (bias), it is very stretchy. If you pull too hard on either piece, not only won't the seams match in length, but the seam will pucker due to the variance in tension.
In stark contrast, darts are sewn in two straight lines. I hope this clarifies why most makers use darts rather than side-seam waist supression. And, yes, in certain fabric patterns the diamond-shaped piece of cloth removed through the use of darts does create quite an interesting pattern. That, however, is a matter of style preference regarding which you should have the choice.

Quote
2] Exclusively single-needle tailoring:How can this be recognized?

1] Both stitches will look the same from the exterior of the shirt - like small, regular hyphens. The single-needle seam, known as a 'lockstitch', will look exactly the same on the underside. However, in 99%* of the cases, the double-needle stiitch will look completely different on the underside. It will look like a series of oval-shaped loops.
2] If a single-needle seam is used for the side-seam of a shirt, you will see the thread of only 1 row of stitching on the exterior. With double-needle you will see two rows.
NOTE: The reason that double-needle machines are used is twofold: First, the obvious. The entire seam is finished in one operation rather than single-needle where you must go back and do the second stitch. Secondly, single-needle is fed by a 6-12,000 yard cone of thread from the top-side and a very small 'bobbin' of thread from the underside. The bobbin thread runs out continuously and must be rewound and replaced. Double-needle machines make a 'chainstitch' which in which both top and bottom threads come from the large cones. Hence, no bobbin winding and changing is necessary which greatly speeds up the $ewing proce$$.
* There is a very, very old (80-90 years) double-needle Singer sewing machine which uses bobbins. For certain decorative sewing operations, it is better than single-needle because it can make two exactly parallel rows of stitches. Nobody I know owns one except me.

Quote
No gussets: I understand that with your methods, a gusset would add nothing to the shirt. On lesser shirts (ie, up to $200!) does a gusset add anything structurally? And I certainly can't imagine that it *detracts*.

Simple answer: Yes. The method of sewing however, not the price, determines a gusset's necessity and effectiveness.

Quote
Hence the necessity for the awful armhole design and the large armhole dimension: I'm sure there are others here with this same problem: I spent too much money on shirts before knowing about this board, and am loathe to simply toss them aside. Can a tailor fix this after the fact? Even if it were to cost, say, as much as a replacement shirt.

No. The 'awful' armhole is cut in a different shape and is cut much lower. There is no way to put the cut away fabric back. Sorry 'bout that.

Quote
Wearing shirts in the smaller sizes has got me thinking about how a shirt should reflect the proportions of the smaller and slimmer wearer. One of the tricks attributed to the Duke of Windsor's tailor was that he was able to make him look good even if he was on the short side. The magic was simply to keep all proportions appropriate for the Duke's frame.
Is there a guideline/tradition regarding, for example, the front placket width, cuff length and height of yoke ? I've got a suspicion that most RTW shirts will use the same front placket and cuffs for all their sizes. This will leave a short armed 14.5 looking like he's more petite than he really is, with cuffs up to his elbows and the placket covering half of his front.

Yes. The most often used sizes are a 1 1/2" center placket and either 2 3/4" or 3" cuff lengths.
In our shop, we stock center placket lining in all sizes from 5/8" (for infants) to 2" (for sizes over 19"/37"). However, changing the center front placket size is absolutely not possible in R-T-W or M-T-M operations where an automatic feeder is used to suckily attach the center placket. (Sorry - a bit of opinion slipped in there). On the other hand, you might consider opting for a plain center which does not visibly indicate the size of center lining used. To which I must slip in - if any center lining is used! Some manufacturers of fabric are these days creating beautiful selvedges on their cloths and trying to convince shirtmakers to save time (while advertising the fabric company) by just turning the selvedge to the inside and calling it a center front. Selvedges, however, shrink radically differently than the remainder of the cloth and will cause extreme puckering after laundering. Advice: See this on a R-T-W shirt, don't buy it. Or else buy a very heavy iron at the same time.
Insofar as the cuff size, you should be offered choices ranging from 1 1/2" to as much as 5"-6" depending upon styling considerations. Common sizes would be from 2" to 3 1/2" in 1/4" increments.
Regarding the yoke: This is the central pattern piece from which all other pattern pieces derive certain of their seam measurements. It is taboo to make any changes to the yoke in both R-T-W and M-T-M shirtmaking. Quite frankly, most custom makers don't like to screw with it either. Even the majority of those making a complete pattern usually start out with at least a preconceived notion about the yoke and more often a complete set of yoke slopers.

