Force and pressure distribution beneath a conventional dressage saddle and a treeless dressage saddle with panels.
Authors: Clayton Hilary M, O'Connor Katherine A, Kaiser Leeann J
Journal: Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997)
Summary
# Editorial Summary Clayton and colleagues investigated how pressure distributes under two contrasting dressage saddle designs by instrumenting six horses with electronic pressure mapping during trotting work whilst ridden by a single rider. A conventional saddle with a beechwood spring tree was compared against a treeless model featuring large panels and a deep gullet, with ten strides analysed per horse-saddle combination using statistical comparison of loaded area, total force, and pressure variables. Whilst both saddles achieved comparable contact area and force distribution overall, the treeless design generated significantly higher maximum pressure values, elevated mean pressure readings, and larger zones exceeding 11 kPa—findings attributable to the narrow gullet dimensions and steeply angled panel construction rather than the absence of a rigid tree itself. The implications are important: treeless saddles cannot simply function as a one-size-fits-all alternative, as panel geometry remains critical to pressure management and must be tailored to individual equine dorsal anatomy just as rigorously as conventional saddles. For practitioners fitting saddles or advising clients, this work underscores that the presence or absence of a tree is secondary to considered panel design and individualised fit assessment in preventing pressure-related discomfort and potential tissue damage.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •Treeless saddles can distribute forces comparably to conventional saddles, but individual panel fit remains essential—do not assume treeless automatically solves fit problems
- •High pressure concentrations in treeless saddles often stem from panel geometry rather than lack of a tree; assess gullet width and panel slope carefully when fitting
- •Both saddle types require customized fitting for each horse's back shape to avoid pain and potential tissue damage
Key Findings
- •Contact area and total force did not differ significantly between conventional treed and treeless dressage saddles
- •Treeless saddle produced higher maximal pressure, mean pressure, and greater area with pressure >11kPa compared to conventional saddle
- •Panel design (size, shape, angulation, and position) critically influences pressure distribution regardless of saddle tree type
- •Treeless saddle panels provided comparable force distribution to treed saddles but high-pressure areas resulted from narrow gullet and steeply-sloped panels