The London Lounge

Could someone kindly tell me the point of this?

A three button coat can look most elegant, provided the top button is not too high and is, of course, left unbuttoned. But if one wishes longer softly rolled lapels, with more display of shirt and tie, why not simply go for two buttons? I look forward, once again, to being educated!

Perhaps (and I'm guessing here) it's for practical reasons:
- in terms of elegance, two-button looks better BUT
3-button acts more as a proper 'coat' if the weather is nippier than one thought?

I've heard teh 3-button-rolled to 2-button lapel referred to as a Brooks Brother lapel, I seem to recall.

Hell of a time to make sure that my dry-cleaners don't iron it 'wrong' (I've got two suits like that...)

It seems to be one of those unfathomable concepts of the American "trad" style- like suitcoats with no waist suppression.

Well to be fair, I don't actually think it looks so bad, but a man of style really ought to make up his mind whether he wants two buttons or three!

Luca wrote:Perhaps (and I'm guessing here) it's for practical reasons:
- in terms of elegance, two-button looks better BUT
3-button acts more as a proper 'coat' if the weather is nippier than one thought?

I can't speak of the original intent or purpose of such jackets, but this would be one reason I'd consider it. The look seems to be less formal, in my opinion, than either a dedicated 2- or 3-button jacket. As such, it is well suited to tweeds and sportcoats. It can also provide variety as with many other such detail choices.

pbc

It seems to be one of those unfathomable concepts of the American "trad" style- like suitcoats with no waist suppression.

This is part of a myth that says the 3 roll to 2 is an American thing. Some SR tailors even perpetuate the story.

I was having lunch many years ago with an old crusty group of A&S alums (the older crowd) when a young friend of mine asked about the 3 roll 2 style and questioned its American origins. One of the oldest A&S tailors looked up and said, "we have been making the 3 roll 2 as our house style since the 20s so I can't see what the Yanks had to do with it!" I suspect the Yanks liked the style and copied it in the 30s, as in that period, they aped most of British style and adopted it as their own. So the Trad thing is probably a lot more traditional English than one would imagine.

Well to be fair, I don't actually think it looks so bad, but a man of style really ought to make up his mind whether he wants two buttons or three!

There was a time when I would have agreed with you and cut mostly 3s. But in the last five years or so I have been won over by the relaxed style of the 3 roll 2 and most of what I wear is in this style.

Cheers

M Alden

Gents,

All things being equal, whether you have one, two or three buttons, the working button will be at about the same height, perhaps within an inch.

The value of the 3 button for me is symmetry, there being a button above and below and the ability to use the buttons to close the jacket.

There are a lot of days when a cap and scarf are all that is needed and I find that closing the jacket at the top button keeps in the warmth and wards off the wind. The value of the top button is even greater if it is cold enough and you have popped the collar so that the lapels close to each other. This doesn't work with a single or a two button jacket.

The convention of rolling over the top button simply opens the jacket and relaxes it.

I recently received a great tweed from Edwin at Steed in a green cloth with a blue overpane from the old Teviotex collection at Lovat Mill. The jacket was made 3 button roll to 2 where previous jackets were 3 button, maybe rolling into the top button. For a heavy tweed, I definately like the higher closing, but admit that the 3-to-2 has balance and a certain dash.

My take away is that the heavier the tweed, the more likely that it will be used in the cold and the higher I'd like the native lapel roll. That's my view at least.

DDM

I used to get nearly all 2Bs, but now get only 3 roll 2. I still hate the true 3. Tastes change and who knows, but I expect to be a 3 roll 2 man for the rest my life.

Whenever I see the soft rolled buttonhole on a lapel, Brooks Brothers and J Press come to mind.

I like the look, because in my mind it truly shows how good tailoring can be done.

Best Regards,

Cufflink79

DD MacDonald wrote:Gents,

All things being equal, whether you have one, two or three buttons, the working button will be at about the same height, perhaps within an inch. DDM

...unless you choose the Windsor-style 2 button, one above and one below waistline.



My olive PoW was cut like that and I am quite happy with the outcome. Pictures to follow soon, weather permitting.

Good one Costi!

DD MacDonald wrote:Good one Costi!

Thanks!

Regarding the original question - I actually think the 3 roll to 2 is much like the patina on a leather shoe. At its origin, it is the sign of a weathered coat that got a lot of wear and lost the crisp shape it had when it came just fresh off the ironing board. This is where the nonchalance of a 3 roll to 2 comes from.
I have a dark blue SB 3B blazer made some 6-7 years ago in a heavy gabardine. It got a lot of wear and, although in the beginning it was a true 3B, now the lapels have naturally rolled almost all the way to the middle button. It may be that it had a slightly short collar, or that the lapels were not pressed very hard, or that the cloth has such excellent spring and elasticity that it tends to straighten up, but the fact is that THIS blazer is the best 3B roll to 2 that I have! I think part of the secret is to cut a 3 roll to 2 making it look AS IF it had unrolled naturally, much the same way a new shoe can be aged artificially employing a special polishing technique, but you have to know how to do it if it is to look good!

The problem with this is that a buttonhole is often unsightly on the wrong side of it; when we make that style we reverse the top buttonhole to account for this. A natural 3b which had rolled over to the second would expose the ugly back side of the buttonhole. I am curious about something- has Sator or any others ever seen reference to this style in any cutting manuals? I never have.

The problem you mention can easily be solved by sewing a double face buttonhole. In my case, the lapels have unrolled, but have not rolled over all the way to the other side, so the buttonhole back would only be visible from one side, not from the front. Being a very dark blue, you don't see much anyway.

I think part of the secret is to cut a 3 roll to 2 making it look AS IF it had unrolled naturally

I couldn't agree more, Costi. That's why I always tell my tailor to do a three-roll-to-two-and-a-half: the lapel points towards the middle button, but you can hardy see the top buttonhole, unlike in the classic Brooks or J Press sack coats.

Absolutely. Mr. Parker at Poole and his coatmaker have successfully made to my instruction that the top button and buttonhole be exactly edge-on to the facing viewer when the lapel rolls through them. The curve is a beautiful thing to see. One is tempted to rhapsodic comparisons with boat hulls and raptor wings . . . .