New Selle Italia ladies saddle for 2008

[KnottedYet]

Not to thread-jack (OK, to thread-jack), but, Knot, what about aero? I think the reason several of us drooled on this saddle was because of the generous cutout.

When riding in a touring style, the Brooks makes perfect sense. Support on the IshTub's with a little give. But, drop aero and you are now supporting with 3 points of contact--the IshTub's and the ?pubis? (sorry, anatomy was long ago). At that point, it just doesn't seem that the Brooks will "get out of the way". And, a couple of posts have indicated just this. Wouldn't this imply a different saddle requirement? Or, am I incorrect in the 3 points of contact?

I'm not Brooks-bashing, just saddle manufacturer-bashing. Not all women are touring and not all women ride aero just as all women aren't put together exactly the same. Check the responses to this thread--several of us liked the looks of the saddle, but then we played The Three Bears--too wide, too narrow, oh, just right.

But, I'm just a rider who today is cranky because she has a big chafing spot from her non-T-shaped saddle, but which she rides not because it is right, but because it is currently the lesser of all evils.

I couldn't find any studies that *really* looked at women in aero. The studies I'm gnashing my teeth over drive me crazy because they don't take that stuff into consideration!

The study with what I (smug in my limited knowlege of leather saddles) assume involved a Brooks was done on MEN and didn't deal with cut-outs or aero. The study didn't even specify the position the men were taking on the saddles... see how poorly this stuff is being done?

(please note, I was talking about what the RESEARCH STUDY found, which was better penile blood flow on a "unpadded leather saddle."
Any woman could have told them that too much padding cuts down blood flow, and too narrow cuts down blood flow. And I was being grumpy at other studies I'm finding, which are designed very poorly when they involve women and saddle shape and fit.)

I didn't criticize the saddle that started this thread at all. I was raging about POORLY DESIGNED RESEARCH STUDIES that involve women, or don't even take into account women's experiences.

You are saddle-manufacturer bashing, I was saddle-researcher bashing.

Edit: I'm talking about peer-reviewed and published in a scientific journal type studies here, not in-house research.

Edit again: According to Trek, cutouts make no difference in comfort or performance, which is why their new "Inform" performance saddle line has no cut outs in either the men's or women's. That is in-house research, and you can bet I want to get ahold of that, and I want a saddle to play with. I know cut-outs make a difference to a lot of TE'ers, so where did Trek get the info that made them decide to nix cut-outs? How was the study designed? Was it standardized for pelvic and saddle parameters? How about soft tissue bulk? And were the studies done on women, or just on men?