1) Ultra-high frustration levels are common. There has been enough money
invested in saddles to rival the GNP of some small countries. It is common
for riders to have tried, purchased and sold up to 10 saddles before finding
the "right one" or today's "compromise".
2) Saddles must meet the needs of both horse and rider, irrespective of the
distances being covered. Many saddles are disqualified due to rider
discomfort. Most saddles are disqualified due to poor fit at the withers
(pinching, white spots, uneven shoulder development are the most common
symptoms).
3) There were several indications of "trendiness" in saddle selection early
on in an individual"s "saddle history" - not unlike what you see today in
the hunter ring. That was rapidly supplanted by a need to find a functional
saddle to enhance performance that could be measured by way of going,
forwardness, balance (on the positive axis) and then by lack of soreness,
uneven development, evidence of pressure points (on the negative axis).
Functionality becomes the one criteria by which these saddles can be
measured. [Now, how to measure funtionality in quantifiable terms? I'm
thinking in terms of length of stride which can be measured, etc. Put your
thinking caps on for this.]
4) There were clearly several saddles that functionally perform better for
a wider variety of horse and rider body types. Many of the saddles were
re-cycled, i.e. purchased from someone for whom the saddle did not work but
were successful for the new horse. I do not want to label these brands as
winners or losers because only a few fall into the "real loser" category.
"Functional favorites" are those saddles that seem to work best in providing
rider comfort and enhancing performance as measured by the positive and
negative functional criteria above. The "middle of the road" category
includes saddles which work for some horses/riders, not for others--when
they work, they work well. The "losers" are, well, the losers - the saddles
with the most complaints drawn from this survey ONLY (please keep that in
mind--this is hardly a representative sample, merely "instructive").
However, even in the "loser" category there would be one or two riders who
found that at a given time, on a given horse, that saddle performed well.
a) Functional Favorites: Sport Saddle hands down, Orthoflex [Lite &
Cutback most popular], Sharon Saare
b) Middle-of-the-road: Stubben Survivor, Wintec, Big Horn, Marciante,
Desoto
c) Losers: almost all of the off-the-rack hunter/jumper/dressage
saddles, Aussie-style saddles, standard Western saddles
Other saddle brands (SR Enduro, etc) so far have too few (one) comments to
add to the survey at this summary point.
5) Body types - rider & horse
a) If you don't "need" a narrow twist, the Sport Saddle is the saddle
of choice and is used by FW to HW riders. However, it "takes getting used to".
b) Here's a news bulletin (sarcasm): FW & LW riders seem to experience
fewer back problems with any saddle mentioned. MW & particularly HW riders
apparently have to take much more care in selecting a saddle that will not
only free up the shoulder but will also distribute the weight. And it does
not seem to matter how much the saddle weighs if the weight is distributed
properly.
6) Body types - horses: I have less information about this. However, the
majority of the horses are Arabs or Arab crosses. Whether or not the horse
has prominent withers, the Arab back remains a unique landscape that has
presented unique fitting problems to which MOST saddlers have not begun to
respond.
7) Ancillary issues that appeared: the type and fit of the saddle pad
often made a critical difference. Even if a saddle appeared to nominally
fit the horse to a "T", the wrong pad could cause enough problems to
instigate a "sell" decision. The "right" pad often saved the day. That was
a whole other area for spending $$ in trial & error.
Speaking of "trial & error", "error" seems to be the name of the game. If I
had 10% of every saddle transaction I'd be set for life! I don't have any
"answers" yet. Hopefully we can establish a few guidelines. Anyone who
wishes to continue to add thoughts to this survey, please do so. This has
become a very intriguing exercise.
Thanks for all the input--
Diane @ Safe Haven
safehavn@fast.net