I have always said that the horse world CLINGS to old ideas because that is the way it has always been done!
Every other sport improves on its gear yearly, yet we cling to the same old gear and saddles and jointed snaffle that is NOT soft or gentle because that is what pony club said to use! BLEAH!
I love endurance riders. More than any group they listen to what their HORSES say instead of what some human tells them must be used because it has always been done that way, and I applaud them all!
I’ve had both treed and treeless saddles for the past 6 or 7 years. I use them for different things.
My saddle fitter was skeptical about them until he checked my horses’ backs – no pain, no white hairs, no muscle atrophy.
I’ve had, over the years, a Barefoot Cheyenne, a Torsion, a Freeform and a Heather Moffett Fheonix. I still have the last two because they are well made, comfortable saddles that work for me and my horses. I love the fact that they are light weight and that I can feel how my horses’ backs move.
I don’t jump in them because I need an extra forward flap and I can’t get my stirrups up short enough, even in my Fheonix (which is an a/p).
I’ve looked at the Sensation but even with that one, I don’t think it would work.
I’ve logged a fair number of competition miles in both a treed and treeless saddle.
I don’t have any particular preference, besides what works best for any given horse/rider combination. I did note that in the study they comment that the treed saddles were custom fitted to each hors,e but make no comment about the treeless being custom fitted or otherwise. - I’m assuming it was an oversight in the way it was worded, as I’ve always found Dr. Clayton to be pretty professional in her research.
Anyrate - treed or treeless - both require custom fitting. OTherwise - meh, - neither work right.
Will also add - I dont recall the concept of treed saddles way back as being designed that way for the benefit of the horse
Before stirrups came round - riders pretty much rode on pads, I guess you could say… an early form of treeless saddles…rofl.
If you look at in that instance, treed and non-tree options have been around since recorded history began - they used…what worked - and sensible riders/owners still do.
Hardly worth fighting about.
~Raine
[QUOTE=Guilherme;5993232]
And you know I haven’t because…?
As for A2’s dislike of my manner, that’s her business. If she finds me rude I find her incredible.
So we’re back where we usually are, with some folks claiming these are the neatest thing since bottled beer and my asserting they are blister rigs designed to cripple horses.
Folks can make up their own minds as far as I’m concerned.
G.[/QUOTE]
I know you must not have any personal experience with a well made, well designed treeless saddle because you once tried to make the comparison of a treeless saddle to a cloth over a mud wallow in a previous thread on the subject. If you could take that other poster up on her challenge you might see that they have some value and are not …what did you call them?..blister rigs waiting to cripple a horse.:rolleyes:
As for the foam dispersing pressure - some of you seem to assume that the rider sits like a rock in one position in the saddle ALL the time and never moves. You assume that the pressure is only being driven straight down through the seat bones and into the horse’s back. 
When I ride I post, 2-point, sit, stand in the stirrups, change diagonals upon which I post, change leads at the canter, sometimes I gallop and am completely off the saddle. Sometimes I squeeze with my thighs and sometimes I press weight down in my heels, etc… My weight and load is constantly changing across the surface of the saddle, practically every second the weight is being redistributed. It’s not like the rider pounds down on the horse’s back in one specific spot for 50 miles.
The stirrup attachment of the Bob Marshall is spread like a sling across the saddle from front to back. So everytime I rise in the stirrups, my weight is being distributed by the stirrup attachment across the seat of the saddle. When I sit in the seat flat on my butt, the weight is transferred to the seat. When I stand, it is distributed again, and so forth…
Also remember that heavier riders can use Lexan inserts inside their saddle pads, on top of their high density foam, to further disperse load. The Lexan panels are firm and rigid, but not as heavy as a tree, and do not have “points” which can dig into the scapula like a tree. It is generally recommended that riders above about 160 pounds or so use some type of firmer plastic insert in their pad on top of the foam.
So we’re back where we usually are, w
Auventera Two - well said!
And if one walked through a tack store one would be amazed at the vast number and types of specialized pads and impact gel foam items for using under treed saddles to try preventing, minimizing, or reducing those infamous pressure points caused by the rigid tree that have plagued riders and horses for decades.