Quote
What do you feel about those carved-in-stone rules that Flusser and others state regarding the relation between the shape of a face an its optimal collar type?

"My view is that it's a lot of manure, except in the extreme cases and 80% of people can wear the collar they like regardless of their facial structure. The outliers, such as those with the longest of faces should perhaps stay away from extreme point collars and people in possession of a few extra chins should perhaps stay away from the full spread collar. I'll admit that the shape of the face is a factor but in most cases, other factors will overshadow it." - - - BjornH

I couldn't have answered the question any better than you did. Alan is a dear friend - but this is one case in which friends do not agree in any shape, point or spread!

Quote
What's a good rule on sleeve length for a shorter man?"

An important factor in making this judgement is actually seeing the person I am fitting. For example, the 4.25" rule for 6' men is only a guideline. This is the kind of thing which should be judged by eye. However, as you have asked for general rules, here goes. Assuming the man's hands and arms are in proportion to those of a 5'10-6' man (say, 15.5"-16"/34"-35"), I would guesstimate as follows:

5' > 5'4" Shirt up from thumb 3.5-3.75"
5'4" > 5'7" Shirt up from thumb 3.75"-4"
5'7" > 5'10" Shirt up from thumb 4"-4.25"
5'10"-6'2" Shirt up from thumb 4.25"-4.5"
6'2"-6'6" Shirt up from thumb 4.5"-4.75"
6'6" & up Basketball Jersey with short sleeves

However, I might at the same time change the rules for amount of cuff protruberance from the jacket. For example, I might reduce the showing cuff to 3/8" on the lower end of the chart and increase it to as much as 3/4" on the upper end.

Copyright © 2004 Alexander Kabbaz. All rights reserved. Forum members may copy, quote, and print for forum or their own individual personal use. Republishing in part or whole by any means is prohibited.

Thanks for reposting, Alex. This is hugely informative.

Fantastic post, Thank you. I have a question about the yoke. Why is the split yoke superior or, what are the shortcomings of a yoke that isn't split?

manicturncoat wrote:I have a question about the yoke. Why is the split yoke superior

As far as I know, the main point of interest in a split yoke is that it gives the ability to have different measurements in the two shoulders. Also, an alteration tailor would therefore be able to change the length of only one shoulder. I don't know if this is the reason Mr Kabbaz had in mind.

Extremely informative and helpful, Alex, as always. As you know, I have embarked on my first bespoke shirt experience, and have had something of a dilemma regarding sleeve length. I was going to post this as a separate thread until I read this one, and instead should, I think, post the question here.

I want to have about 1/2" of "linen" showing past my jacket. The dilemma centers around ensuring that this will be the case after many washings. My shirtmaker told me that, since he pre-shrinks his fabrics, I can expect no more than 1-2% shrinkage over the course of washings. However, on a 35" sleeve this could amount to as much as .5", or more if his estimate of shrinkage is too low. This would mean, of course, that if the length is right at first, it certainly won't be after a few washings. His suggestion was to begin with the length greater than ideal, with the expectation that it would end up right after a few washings. But I don't want to be walking around with 1" of linen in the early stages! I mentioned to him the Hilditch & Key device of leaving about 3/4" of sleeve fabric in the cuff for lengthening after shrinkage. This way, we could have it right at first, and then later, after some shrinkage, use some of the buried fabric to restore the length. He balked at this, saying that the buried fabric would ruin the esthetics of the cuffs. Since this was my first shirt, I acquiesced. So Alex, here are my questions:

1. How do you handle this problem?
2. With pre-shrinking of fabric, how much shrinkage do you estimate with your shirts?

Any insights or suggestions by other London Loungers would be also be much appreciated.

South Pender: Much as I might sympathize with your plight, your expectations are not completely reasonable. This is why: I, too, would object to leaving 3/4" of extra fabric in the cuffs. It would be a bit unwieldy and would show in that the cuff would not be flat. Additionally, when you later went to lengthen the sleeve by re-sewing the cuff lower on the sleeve, the needle holes would show for at least a few washings. Much as your maker might say, "But you told me to", you would still feel resentful. His course in refusing is correct.
And now a BIG but: The proper solution, should you care to exercise it, would be to have the shirt made correctly in the first place and then wash it multiple times (6 to 12) before wearing it. You can shorten this process greatly by washing and hot drying once or twice. Here I disagree with your chemisier. Given your concerns, this is something he should not only have suggested ... but should have offered to do for you.

