Quick answer: this brand sells one decision — fabric weight — at three different cuts, all in the $24.99–$29.99 band. The Thick High Waist Yoga Pants ($24.99) are the reputation: 4.4 over 70,696 ratings, squat-proof by consensus, warm and snug by the same consensus. The Lightweight Joggers ($29.99) are the softer all-day pair and the brand’s top October converter. The High Waisted Running Shorts ($24.99) are the loyalty product — owners own eight — with the documented catch that sizing varies by colorway. Every complaint on this page is someone who wanted the other fabric weight: the trick is knowing which one you are before you order.
The three-product lineup
The brand’s feed carries 877 US listings, but the weight is an illusion: 97 are jogger-family and 78 are shorts-family colorways of the same cuts. These three parents are where the ratings actually pool.
THE GYM PEOPLE Lightweight Workout Joggers
The lightweight arm of the range and the top converter in October’s affiliate data — the joggers, not the famous leggings. The design brief is softness with pockets that fit a Pro-size phone, a flat-front waistband that does not roll, and fabric owners repeatedly say does not attract dog fur. The honest trade is in the name: lightweight means a thinner hand feel than the thick line below, and at least one owner found it too thin for her preference and donated the pair. If your use case is errands, walking the dog and sleeping in them — which several owners admit to — this is the one. If you want squat-proof opacity under gym lighting, the thick line is the one that carries that reputation.
- lightweight, softer hand feel — the polar opposite of the thick line — comfort-first, not opacity-first
- pockets hold a Pro-size phone — the detail owners cite most, walking the dog and gym runs alike
- flat-front waistband, no rolling — high-waisted fit that stays put without digging in
- too thin for some tastes — one owner donated hers over fabric weight — know which side of that line you are on
THE GYM PEOPLE Thick High Waist Yoga Pants
The product this brand is actually known for: 4.4 stars over 70,696 ratings, which is a bigger review pool than the rest of this brand’s top sellers combined. The pitch is a thick, non-see-through fabric with a wide waistband, at $24.99. The reviews converge on three facts. One, the squat test passes — multiple owners bought these specifically because cheaper leggings failed it. Two, the fabric is on the stiff side and runs warm, which one owner flags as wrong for hot weather and uncomfortable for long sitting. Three, the fit runs snug enough that repeat buyers routinely size up one or two from their usual brand size.
- 4.4 over 70,696 ratings — the anchor of the whole brand and its second-biggest October converter
- 100% squat-proof, repeatedly tested — the reason owners switched from cheaper leggings
- thick fabric runs warm and stiff — owners who work from home say it is not their all-day sit pair
- size up from your usual brand — repeat buyers describe going one to two sizes up, especially for XL+ frames
THE GYM PEOPLE High Waisted Running Shorts
13,776 ratings at 4.3 for a $24.99 short. The design is the honest version of a running short: a built-in brief liner, a single zippered pocket along the back of the waistband, and a cut that is shorter in the front and longer in the back — the coverage detail multiple owners call out as why they rebought in many colors. What is not honest is the sizing consistency: one owner with eight pairs reports the same size fits differently depending on the colorway, with black and gray running tighter than navy and green. Order your normal size, but know the exchange risk is color-dependent, not random.
- built-in liner, no underwear needed — the comfort point every five-star repeats
- one rear zip pocket — holds phone, key fob, earbuds case — there are no front pockets
- short front, longer back — the coverage geometry owners rebuy for
- sizing varies by colorway — eight-pair owner: same size fits tighter in black/gray than navy/green
Which pair, for which day
All three are the same $24.99–$29.99 price band. The decision is not price — it is fabric weight and where the seams sit on your body.
Opacity under gym lighting — Thick High Waist Yoga Pants ($24.99)
The squat-proof reputation is the product. 70,696 ratings, 4.4, and the review pool’s own stress test. Trade-offs: runs warm, runs snug, and the 3XL color range narrows to basics.
All-day comfort and pockets — Lightweight Joggers ($29.99)
The top October converter. Softer hand feel, phone pockets that work on dog walks, and a waistband that does not dig in during 8-hour wear. Trade-offs: thinner fabric, and a cut that runs short and tight above 5’8″.
Running and warm weather — High Waisted Shorts ($24.99)
Built-in liner, one zip pocket, front-short/back-long coverage. 13,776 ratings at 4.3. The known risk is color-dependent sizing — order normal size and expect the exchange lottery.
