I have another comment related to the CF angle. You always see this on blue jeans probably because, like Patricia said, you’ve got no front darts. Another side effect of the CF angle is that you get an increased bulge in the curve of the crotch. This is undesireable for most women unless you’re a drag king. Male rock musicians love this look.

I think the CF angle increases comfort when wearing tight pants such as increasing the CB angle creates comfort. More angle gives more length to the CF seam at the same crotch depth. Blue jeans were meant for working and riding horses and I can’t imagine riding a horse comfortably in any of my tight dress pants that have the straighter CF.

1) The folds you see in the front crotch area …( )…indicate that the front crotch depth is too SHORT and the crotch extension is too long…not enough height with too much ‘width’ on that front seam! This curved seam is being forced to ’straighten’ on the body, resulting in those ( ) folds on each side of the crotch seam.
2) However, the arrow is indicating the folds in the inseam…..again, because the inseam is too long!
INSEAM + CROTCH DEPTH = OUTSEAM….so, to shorten the inseam, the crotch depth must be increased…see comment 1.
There is no mention of whether or not these offending inner thigh folds occur on the back, too….but it is my guess that instead, there are folds under the tush (?).
3) There appears to be an excess of fabric in the outer thigh areas…like jodphurs. This can be caused by a couple of things….too much hip ease is a biggee…this is possibly a result of a back crotch curve that is too L-shaped, resulting in inadequate pantswidth across the back pattern…so the patternwidth is increased (at the sides) until it is enough to cover the bum. But the pants will still feel tight across the bum in the center back, even with all this extra fabric out on the sides.
Sometimes this is caused by a ‘misalignment’ of the waist/pant foundation over the legs….which is a result of incorrect crotch extensions, front and back.

It is possible that the back crotch seam might need to be reshaped to be more of a slant…\…and less of an L-shape…this would increase the pantswidth at the level between hip and crotch and eliminate the need for the excess fullness on the sides.
Increase the crotch depth, and shorten the crotch extensions (this will recenter the legs). The total crotch length from front waist to back waist might be right, but it is in the wrong proportions and wrong shape.

Oh, and the slanted CF seam is to control the amount of side/hip curve on the pattern. When there are no front darts, the CF must slant, or the front sideseam curve between waist and hip would be horrendous! When darts are used, the CF slant can be lessened, and with pleats, the CF can be drawn vertical. At least, that’s my story and I’m sticking to it!

Sorry, I cannot see or read the discussion forum anymore….I am an outsider!…So you may have already talked about all of this!
Patricia Smith

The crotch curve on both are still too shallow; and, the angled CF on the white pattern is incorrect, IMO. I’ve always been taught (and practiced) to keep the CF on grain. Are there exceptions to the rule I don’t know?

They originally claimed to have issue with the front inseam; but, I don’t see an issue with these patterns. I stand by my original assessement that the fit issue was the length and depth of the crotch forks (front & back); and, I now add the inseam of the underside as a culprit, too.

Thanks so much, Thatcher!