Edit: Sorry, I missed your direct questions:

1. How do you handle this problem?
2. With pre-shrinking of fabric, how much shrinkage do you estimate with your shirts?

1. I leave an extra 1/4" inside the cuff, in addition to the seam allowance. If I screw it up worse than that, I deserve to have to make new sleeves.
2. I object to the concept of "estimating". Makers are paid to know what they are doing. Each new type of fabric should be tested. It isn't rocket science. Measure a square yard. Wash it and dry it. Measure the result. Voilá! You know what percentage it shrinks. That is not to say that a substandard batch won't occasionally come through from the mill and an odd shirt or two might have to be remade. As a matter of fact, I just had one of those from a member. (Actually, I think he took it to one of those Santeria priestesses and had a spell cast upon it ... but he'll get his comeuppance one day, too ... In any event, he's bigger than I so a new shirt he'll get.) But estimation? Of shrinkage? Phooey!.

I've tried many times to answer the split yoke advantages vs. one-piece yoke using words. Sadly, all attempts have failed. Now, you'll just have to put up with my rudimentary artwork. Following is an explanation of only one of the advantages. There are others, each of which would require the same creation of artwork and the same undue suffering on your part. Suffice it to say that I am showing one simple example. Not only do I know a myriad of others ... but discover new ones quite often. As a matter of fact ... not to pick up on anything written elsewhere ... but I wish that shirts cut with side panels were acceptable. Gosh ... could I have fun with that seam!

If there is something unclear about the following, please try to be clearer than I in your question. This is quite difficult to deal with using words.

Diagram #1 shows a basic split yoke. The upper straight line is the seam which joins the yoke to the front. The left quasi-vertical line is the seam which joins to the sleeve. The rear line which emanates from the center straight outwards and then begins to curve is the seam which joins to the rear of the shirt. The semi-circular curved line joins to the collar band. The vertical line in the center is the seam which joins the left and right yoke halves.

Note that the center seam split is perfectly perpendicular to the rear seam. When yoke #1 is joined in the center, it will remain as shown except that there will be no split. Except for the stitches, it will be exactly the same as a one-piece yoke created for a completely symmetrical individual. It is important to note that only one stripe ends before running all the way to the outside of the yoke near the back joining seam. This is a normal appearance of a non-chevroned yoke (except those made on one nationality of yoke system where the rear of the yoke is a perfectly straight line).

Diagram #2 shows a split yoke created for a person whose shoulders curve forward. Note that the center seam is cut at an outward-leaning angle in relation to the rear joining seam. You can see how when these are sewn together (Diagram #3) the angle forces the yoke to cant to the fore in accordance with the forward curving shoulders. It is important to note that only one stripe ends before running all the way to the outside of the yoke near the back joining seam. Again, this is the normal appearance of a non-chevroned yoke. It should be noted that in the diagram, the stripes show a slight angularity to the fore at the center after sewing. This is true, but has the tendency to be invisible when worn for a variety of reasons.



In Diagram #4 I have created the same forward-curving yoke as a one-piece. Now, when this single-piece construction is laid down upon the fabric and cut, there is no way to mask (as there was in Diagram #3) the forward curvature. It is made blatantly obvious by the number of stripes which run off the back joining seam of the yoke. Additionally, the stripe at the front-joining seam is now direcetly parallel to the seam. This is not the normal, aesthetically expected manner of stripe appearance on a yoke ... but it is forced to be because of the shape of the pattern.

In summation: There is no modification which can be done with a split yoke that cannot be done with a one-piece yoke. However, there is no way to conceal a body's unusual shoulder characteristics with a one-piece yoke as can be accomplished if the center split is present. Naturally, this does not apply to plain colored, high-count broadcloths unless they are being inspected using a magnifying glass.

AlexanderKabbaz wrote:And now a BIG but: The proper solution, should you care to exercise it, would be to have the shirt made correctly in the first place and then wash it multiple times (6 to 12) before wearing it. You can shorten this process greatly by washing and hot drying once or twice. Here I disagree with your chemisier. Given your concerns, this is something he should not only have suggested ... but should have offered to do for you.