A wise rider would research/find tack that is best for the comfort of their horse, and works best for the job at hand.
That is so true! I really loved watching Phelps in the Olympics, and listening to the commentators talk about the changes in suits over the years. They are now so highly technical that they make the suits of decades ago look practically like death traps. At the time, it did make me think about riding and how our gear has changed very little over the decades.
I love endurance riders. More than any group they listen to what their HORSES say instead of what some human tells them must be used because it has always been done that way, and I applaud them all!
That’s one of the things I love about the discipline also. I love it that there are esentially no restrictions on tack, as long as everyone is safe and stays sound, that’s all that matters. The endurance crowd knows that to get a horse through 50 or 100 miles, you have to use what WORKS. You can’t be stuck to a protocol that some arbitrary committee devised 30 years ago. The horses and riders would never make it over the finish line if that were the case.
That is SO true! You have lift back pads, lollipops, pommel lifts, gel, foam, mattes half pads, thinline, corrector, therapeutic felt, even pads with air bladders inside.
People pay $180 for the Port Lewis Impression Pads so they can put it under their treed saddles to see where the pressure points are so they can pad accordingly.
People are sadly mistaken if they think that a tree just automatically corrects everything and perfectly distributes pressure.
One of my trail riding friends paid mega $$$$ for a custom fit Synergist. She bought the super $$$$ expensive back impression mold that you bake in the oven and then perfectly shape to the horse’s back so the saddle is made precisely. Within 6 months she had to send it back to be refitted because the horse has muscled up and his back changed. Eventually she couldn’t get it fitted to him at all! The saddle is now sitting at my house and she has ordered a different brand of $$$$$ custom fit saddle and it will take 6 months for it to be made for her horse! :eek: She’ll have to sell the Synergist and the cycle starts all over again.
You definitely have to fit a treeless to a horse’s back also, but I think it is significantly easier and more forgiving than a traditional treed saddle.
As I’ve said, folks can make up their own mind. The fact that I’ve been made the “center of attraction” because I’ve challenged the “prevailing wisdom” of this group is interesting. If Shakespeare were here he’d probably say “Methinks the lady(ies) doth protest too much.” :lol:
If we studied history we’d know that the saddle tree dates back at least to the Romans. They did not use it to carry additional weight but rather as a more stable platform for weapons usage (javelin and bow). I don’t think they invented it (the Sythians, the premier horsemen of their time, may have). Evey horse culture that has been introduced to it quickly adopted it. A tiny fragment of the North American horse industry has reverted to the primitive practices of the past. If that works for them then God Bless 'Em.
I’ve had my say and, in other threads, may have a say again. If I’m wrong then ignore me; the horses will tell the story. If I’m right then the horses will tell the story.
G.
[QUOTE=Guilherme;5994670]
I’ve had my say and, in other threads, may have a say again. If I’m wrong then ignore me; the horses will tell the story. If I’m right then the horses will tell the story.
G.[/QUOTE]
That is the first thing you’ve said on the subject that I can agree 100% with.:)
[QUOTE=Auventera Two;5994533]
Also remember that heavier riders can use Lexan inserts inside their saddle pads, on top of their high density foam, to further disperse load. The Lexan panels are firm and rigid, but not as heavy as a tree, and do not have “points” which can dig into the scapula like a tree. It is generally recommended that riders above about 160 pounds or so use some type of firmer plastic insert in their pad on top of the foam.[/QUOTE]
Both my pads have Lexan inserts. I shaped them to the contours of my horse’s back and they lay in their pockets above the laminated foam.
I’m only 140lbs, but I chose the Lexan inserts because of all the fast work in 2-point and the jumping. I think they’re a great option.
The horses HAVE told the story. There are many top level endurance horses out there that have been competing year after year, literally thousands of miles, in treeless saddles, quite successfully. I literally could not even begin to tell you how many treeless riders I have seen on the trails and at endurance rides. It’s not a rare thing. It’s not the ocassional person who decides to try something different. Riding treeless is becoming very common.