Side by side
Prices, ratings and rating counts from the brand’s affiliate feed at time of writing.
| Thick High Waist Yoga Pants | Lightweight Joggers | High Waisted Running Shorts | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | $24.99 | $29.99 | $24.99 |
| Rating history | 4.4 · 70,696 | 4.5 · 1,952 | 4.3 · 13,776 |
| Fabric weight | Thick, opaque, runs warm | Lightweight, softer, cooler | Quick-dry with built-in liner |
| Pockets | Both legs, per owners | Deep side pockets, Pro-size phone | One rear zip pocket only |
| What the reviews stress | Squat-proof vs warm/stiff; 3XL color range | Pilling on rough seats; cut runs short at 5’8″+ | Color-dependent sizing; coverage geometry |
| Documented weakness | Loose mid-thigh despite tight waistband | One-year hole in daily rotation; shiny finish | Same size fits differently by colorway |
| Best for | Gym visibility, colder months, XL+ sizing up | Errands, WFH, dog walks, travel | Running, hot weather, casual wear |
Not the right pick if… you are taller than about 5’8″ and buying the lightweight joggers as lounge pants. One owner at 5’8″ in XL found them too short and too tight, with a shinier finish than the photos. The brand does have the height answer — the thick leggings, which a 6-foot owner says are long enough with perfect compression — but it is a different product, not a size bump on the same one.
Not the right pick if… you wear your leggings against rough surfaces all day. The documented failure mode of the brand’s fabric is pilling where the fabric meets wood benches, concrete or the ground — an owner who liked her pair added exactly this update months later. Gym mats, upholstery and car seats are fine. Bleacher seats and garage workouts are where the three-star reviews come from.
Not the right pick if… you need one order to be one fit. The shorts are the worst offender here: an eight-pair owner documents the same size fitting differently by colorway — tighter in black and gray, looser in navy, green and blue. If you are buying for an event rather than for rotation, order two sizes or buy one colorway you have already worn.
Not the right pick if… you are 3XL and want the full color palette. Through XXL the color choice is large; at 3XL it collapses to basic colors, and the plus-size owner who raised it loves everything else about the product. Check your colorway’s availability in your size before building an outfit around it.
Not the right pick if… you expect Lululemon fabric hand feel at $24.99. Owners consistently describe the thick line as stiff compared with premium leggings — the stiffness is the price of opacity at this price point. The lightweight line is softer but trades away the opacity-first reputation. Neither pair is both at once; the reviews that read as complaints are almost all from people who wanted the other pair.
What verified buyers say
Six verified Amazon reviews, paraphrased and attributed — the pilling update, the 5’8″ fit boundary, a one-year hole, color-dependent sizing, the 3XL color wall, and the squat test performed on purpose.
A three-star that aged into the most useful review on the page. She liked her dark camo leggings — looked like the photos, waistband tight enough to hold the stomach in — and updated months later with the finding that matters: sitting on anything rough (a wood bench, concrete, the ground) makes the fabric pill and peel pretty easily, and it becomes more noticeable over time. The fit caveat is also specific — the waistband is tight but the mid thigh toward the back of the knee runs loose. That combination is fine standing, odd sitting. If your leggings live against gym mats and plyo boxes, this is the review to read before the five-stars.
The joggers’ honest boundary, from an owner who bought XL at 5’8″. Well made, nice waistband, nice leg cuffs, soft and not-too-thin fabric — and cut short and tight for her height, plus shinier than the photos suggest. The lightweight joggers are the pair most likely to be bought as lounge pants and returned as ill-fitting, because the rise and inseam are calibrated for a shorter frame. If you are 5’8″ or taller, the thick leggings below — which a 6-foot owner specifically says are long enough — are the safer bet from the same brand.
Not a fit complaint — a durability data point. She loved the pants, wore them on rotation for about a year, and found a hole in the middle of the inner leg. Her own word for it is defect, and at one year it is just past the point where most people would not blame the fabric. Read it against the backdrop honestly: the lightweight line is thinner by design, and a year of daily wear plus dog contact is the realistic service life this review documents, not a scandal. The thick line’s review pool does not show the same failure mode at the same rate.
She owns these shorts in many colors and gets compliments on all of them — and her biggest problem is that the sizing is not accurate depending on the color. Her mediums fit perfect in some colorways, run tighter in black and gray, and fit like larges in navy, green and blue. She ordered a small in one color because the medium was too big, and the small was too small. That is a dye-lot or factory-batch issue, and it is the single most common exchange trigger on this listing. Her advice is implicit: buy your normal size, keep the tag on, and expect a possible one-size exchange depending on which color arrives.