Thanks Alex. Let me make sure I understand your recommendation. You must be advising that I have the chemisier make the sleeves maybe 3/8" to 1/2" too long at first, so that after I perform the multiple washings, they end up at the right length. This would suggest that most of the shrinkage occurs on the first 6 to 12 washings, and then hardly at all after that. Do I have both parts right?

Thanks Alex. Let me make sure I understand your recommendation. You must be advising that I have the chemisier make the sleeves maybe 3/8" to 1/2" too long at first, so that after I perform the multiple washings, they end up at the right length. This would suggest that most of the shrinkage occurs on the first 6 to 12 washings, and then hardly at all after that. Do I have both parts right?

Emminently so. (Six should do the trick within 1/8") But see my edit above. I should rather see an exact amount added as per the shrinkage percentage.

Just to amuse you a little bit, I once had a bunch of shirts made at Emma Willis in London. Several were made from the same superfine poplin, but in different colours. All but the mid blue example were fine. Said blue one suffered from excess shrinkage of the interlining. Collar and cuffs were exchanged, but the problem returned after the first wash.

I finally had a session with them to sort things out. At their prices I felt somewhat bellicose. So they agreed to remeasure me, and the shirt, and one of the other shirts that were fine. We discovered that the fabric had not shrunk, but STRETCHED. The sleeves had gained a full 1" in length!

We discovered that the fabric had not shrunk, but STRETCHED. The sleeves had gained a full 1" in length!

That's actually not as rare as one might think - although it does turn all the rules somewhat upside-down when it happens!

Which is why, for many years, I have not considered my wares to be shirts. They are my children, which I put into extended foster care. Some are goodies-two-shoes. Others are eternally terrible-twos. And then there are those rebellious teenagers.

It's just easier if you don't think of them as inanimate shirts.

Jeez Alex, there's no hope! Is nothing easy in this world?

Alex, just a little more on shrinkage if I may. I hand wash my own dress shirts, using cool or lukewarm water. I then hang them to drip dry before ironing (which I try to do when they are still just a little damp). I never send them to the cleaners or use a dryer. If I'm told to expect, say, 2% shrinkage, can I assume that it should be less for me because of my washing protocol? In your experience, how much shrinkage occurs with this very gentle approach? Another thought and question: Do shirting fabrics differ in lawful ways with respect to shrinkage percentage so that it is possible for a chemisier to say with accuracy that such-and-such a fabric can be expected to shrink by not more than 2%, whereas this other fabric can be expected to shrink more--say not more than 3%? A corollary question would be: Can we trust the percentage values given? I guess you've indicated earlier that this is an empirical question that the chemisier should be able to answer. However, if the chemisier has pre-shrunk the fabric and calculated a 1% reduction, shouldn't we then expect a diminishing percentage with future washings?

Thank you for your answer on my split yoke question, it could not have been clearer.

Thank you manicturncoat.

SouthPender: Whew! I should have brought my calculus text along.

Here's the scoop:
1] I test a piece of every new fabric type and calculate the percentage of change. The vast majority of high quality broadcloths & poplins from top mills such as Alumo and Albini shrink roughly 1%.
2] I build a 1% shrinkage factor into my patterns.
3] Using a variety of time-tested methods, I shrink all fabrics to a degree where there is 1% shrinkage left in the cloth and then cut the shirt.
4] I cut and make the shirt.
5] If the client has been a good doobie, I then wash the shirt.
6] If he has been a supremely good doobie, I may then check the measurements of the washed shirt depending upon my mood.
7] If it has shrunk a bit too much, I'll telephone the client and comment that I've noticed him gaining weight recently and, perhaps, he might consider laying off the truffles for a while.
8] If the measures are dead-on, I may still call the client and compliment him upon his recent exercise regimen and the good effects it has been having upon maintaining his weight.
9] However, in no instance can the shirt be wrong. The client is always at fault, having most certainly gained or lost subsequent to our most recent visit.

As far as your more mundane question regarding method of washing, I believe the answer to be no. No matter what the washing style, eventually the cotton will shrink as much as its mother's genes dictate. As I said previously, you can speed up this process with a hot wash & dry or two.

Note that, if you are pressing your shirt damp, you can certainly stretch it out a bit using the pressure of your iron. That's actually the solution to Item 7 above.

And, finally, here is a very frank answer to your 'expected shrinkage' question: Unless your maker also performs Steps 1 through 3 above, I wouldn't trust a darn thing they say in this regard. All they're parroting to you are industry norms such as "Voiles shrink 3-5%", and the like.