I didn't realize it was a military thing. And in fact, I don't believe it is.
I have seen people wear their watch "upside down", including made up women in fashionable attire that would be the polar opposite of the rough style the article is portraying. On the contrary, I looked at a few random pictures of soldiers and in most of them the watch worn the standard way, with the face on the outside of the wrist. In fact, I find the "upside down" way more "girly" than "manly", simply because I think I saw more girls do it than men.
For practical reasons, I guess there are advantages to both. But the "protect the watch" argument, I don't really buy it. It is situational. If you have your watch inside your wrist, you bang it when you have your hands on a table, when you pick heavy stuff, it may come in contact with stuff you have on your belt (tools, gun, ...), etc...
I suspect the article is just an ad. They want to sell a watch for "tough guys" and came up with that story.
I suspect the article is just an ad. They want to sell a watch for "tough guys" and came up with that story.
The whole site reeks of "Chinese-made watch that we slapped our logo on", with some tacti-cool sprinkled on top. This article in particular is a little too "just so" for my tastes.
But my main objection is that I've known folks that were in the military (and not having served myself), and of the ones I currently know (and therefore, can trust my memory), not a one wears their watch on the inside.
But we've got plenty of military folk on HN, I welcome being corrected.
I have seen some military personnel wearing watches upside down, however, majority of military personnel wears electronic watches on top of the wrist and have it covered with sleeves.
WW1 trench watches had a utility - time of the attacks were timed and they had no radios. With the invent of portable radios and communication equipment, utility of wrist watch to start military operations significantly diminished.
With that said, WW1 trench watches were just pocket watches on the wide wrist band. They aren't comfortable to wear in all positions, so I highly doubt that even during WW1, a lot of soldiers would wear their watches upside down.
>I suspect the article is just an ad. They want to sell a watch for "tough guys" and came up with that story.
Look at this £240 tacticool watch we, the authors happen to sell.
Meanwhile when I was in we all wore the disposable £5 casio you could get from Argos an didn't care if it got smashed up
I've never heard of this practice and spent a lot of time around military personnel. I was familiar with "Buy a diving watch. It is more likely to survive the rigors of the field."
Nothing about wearing it "upside down" and not sure I know what that means. Before cell phones became the new standard timepiece, pretty sure I wore my watch on the inside of my wrist and see no reason to think there is a "correct" way for it to face. Back of the wrist or inside of the wrist seems like arbitrary personal preference to me.
For what it's worth, my dad always wore it inside his wrist, and always said it's so you don't fling your arm out and smash it on something. He'd also twist it around when doing close work. So he, at least, both believed it and did it.
The real reason: if you ask me the time when I'm holding a pint, I'll pour my drink on you, not me (this was the punchline in an old British comedy sketch I can't find a reference to now).
When I did factory work back in the '80 (when people still wore watches to tell time) quite a few folks on the floor wore their watches that way to protect them from damage. Whether that makes sense or not depends on what you're doing with your hands.
Military do it when in the field to keep the reflections down. Women do it with watches that have bands designed to look like bracelets, they get the practicality of a watch while still appearing to just be wearing a bracelet.
Haha, same. My wife has always worn it this way, and while she grew up in a military family, only she does this. She just finds it convenient when doing things.
Tried it just now. My wrist is now raised off my macbook, I feel my own pulse now, and the terrible clatter of glass scratching on aluminum can be heard as I type. But I feel so cool.
Former military here…I only ever did this a few times in very specific circumstances. I wasn’t infantry but when exercising that role I did do this a couple of times when on sentry for a long time or when in an OP (observation post). This was rare and only on exercise, I never needed to do it ‘for real’.
The reason I did it is whilst lying down or in very confined/concealed area it’s easier to turn your wrist to see the time, which passes amazingly slowly in these situations. If you imagine you arm outstretched in front of you it’s a lot easier to see the watch face if it’s on the inside of the wrist as you have to turn your arm much less.
I’m not sure I am explaining it adequately, but it these circumstances it’s definitely easier.
At all other times and in my normal role I never did this.
Regarding light discipline, many brands make military versions that are much harder to accidentally press the backlight or in modern tomes allow you to turn off the heartrate monitor lights. Also, we would generally wear long sleeves which would cover a watch in most situations anyway, even in hot climates. There was a gradual mover to 3/4 length or turned up sleeves during my time, when watches would then often then get covered by tactical gloves or sometimes even dedicated covers made to conceal a watch.
i did this for a while (non military) and the entire reason was i found the motion to read the watch much more ergonomic. reading an "outside" watch requires twisting my arm or lifting my elbow in a somewhat uncomfortable movement. on the inside felt like an easier movement to read the dial.