A plus-size owner who otherwise loves the leggings — 6 feet tall, long enough, perfect compression — docking a star for a range problem rather than a product problem: through XXL the color choice is large, and at 3XL it collapses to basic colors. She has taken to emailing companies about it. It is worth knowing before you browse: if you are 3XL and want the camo or the bright colorways, check availability first rather than assuming the full palette carries through the size range.
The review that explains the 70,696 rating. Her framing is blunt: the comfiest leggings she has owned are always see-through, and the non-see-through ones feel like yucky plastic. These are comfier than typical sports leggings while being seriously not see-through at all — 100% squat proof in her words. She sized up two from her usual large to an XXL and got a fit that is neither wrinkly nor love-handle tight. That sizing advice from a happy owner is worth more than the size chart: if you are between sizes or XL-adjacent, up one or two is the consensus path.
Three wardrobes these were made for
The gym-first buyer
Thick leggings for lifting days, shorts for running days, both at $24.99. This is the stack the 70,696-rating flagship was built for: opacity under lighting, a liner instead of underwear, and a waistband that survives jumping and climbing. Budget one size up from your usual brand, and do not expect the color range to survive into 3XL.
The work-from-home rotation
Lightweight joggers as the daily driver — the exact use case their October conversions came from. Pockets for the phone on dog walks, a waistband that does not dig in at a desk, soft enough that multiple owners report sleeping in them. Keep them away from concrete and expect about a year of hard daily wear per pair.
The repeat buyer in many colors
The shorts are the brand’s loyalty product: owners own six, eight, ten pairs. The rear zip pocket and front-short/back-long cut are what they rebuy. The price of admission is the color-dependent sizing lottery — every long-term owner has an exchange story, and none of them stopped buying.
FAQ
Do THE GYM PEOPLE leggings run true to size?
Snugger than mainstream brands. The pattern across the review pool: owners who wear a medium in Old Navy or Kohl’s brands take the suggested large here; owners who bought for opacity deliberately sized up one to two sizes — one went from her usual large to XXL and called the fit perfect. The shorts are the exception: sizing is colorway-dependent, tighter in black and gray than navy, green and blue, per an owner with eight pairs. Order your normal size, keep the return window open, and treat the first pair as the calibration pair.
Are the thick leggings actually squat-proof?
That is the product’s whole reputation, and it is the most-repeated claim in 70,696 ratings. Owners describe switching from cheaper leggings specifically because those failed the squat test, and several report testing these deliberately — one writes they are 100% squat proof and not see through at all. The trade is honest: the fabric is thick enough to be opaque and also thick enough to run warm and feel stiff compared with premium brands. If you want soft and airy, that is the lightweight line, and opacity is no longer the guarantee.
Which fabric pills?
The documented pilling case is on the brand’s fabric generally when it rubs rough surfaces — wood benches, concrete, the ground — and the owner who reported it added it as an update after months of liking the leggings. Smooth gym equipment, office chairs and upholstery did not produce the same complaint in the review pool we read. If your routine includes bleachers, outdoor stairs or floor work on abrasive ground, either budget for fabric shaver use or pick a different brand for those days.
What is the durability record?
The failure data points in the pool are specific rather than systemic: one lightweight-jogger pair developed an inner-leg hole after about a year of daily rotation, which that owner called a defect. Against that, multiple owners report owning three-plus pairs across years and rebought in multiple colors — the shorts especially, with one owner at eight pairs. At $24.99, a year of daily wear per pair is roughly the documented expectation; the thick line carries the longer track record simply because its fabric starts thicker.
Why are there so many almost-identical products in this brand's catalog?
The affiliate feed for this brand lists 877 variants — 97 of them jogger-family and 78 shorts-family listings — because each colorway and size of each cut is its own listing sharing a review pool. That is also why the same three cuts carry 70,696 and 13,776 ratings while the rest of the catalog looks sparse: the reviews pool into the parent products. Practically it means the rating you see is the cut’s reputation, not the specific color you are ordering — and the color-dependent sizing complaints live inside exactly that structure.
How was this page put together?
We are an independent review site. Specs, prices and coupon states come from the brand’s official affiliate feed at the time of writing; ratings are the public Amazon rating history of each parent product. Review summaries are paraphrased from verified Amazon customer reviews of the three products above, one-star and three-star included — every quotation is attributed to the reviewer name shown and the month it was posted. If you buy through our links we may earn a commission; it does not change which reviews we quote or what they say.