It doesn’t take years to make a horse back sore. It generally takes only a few rides. If a saddle is pinching, pressing, and hurting, the horse will start to show signs fairly quick. This will be even more evident in mountainous regions where the horses are going up and down hills. The big name treeless competitors I mentioned earlier live in mountainous regions and ride on very difficult and steep trails.
Spend some time on endurance.net looking at Tevis photo albums. Check out the photos from the vet checks and tell me how many Bob Marshall and Freeform saddles you see. People don’t just willy nilly flounce off to Tevis in a saddle that sores up their horse, or a saddle they haven’t been training regularly in. People who go to Tevis generally have done their homework and have been conditioning for months or even years. I tend to think that most of them (no, not all) know what they’re doing.
You are assuming that all the riders who have ridden treeless for 3 or 6 or 10 years are suddenly out of nowhere going to have every horse in the barn pop up lame and back sore after all those years of treeless. It doesn’t usually work that way. If a saddle is going to cause problems, it shows up sooner rather than later.
And just to clarify, I am NOT saying that treeless is the only way to ride, or that it’s the best. I don’t personally care what a person rides their horse in. As long as the horse and rider are both comfortable, sound, and happy, it doesn’ matter.
[QUOTE=Guilherme;5994670]
As I’ve said, folks can make up their own mind. The fact that I’ve been made the “center of attraction” because I’ve challenged the “prevailing wisdom” of this group is interesting. If Shakespeare were here he’d probably say “Methinks the lady(ies) doth protest too much.” :lol:
If we studied history we’d know that the saddle tree dates back at least to the Romans. They did not use it to carry additional weight but rather as a more stable platform for weapons usage (javelin and bow). I don’t think they invented it (the Sythians, the premier horsemen of their time, may have). Evey horse culture that has been introduced to it quickly adopted it. A tiny fragment of the North American horse industry has reverted to the primitive practices of the past. If that works for them then God Bless 'Em.
I’ve had my say and, in other threads, may have a say again. If I’m wrong then ignore me; the horses will tell the story. If I’m right then the horses will tell the story.
G.[/QUOTE]
How are all of the endurance horses ridden treeless (not to mention MY horses) not telling the story sufficiently for you to re-think your beliefs? How can they all be so “crippled” and keep going, passing vet checks, and doing another 100 miler? How often are the horses vet checked at your rides, G?
I think this is a case of a very poorly written article (written to the lowest common denominator) rather than a useless study as some have said.
I don’t have the reference to the study, but here is some information on the researcher
http://www.equinology.com/info/instructor.asp?insid=17
Her book on Sport Horse Conditioning is considered a bible by many different sports. My understanding is that it is well respected by many endurance riders as well.
My guess is the study is not as it was reported, but is much more detailed and well-thought out.
Without seeing the real presentation, I wouldn’t venture to comment on the result.
Kind of like the “use of data” from a Dept of Environmental Protection report that stated only 1-2% of people in NJ actively hunt that got translated by an activist non-hunting group into 98% of NJ people are anti-hunting.
Looking up information on the meeting her plenary lecture was
Professor Hilary Clayton, Michigan State University (USA), gave the delegates an insight into what actually happens in the horse’s mouth. In her marvellous lecture she used video fluoroscopy in order to show a horse’s response to different bits and the effect of rein tension. “Since the bit makes contact with sensitive structures within the horse’s oral cavity, it is important to select, fit and use the bit correctly.” Furthermore she showed some very interesting preliminary results of studies during which elastic side-reins were compared with those made from inflexible material.
Will continue looking for info on the saddle fit issue. But don’t just write this researcher off.