This article fails to mention that watches were a lot smaller compared to the gigantic pieces of jewelry that dominate the 'military-themed' watches of today, and avoids many of the problems that people have mentioned.
Here's an example of an issued 'military watch' from from 1956:
It's only 32mm in diameter, compared to the advertised Smith and Bradley 'designed to be worn inside' which is 42mm, or the 'standard' size Garmin Fenix which 47mm. Many modern G-Shocks are larger still.
One thing I like about rubber/cloth bands is that they don't make noise or do risk doing damage when I'm typing at my computer. Wearing a watch on the inside is a non-starter for me for this reason.
I also like being able to glance down at my wrist and see the time. My wrist is rarely in the proper orientation for this to be possible if I were wearing my watch on the inside.
Lastly, I wonder if "raise to wake" would work in this orientation? It seems not to on my Garmin.
>If your watch face is on the outside of your wrist, you have to lift your arm and turn it to see the time. This effectively doubles the width of your body, increasing your exposure.
That's a wide movement! Maybe they can learn some "arm discipline" to avoid doubling your width when reading the time?
Nurses wear inside of wrist to simplify taking heart rate, or at least they used to back when you actually had to count it yourself. Divers wear inside of wrist to avoid having to do an awkward posture change and instead just look down.
When I was young, we had kind of a surrogate grandmother who was a retired nurse anesthetist. She told us stories of the old days counting the pulse of patients, holding an eye dropper full of chloroform to add to the gauze mask over the patient's face when the pulse got too fast.
If she had too many cases close to the end of her shift, she'd have to drive home buzzed on chloroform fumes.
Only a single data point, but my father, who was Vietnam-era USMC in "special weapons," wore his wristwatches this way all his life. He never really said why other than that was what he learned in the Corps (he had never owned a watch prior to then). I always assumed it had some practical purpose in the field, but I'm not sure what that might have been.
My grandmother was a nurse and wore her watch on her inner wrist. I think it was common and protected it from getting snagged during her rounds. Now I don’t think nurses are usually allowed to wear watches in most hospitals.
There are 'nurse watches' that attach to uniforms (lapel clip) and that are design so that the "12" spot is facing the floor so that when one looks down it is at the 'top':
i wish i could wear my apple watch upside down. it is much easier and faster to get the time when worn this way, and it reduces repetitive wrist strain since rotating the wrist outward enough to expose the face require way less torsion than rotating it inward. also, the buttons and digital crown on the watch actuate way less frequently when my wrist is in flexion, i.e., when doing dips and military presses. however, the sensor and accelerometer readings are inaccurate in this orientation, so right side up it is.
> There’s another less obvious protection as well. A watch on the outside of your wrist will have the crown facing down (when hands are down). On the inside, the crown is protected. This matters when you’re knee deep in water and mud sloshing around. The water is less likely to get inside of your watch and mess with the movement.
This doesn't make sense. Assuming it's worn on the left wrist, and the crown is on the right of the watch face, then the crown is _always_ facing down (when hands are down) - no matter if you're wearing it on the inside or outside of the wrist. Am I misunderstanding something?
This part seems like an unfinished thought. I thought they meant to say that being on the inside of the arm would mean that the crown is less exposed towards splashes, debris, and whatnot from the outside.
The crown facing the hand is a carryover from traditional watches where the user would need to regularly wind or adjust the watch's time. It doesn't really have any benefit now, and just needlessly exposes the crown to shock damage and irritates the back of the hand if the watch falls towards the wrist.
Seiko diving watches and some others move the crown to the 4 o-clock position where it's slightly less exposed:
While one might expect this to be true, in my experience of wearing ballcaps and moving at above-walking speeds it's actually the forward orientation that holds best. A backwards bill often presents a larger surface to the wind, especially if it's pulled low against your neck. Moreover, the forward orientation is kind of "hooked" around your forehead, whereas the backwards orientation basically is just sitting on the cap of your skull, so less wind force is needed to unseat it. Forward caps the wind needs to kind of peel it off, backwards orientation the wind just pushes upwards lightly.
I have seen people wear their watch "upside down", including made up women in fashionable attire that would be the polar opposite of the rough style the article is portraying. On the contrary, I looked at a few random pictures of soldiers and in most of them the watch worn the standard way, with the face on the outside of the wrist. In fact, I find the "upside down" way more "girly" than "manly", simply because I think I saw more girls do it than men.
For practical reasons, I guess there are advantages to both. But the "protect the watch" argument, I don't really buy it. It is situational. If you have your watch inside your wrist, you bang it when you have your hands on a table, when you pick heavy stuff, it may come in contact with stuff you have on your belt (tools, gun, ...), etc...
I suspect the article is just an ad. They want to sell a watch for "tough guys" and came up with that story.