Short torso,long legs - what now?

Edit Post

Putting a whole lot of muscle on your legs/ass with heavy squats and similar will improve your sitting height and give the illusion of shorter femurs.

Also you could get some shoes with lifts in them and wear them around for a while and see if anyone notices you having even longer legs or if people just don't notice.  I suspect the general public doesn't pay much attention to proportions (example: if I see a girl that looks tall I have to look at her feet to see if she's wearing heels, I don't automatically register that her legs are weirdly long).

Edit Post

Quote from: SpiderProwler on June 20, 2014, 04:48:31 AMI dunno how you guys are getting such low inseam measurements. I'm 173 cm, with a 94 cm sitting height, and I'm 31.25 inches from crotch to floor. I wear a size 30 pants, but my real length is probably 29 (pant inseams are crotch to ankle).
(....)
Either you guys aren't measuring right, or you have torso/leg length ratios in the top .1 percentile.

At my 'floor-inseam' of 32" I'm wearing 32" jeans and they fit perferctly. I want not to end them at my ancles, (high water trousers). The trousers from my business suits are longer too than crotch-ancle.

To me the 'floor-inseam' (floor to crotch, in straight standing position) and bodyheight are the only reliable and very easy to do measurements. Especially sitting height gives discussion over and over again, as there is with the labeling of clothes. (I've just measured a new pair of jeans, L32: inseam actually just over 31")

Edit Post

Quote from: Tall on June 20, 2014, 05:05:06 AMAre you possibly measuring from your pubic bone to the ground? That could account for the difference.

No, measure straight standing, nked from floor to the point my legs start under my torso (eliminating ball size  )

Edit Post

Quote from: shorttorsolonglegs on June 20, 2014, 07:33:27 AMMy sitting height is 45 cm,my inseam(from balls lol) is 89(!!!) cm or 35 inch and my wingspan is 170,so over my height.
My brother,who is 6'1'' (184,5 cm) has the following measurements:sitting height 93.5 cm,inseam same as mine 88-90 cm,and a wingspan of 190 cm. What do you think about our proportions?

Your brother looks perfectly proportional to me with nice long leggs. Perhaps somewhat over average long, but definitely not disproportional.

Your numbers are hard to believe. (I do believe you, but it's just hard to imagine what it looks like). As a LL candidate I've done mutch research on proportions and practical stuff, but this is a first time to me.
Your bodyheight minus 35" floor inseam gives the torso of a 4' child(?).
What jeans size (W) and shirts are you wearing?

Edit Post

Quote from: Rick52 on June 20, 2014, 11:42:20 AMAt my 'floor-inseam' of 32" I'm wearing 32" jeans and they fit perferctly. I want not to end them at my ancles, (high water trousers). The trousers from my business suits are longer too than crotch-ancle.

To me the 'floor-inseam' (floor to crotch, in straight standing position) and bodyheight are the only reliable and very easy to do measurements. Especially sitting height gives discussion over and over again, as there is with the labeling of clothes. (I've just measured a new pair of jeans, L32: inseam actually just over 31")

I believe my sitting height ratio is more accurate. Based on these results, I'm led to believe I have proportional legs. If my inseam was one inch shorter (becoming 30 inches), my upper body would be 1 inch longer than the Dutch sitting height average (considering my spine is the same length as my head is probably 5 mm shorter), and that would be at 173 cm.

I choose to believe sitting height and my x-ray measurements which show me to have disproportionately short legs rather than this floor inseam business .

Sitting height is the common measurement and it is perfectly valid assuming you're not morbidly obese. Using random measurements like floor inseam confuses people. Please just stick with the tried and tested measurements in these discussions.

Edit Post

sitting height maybe tried and tested but I have noticed that it is not always relevant.

2 guys appear to have the same leg length. Their belt line is as the same height. one guys appears to have a 4 inch higher sitting height BUT is only 2 inches or less taller than the other guy. I see this a lot in my office.

it has already been discussed that people with a wider pelvic* tend to have higher sitting heights. I noticed this in a guy in my office who is 5'10 but sits higher than guys who are 6'2.he is not fat but he has a wider waist.

In short, the difference between a shot guys height and a tall guys height is very rarely inseam height difference plus sitting height difference.

some guy here says his sitting height is 94cm and his height is 173cm, This guy Is exactly 10cm taller than me at 5'4. his sitting height (94cm) is 11cm higher than mine. you would then think that we have the same (-1) inseam length right? well his inseam is almost 3 inches longer than mine. my inseam is 28inches. (my pants are 27inch inseam)
and yes I have measured my sitting height so many times and it always comes back as 83cm

Sitting height can be misleading.

its better to stand up and measure your proportions. thick bones will increase ur sitting height but not necessarily your height as well.

Edit Post

Think what you want. I got actual x-rays of my legs and they were the same length as someone on old forum  who was 5'6, mine were shorter than apotheosis who was 5'7 and had short legs.

And yet my floor inseam would suggest I have normally proportioned legs. Floor inseam is misleading because everyone is measuring to a different point, applying different pressure to their crotch, etc.

I guarantee you that at an 83 cm sitting height you are not only 1 inch shorter upper body wise than I am. I have x-ray results, that is the only objective measurement here.

Edit Post

Quote from: Rick52 on June 20, 2014, 12:03:18 PMYour brother looks perfectly proportional to me with nice long leggs. Perhaps somewhat over average long, but definitely not disproportional.

Your numbers are hard to believe. (I do believe you, but it's just hard to imagine what it looks like). As a LL candidate I've done mutch research on proportions and practical stuff, but this is a first time to me.
Your bodyheight minus 35" floor inseam gives the torso of a 4' child(?).
What jeans size (W) and shirts are you wearing?

Well my brother is quite proportional,that's what I think too,this is why I don't understand why I am such a freak.
You're right,those numbers are indeed hard to believe because I gave the wrong values.For the sitting height I measured only my torso and for the inseam I measured my jeans length.After that I measured myself correctly but accidentally posted the wrong values.
So the correct sitting height is 70 cm and an inseam of 80.Sorry for the mistake,those numbers were quite insane lol
I'm quite fat so my jeans size is 32/32 and I wear XS or rarely S in T shirts.
You made me quite curious about the average inseam and sitting height:can I find info about this?I found this but am not sure how accurate is it http://ww2.valdosta.edu/~jnienow/height.html
Also guys,there is no chance for me to add at least one extra inch to my torso?Help me out please,I really need it.Is there any research on this topic?

Edit Post

If you slouch you could correct your posture with a harness but as for torso lengthening?  The back is very complex compared to femur and tibs. 
Stretching bones is one thing but I don't think that you could safely stretch the spinal fluid/jelly without risking paralysis.

Edit Post

show photo stop the troll