men's running shorts: shorter or longer?

I played in the company softball league a few years back. My closet mostly had running shorts, but I still had a couple of pairs of general athletic shorts in rotation at the time. I picked a pair of 6" inseam champion mesh shorts. People made fun of me for showing up in short shorts! That was the longest pair I had!

It worked out to my favor though since I was remembered more for my shorts than my poor play on the field.

Just wear pantaloons. All the cool guys are doing it now.

The general rule of thumb is the longer the shorts, the bigger the hobby jogger. I used to wear basketball shorts when I started running, it's just the way it is.

With any shorts length trends you should take into account the growing number of hobby joggers. That's what you're seeing there.

I wear basketball shorts to do most of my runs. I wear short running shorts for my long runs and races. Basketball shorts don't necessarily bother me when I run, but my legs do feel much less restricted and lighter in running shorts

It is because people got fat. Fat persons wearing short shorts looks really bad.

Yes, at one time everyone wore 3" inseam running shorts or shorter. If you were fat you did not run. Not too long ago all basketball players also wore short shorts.

My pet peeve is lack of pockets. If you are running 2-3 miles you don't need pockets, but if you are running 20 miles you need pockets for "stuff".

Live to run wrote:

The general rule of thumb is the longer the shorts, the bigger the hobby jogger. I used to wear basketball shorts when I started running, it's just the way it is.

With any shorts length trends you should take into account the growing number of hobby joggers. That's what you're seeing there.

+1, i used to wear basketball shorts when i started too, the went to 7", then 5", now i just don't give a sh1t what people think and wear 2.5"

Kudzu, the best running shorts I have ever found as an aging runner (37) who no longer wants to wear splits are the Brooks team shorts at Running Warehouse:

http://www.runningwarehouse.com/Brooks_Mens_Curved_Side_Panel_Short/descpage-BMCPS.html

I am not shilling for the site or the brand, but these perform well for fast running and still cover a good amount of leg. No pockets or other crap (sorry to the pocket guy above). Just a good running short that I feel comfortable wearing around town without embarrassing my family.

It says 5" inseam but I have found that they feel a bit longer than most of my 5" shorts.

Hope it helps.

Runnnnnnin Daaaad wrote:

Kudzu, the best running shorts I have ever found as an aging runner (37) who no longer wants to wear splits are the Brooks team shorts at Running Warehouse:

http://www.runningwarehouse.com/Brooks_Mens_Curved_Side_Panel_Short/descpage-BMCPS.html

I am not shilling for the site or the brand, but these perform well for fast running and still cover a good amount of leg. No pockets or other crap (sorry to the pocket guy above). Just a good running short that I feel comfortable wearing around town without embarrassing my family.

It says 5" inseam but I have found that they feel a bit longer than most of my 5" shorts.

Hope it helps.

Most brands actually have a team short model that's non-split but fairly short. They're actually more old school, in a sense, as true split shorts weren't around in the early days of the running boom. I believe Ron Hill pretty much invented them, calling them the "freedom short." He also wore a singlet that was basically made out of a hockey net--for ventilation. That innovation proved less popular than the split short.

For a different perspective from an old lady, my problem with the length of running shorts is not the length of the inseam but the length from crotch to waistband. I can no longer find any shorts that aren't these super-low hip-huggers, and I just don't feel comfortable wearing shorts whose waistband sits 4 inches below my belly button. Fortunately I still have lots of old shorts that fit, and I hope they will last long enough for me to ride out this trend.

For what it's worth, I like relatively short shorts on men. I quit watching the NBA when their "shorts" hit knee-length.

Runnnnnnin Daaaad wrote:

Kudzu, the best running shorts I have ever found as an aging runner (37) who no longer wants to wear splits are the Brooks team shorts at Running Warehouse:

http://www.runningwarehouse.com/Brooks_Mens_Curved_Side_Panel_Short/descpage-BMCPS.html

I am not shilling for the site or the brand, but these perform well for fast running and still cover a good amount of leg. No pockets or other crap (sorry to the pocket guy above). Just a good running short that I feel comfortable wearing around town without embarrassing my family.

It says 5" inseam but I have found that they feel a bit longer than most of my 5" shorts.

Hope it helps.

Haha! Those shorts in your link are described as men's, then at the bottom the description says "Leave your competition in the dust with the Brooks Women's Curved Side Panel Short."

I love love love the Van Cortlandt shorts from tracksmith. I have 4 pairs, which comes to $240, for you math majors. 4 inch inseam.

nothing rivals the beauty of distance runners' anorexic legs

What about compression shorts? They truly are the best to stop chafing and aerodynamic. Yet only about 5% of men can pull them off without looking like dooshnozzles. Fit women look great in them.

Iron manly wrote:

nothing rivals the beauty of distance runners' anorexic legs

well said.

i will tell you guys one thing. I always wear a 5 incher with the waistband rolled up, so it becomes more like 3 incher. All kinds of people cant help themselves, they have to look at my legs. And its not in a disgusted manner. On the contrary, you can see them looking and admiring the beauty that is the sight of my ultra thin legs. Older women, milfs, young boys, old guys, they all cant help but take a long hard look.

compression shorts are for triathletes.

I'm a sprinter, but don't quite go as extreme as Trayvon with distance shorts in WC/OG events. I wear BOA 1" at the track for workouts, but normal sprinter half tights for races. I don't ever run on roads or away from track facilities.

Large sporting good stores are a waste of time. Unless it's an emergency and you need something (dozen golf balls, softball bat, etc.) or a sportsball team championship t-shirt, it's not worth going to.

You're better off hitting the outlet store and getting a pair of women's running shorts for $10.

amkelley wrote:

For a different perspective from an old lady, my problem with the length of running shorts is not the length of the inseam but the length from crotch to waistband. I can no longer find any shorts that aren't these super-low hip-huggers, and I just don't feel comfortable wearing shorts whose waistband sits 4 inches below my belly button. Fortunately I still have lots of old shorts that fit, and I hope they will last long enough for me to ride out this trend.

For what it's worth, I like relatively short shorts on men. I quit watching the NBA when their "shorts" hit knee-length.

Is this because that is what the women want? Ask and ye shall receive.

What about the Brooks Sherpa?

http://www.brooksrunning.com/en_us/mens-sherpa-5in-short/210824.html?dwvar_210824_color=659#start=2

My pet peeve with "running" shorts sold at retail stores is that most have side/hand pockets. I like shorts with a mid-back zip pocket for secure storage of keys.

Why wear shorts at all, just wear tights.