Still haven’t found the actual study report, but from this it sounds like a preliminary study that will require a better design or at least a whole lot more repetitions and other saddle systems tested.
http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/news/2011/11/116.shtml
Presentation 5: Hilary Clayton
Pressure distribution beneath conventional and treeless saddles
Many riders try treeless saddles when they find it hard to fit conventional saddles to horse and/or rider. In this study Professor Clayton and her team compared weight-bearing area and pressure distribution patterns of a well-fitting conventional saddle and a treeless saddle. Eight horses were ridden by a single rider at sitting trot in a straight line in a conventional saddle and a treeless saddle. An electronic pressure mate measure total force, area of saddle contact, maximal and mean pressures. There was no difference in total force was found between the two saddles but the treeless saddle recorded greater loading on the middle third of the saddle. The loading was even across the front, middle and caudal thirds of the conventional saddle. The treeless saddle had a significantly smaller area of contact on the horses’ back and a significantly higher mean maximal pressure. The treeless saddle also had significantly more sensors recording pressures greater than 11 kPa. Pressure above this level have been found to be associated with back pain in horses by other researchers.
The conventional saddle performed as it was designed to do by distributing the pressure over a wider area of the horses’ backs. The treeless saddle had higher peak pressures with high pressure areas concentrated under the riders’ seat bones.
Criticism of this study included the fact that the treeless saddle was not fitted to the horses involved and only one type of treeless saddle was assessed. The researchers noted that it would be good to compare the treeless saddle to a poorly fitting conventional saddle. This audience member also noted that the type of treeless saddle (Ansür Carlton) did not require any specialised pad to be used under it. This is contrary to many treeless saddles and a pad that is designed to work with the treeless saddle to disperse pressure may give an entirely different result.
[QUOTE=Drive NJ;5995035]
This audience member also noted that the type of treeless saddle (Ansür Carlton) did not require any specialised pad to be used under it. [/QUOTE]
I know that’s what the manufacturer claims, but my mare told me her Carlton did indeed need a special pad.
Having used them with and without, I’d hesitate to use a treeless saddle without a purposeful pad, regardless of what the manufacturer says.
And I don’t doubt the complete details of the researcher’s study was lost in translation to the article. I know of Dr. Clayton and have her book on Conditioning Sport Horses in my library.
I’ve had the pleasure to hear Dr. Clayton speak about her work in person, and we are very lucky to have her in the field, funded to do real work on performance horses. Her work is rigorous and well done, though of course subject to limitations of funding. She has been instrumental in several changes for the benefit of horses everywhere, not least of which is the removal of the minimum weight requirement for eventing. It would be incredibly cool to be one of her graduate students.
Her study very specifically measures sitting trot. In part, I would point out that Dr. Clayton is probably more oriented towards analysis of this type of saddle for dressage than for endurance. (She is an upper level dressage competitor and her major funding is from a dressage oriented sponsor.) If you are not sitting the trot during a 100 mile ride, obviously, this would not apply - you’d want her to rework the study with rising trot and standing in stirrups if you wanted to know the results for those positions.
I certainly believe in doing what works for the horse. If you have a saddle that works for your horse, a generalized study doesn’t change that. What these studies do is point to directions for innovation and problem solving for others, and potentially save people several thousand dollars an iteration going down paths that aren’t likely to work.
If the test was done with an Ansur Carlton, a lot depends on whether it was done with an older model (no gullet) or a newer one, which has the gullet.
My own experience with treeless saddles has led me to the conclusion (sample size of two horses and four treeless saddles) is that those saddles without gullets require a special pad to create one.
[QUOTE=5chestnuts;5993337]
Just look at these popular treeless saddles and tell me if you think they look like a puffy bareback pad…or if the shapes looks remarkably familiar to you:
Ansur “Elite” jumping saddle (made in Sensation “G4” dressage
Barefoot “London” dressage (made in Germany)
Freeform (endurance style)
Bob Marshall (high end endurance saddle) - western trail models
Heather Moffet “Vogue GPT” and “Fhoenix” treeless
These saddles are made in Europe, UK, US, and Canada.
Not exactly a “flash in the pan” or local fad. ;)[/QUOTE]
Well, Thank You!!
I guess I haven’t seen those brands before. Where does all the padding and inserts go? What do they have in place of a solid tree? Having no experience ,I am not against treeless saddles but I do find it hard to believe that they would be very stable on a round backed horse, especially when mounting from the ground ( having a horse with no mane).
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
