Updated from Sept. 18, 2013, to include interview with Tommy John Founder and CEO Tom Patterson as well as new information, particularly news of a new product launch and comparisons to companies such as Under Armour (UA) NEW YORK ( TheStreet) -- Serendipity rocks. In fact, random serendipitous events keep me from becoming a pessimistic and bitter observer of all that's wrong in the world. Last week, I was lucky enough to appear on CNBC's "Squawk Box" morning program not once, but twice. Needless to say, that was (is and will always remain) a major honor. It also meant that, naturally, I paid more attention to one of the show's hosts, Andrew Ross Sorkin, last week. Not sure why I wasn't before, but I started following the award-winning author and The New York Times journalist on Twitter. Good thing I upped Sorkin's visibility in my "social" life. If I didn't, I might not have come across this gem on The New York Times Magazine "Style" blog: Tommy John brand undergarments. This resonated with me because, after years of searching, I thought I could do no better than a mix of Under Armour ( UA) and ExOfficio boxer briefs and somewhat reluctantly purchased undershirts and briefs from Kenneth Cole. I had no idea an upper echelon of underwear even existed. At least not one within my financial reach. As a company and concept, Tommy John differentiates itself from Under Armour and others in several ways. First, it is an underwear company at heart. While Under Armour started with moisture-wicking t-shirts and brands such as Calvin Klein started with high-fashion, Tommy John started with undershirts, moved on to underpants and, as of Monday, introduced socks. Patterson says the company's strategy is to dress men "from the inside out." That's opposite to the common trajectory of launching undergarments after the fact merely to enter a potentially lucrative category. With the introduction of socks at the beginning of October, Tommy John continues on that path. Second, Tommy John falls in between companies such as Under Armour and Nike ( NKE) on one side and Calvin Klein and Ralph Lauren ( RL) on the other. It blends athletic features such as light compression with the fashion and function CK and RL have come to be known for. Tommy John stuff isn't cheap. Items run you roughly $30 to $40 a pop, but the second I opened the box and slipped on the first undershorts/undershirt set, I knew it was worth every penny. So good I'm wearing my Tommy John underpants today and might even wash them tonight so I can wear them again tomorrow before the next shipment arrives. This experience is akin to meeting the right woman. You just know it's the real deal from the word go. A first date (in this case, the Tommy John "starter kit") turned into an uncontrollable and, I reckon, very sustainable lust (a $250 order set to arrive Thursday or Friday). Why are these undergarments so good? Why are they worthy of a column in the vaunted New York Times and now one here at TheStreet? Sorkin covers those bases quite nicely, but ... how do I say this? ... Well, I'll just say it.
Sorkin writes with a level of decorum several degrees above the norm set by an average Joe like me. Of course, there's a place for that, but there's also a place for, let's say, a cross between Maxim and Men's Health. Because, we're all adults here. We all deal with the same or a similar set of issues. So why can't we speak about them openly and maturely? I went on an ultimately stalled quest for the perfect undergarments because, simply stated, I sweat. A lot. Back sweat and butt sweat. It can make for a rough existence at times. Back sweat looks bad. And butt sweat is simply uncomfortable. The wrong undergarments can actually make the problems worse. With Tommy Johns on my back and my butt, I still sweat. No doubt. I know I am sweating, but I don't feel like I am sweating. There's something about the material, the fit, the entire experience that provides this simultaneous response: I know I'm wearing underwear -- and it feels great -- but it doesn't really feel like I'm wearing underwear. Tommy John touts it's stretch technology, which purports to keep you perfectly tucked (it works) as well as its "Quick Draw Fly" for "quick access when nature calls." That also works perfectly. After experiencing Tommy John's "horizontal fly" Wednesday morning, I knew I was in love. For fear of being too crude, I, for the first time in a long time, was consciously concerned about not letting that one last dribble land on the inside of my undershorts. I just didn't want even one drop of a foreign substance on these things. This dribbling happens, most frequently, during two somewhat similar, though very (hopefully) separate events for men. Though it hasn't been put to the test, I think the fabric Tommy John uses has powerful absorption qualities so you'll remain comfortable even if you make a "mistake." That said, I will make sure I'm shaken, stirred and drained to the point where my Tommy Johns stay good as new. I never exercised that level of care and control with my Under Armour, ExOfficio and Kenneth Cole stuff. From a psychological standpoint, I am a new man. Seeing a ripped guy modeling underwear never really provided me much motivation to get in better shape. I'm not fat, though I could lose some excess weight around my waist. And, while I'm not wimpy, with a little work, my body style (picture former NY Giants running back Joe Morris) lends itself to a modest level of muscularity. Seeing Tommy John advertisements and, subsequently, seeing myself in my mirror in their product triggered this image of a new, better fit me. I'm re-situating that workout routine I've been mailing in for the last six months immediately. Tommy John threw me a curve ball, via Andrew Ross Sorkin, I wasn't expecting. And it turned me into a new man. Follow @rocco_thestreet -- Written by Rocco Pendola in Santa Monica, Calif.