JamesKennedy Wrote:Just think about this... if a hairpiece looks like real growing hair, and real growing hair looks like a hairpiece, then what?

Thats what I have been saying to the paranoid wearers for years mate.

Baldrich Wrote:Non-balding men have a patch of hair forward of the line of their sideburns. See Obama and Cruise as random examples. That little patch is very important for achieving a realistic look. When you lose it you get the wide forehead syndrome that has been discussed here earlier.

Absolutley 100% correct - I wonder if the ultimate solution to hairloss is to get a minor hair transplant to restore that 'little patch', and use a hairpiece on the top of the head where a transplant could never achieve a decent density?

Here's an example of such a transplant:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2578499/dallas_temporal_point_reconstruction_hair_transplant/">http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2578499/d ... ransplant/</a><!-- m -->

You guys drive me nuts!

Do you think people in real life look for people's side "patches"?!?

I'm sure you will be walking down the street some day and some random stranger will point at you and say "Look everyone, he has no side patches, that must be a wig!!!"

Perhaps keeping up on the haircut and fading in the sides will help with this issue. You don't need to get a freakin' side patch hair transplant! Some people, I tell ya.

James Kennedy: obnoxious right back at ya mate. I am not slating the guy off; quite the opposite. I am on a wig forum commenting on tips for making my wig look good; so chill out. I do think (in fact I know) that people in real life subconsciously register when people's hair looks "funny", even if they can't necessarily say why. One of the things they register is a full head of hair on top, but no temples. Sure, not everyone will put two-and-two together and realise it is a rug, but it is drawing attention to something which you don't want to draw attention to. Here's another example, Peter Orszag: looks OK from the front, but once you see his sides, no temples = dead giveaway. Everyone in America has spotted that one.

[attachment=1][attachment=0]

Frankly, if you aren't alive to (not so subtle) nuances of this kind, I wouldn't want you cutting my hair.

Hairagain: Sorry mate; just can't work out what you're trying to say at all. Thanks for playing.

BA: I agree, one solution to losing your temples is a comb-down style, provided you keep your head vertical and the wind isn't too strong. Not sure about the matching ear-rings though.

Dave83: Ah, finally a voice of reason. I think you're right. A miniature FUE transplant is the answer, provided it works.

It's easy enough, and totally essential, to fill in those side "patches", which are often called "temple points". Check my recent photos and my recent template for ideas on how you can solve the problem...

I'll never understand these high profile wearers (like the pic you've posted) who seem to have an inability just comb their side hair forward (or leave it a little longer)... it's really not that hard! In fact it's super-easy!! so why do so many people have wide forehead syndrome? I'll never understand it...

too many people with no temple hair have this un-natural looking thick piece, and low hairline. in that pic he needs more of a recession pattern. its so obvious. its not the piece, its the person, some people should definitely get 3rd party perspective

I don't understand why Baldrich is getting such a hard time over what he is trying to point out - what he is saying is absolutley right.

There is more to hair loss than losing the hair on the top of your head. If you want your hair replacement to look as convincing as possible, you should know this stuff.

I've seen tons of people that don't have those side patches and aren't bald and don't wear.