March 26, 2007

Windsor = 0

It has come to my attention that a full Windsor knot is also known as a double Windsor.

If W = 2W, then W must equal 0.

But that means that that a half Windsor (1/2W) would also equal 0.

This equation would have us believe that a half Windsor is the same as a double Windsor, which it clearly isn't.

In any case, now that I know how to tie a Windsor, I'm never going back to the traditional four-in-hand knot. The Windsor knot uses up more of the tie, you see, thus not dangling as far down on the body. Thus, the Windsor is an important tactic for short people who don't want their ties hanging below their waist.

8 comments:

Adam said...

Don't do it! Windsors are stodgy old-man knots, even if Forrest Whittaker used one.

lal said...

a lot of so called arithmetical paradoxes are based o multiplication by zero.

the problem with the 2w is that it results in a big bulky knot

dl004d said...

Adam is taller than 5'8" — therefore, I'm not listening to his advice.

ed002d said...

There's always the half-windsor, which is less bulky/stodgy while still providing a symmetrical knot (if tied correctly). The four-in-hand knot always looks crooked.

Anonymous said...

I have been using the shelby not for years http://www.tieguide.com/pratt-shelby.htm

JWH said...

er.... knot.... not "not"

dl004d said...

Thanks, Jeff. I'll try that one, although I'm not sure there's enough looping to be as beneficial to short people as the Windsor.

jwh said...

it might be the perfect compromise for you... not fat enough to be geezer like, but has an extra turn in there for you shorties...