Position of the bar relative to the shoulder blades

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

On this mare, if I hadn't set the rigging position ahead of a full double, considering her shoulders and large barrel, the bar tips would have been a good twelve inches forward of the end of the scapulas, or the cinch would have had to shoot forward at about a 45 degree angle. This particular mare had a short back to go with long shoulder blades and a large barrel. It seems to me that the front of the bars would have had to be shaped much differently to set comfortably in the more forward position on her shoulders compared to if the tree was to set just behind her shoulders. I would love to hear more opinions on this- should the tree be on or behind the shoulders, or does this it matter one way or another? Some horses do seem more interested in bucking when something is on there shoulders, but this could have more to do with poor bar fit and uneven pressure than the fact that there is pressure on the shoulders. The mare I built the saddle for wouldn't even lope without bucking with several other saddles, and now goes comfortably even on a riding trip across several western states last summer- I readily admit this could be more due to the custom bars or even accident than my logic. I am anxiously awaiting more expertise and experience on this topic to expand my limited knowledge (admittedly anecdotal as well). Thank you for the experienced input, and I love these forums,

I tried to find where this idea has been discussed previously on LW, but I couldn't find the posts. So I started a new thread for this topic coming out of the Tree Fitting, I know, I know... thread just to make it more searchable in the future. It is very important, and also very controversial.

Where should the front bar tips be set relative to the back of the shoulder blades and how does movement affect this? HUGE question that we really don’t have solid answers for yet. There are lots of opinions which shows how little we really know so far. Here is an overview of the various ideas as far as we see them.

Idea #1

You need to set the front of the bar tips back of the shoulder blades at least 2” or you will interfere with the shoulder blades during movement. This and the “nothing goes behind the 18th rib” rule may both work well as guidelines for English saddles but I hear them all the time transferred as laws to be followed for western saddles as well. Frankly, they just don’t apply. The front bar pad design on a western saddle is a large surface area shaped in such a way so as to fit the contours of the horse’s wither area. It is not something that, should the shoulder blade contact it at any phase of the stride, will impede movement in the way that the small, thin arch of an English saddle would. This is why shaping is so important.

Idea #2

You should have the bars sitting on top of the shoulder blades at all times to help carry the weight of the rider. This is current promoted on an easy to find YouTube video made by a saddle and tree maker. First time I have every heard someone say they wanted to do this. We strongly disagree. This causes the same problem as when the saddle is placed too far forward and held there with a breast collar. You then have a small amount of muscle being compressed between a solid bar and a weight bearing, moving bone. This can’t help but impede the movement of the shoulder blades. It is also a recipe for atrophy and damage and results in hollows behind the withers as the muscle there wastes away from excess pressure, and it leaves prominent shoulder blades sticking out, exacerbating the problem.

Idea #3

You can build a saddle designed to have bar area that protrudes over the shoulder blades but doesn’t contact them so you can get the rider further forward on the horse without interference. Again, we disagree. There are a number of companies who build trees with this goal in mind. From what we have seen the idea is most common among people who ride gaited horses. We just don’t feel this can work well for long term riding. If you have a significant section of the bar designed NOT to bear weight, that limits the surface bearing area left, causing increased PSI under those areas. And can you stop the tree from tipping forward and falling down onto the shoulder blades all the time? We don’t think so. For riding in a arena where you are always riding on a level surface and concentrating on your position, etc. at all times, it might possibly work. But if you ever lean forward or back to avoid an obstacle or open a gate, we can’t see how the tree won’t tip, and that happens as soon as you ride outside. And you sure couldn’t expect that design not to contact the shoulder blades if you are roping. As well, what keeps a saddle of that design in a constant place on a horse?

Idea #4

You build the bar to fit just behind the shoulder blade so the short area of relief or flare, depending which term you like to use, built into the front bar tip doesn’t put pressure on the shoulder blade itself. This is how we build our trees and why we think it works best. When the leg is weight bearing, there should never be pressure on it. As the horse extends his leg forward in the non-weight bearing portion of his stride, the back corner of the shoulder blade does move back. But if the bar tip is shaped correctly (not a blunt wall to run into) the shoulder blade is free and will slide underneath that bar without excess pressure on it. As long as the muscle and cartilage in that area is never squeezed between two hard surfaces, solid (weighted) bone and tree bar, there will not be excess pressure and there will not be damage done. So the shoulder blade CAN go under the bar tip without causing problems – so long as it doesn’t bear weight at the same time.

We know a lot of tree makers who fall into this basic category. We all know that the curved shape of the bar pad and especially of the front bar tip is crucial, but we disagree on exactly how it should be shaped and exactly where the bar tip should end. Our method of dealing with shoulder interference is have relatively short bar tips normally on our trees which won’t extend over the shoulder blades. We build a lot of curve into that first ½” or so of bar tip, not to flare them out to sit over the shoulder blade but to allow a smooth surface for the shoulder blade to slide under. Other makers currently posting on this board do things differently. This is where the technology of the pressure pads, used in properly conducted trials, will be able to teach us a lot. The next few years will be exciting in terms of what we will learn about saddle fit. The next few posts might be exciting too. Looking forward to this discussion.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Rod and Denise Nikkel

[daviD A Morris]

Ok I'm pretty much with idea #4, however, look at the accompanying photos of a warren wright tree on a registered quarter horse. Also take into consideration that it is only a small tree, seat length 15" (in the tree) The owners of this horse tried dozens of different saddles from production line stock to hand made saddles and they all slide back till they are too far back. Too far back ? who says how far back is too far? well the riders, and I agreed with them, when the back end of the skirts are hitting the horse on the hips. within a few minutes of starting to work the horse the saddles have slipped back and then with each stride are driving into the back of that scapula, to the point of giving the horse white hairs. Full position and 7/8ths rigged saddles were the worst, 3/4 position rigged saddle not as bad, but still bad. The horse is built "downhill" a bit, which doesn't show up the photos, but I've seen horses a lot more 'downhill' than this one.

So what do the experts say? should I make a tree with more flare at the front to kind of distribute the force of the saddle against the back of the scapula over a bigger area? Should I make the tree narrower than this WW tree in the photo so that it sits up more on top of the shoulders and less down the sides? Maybe just turn the tips of the bars out a little. I'd put a little extra on the front of the skirts to help ride up over that scapula as i noticed with some saddles that the front of skirts were realy "driving into" the back of that scapula.

Interested in what other people have to say.

dam

Edited April 28, 2009 by daviD A Morris

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

Firstly, we make no claim to be experts, so maybe we shouldn't be responding here. But we sure enjoy learning from what everyone says.

David, Although it is hard to tell from just pictures, my initial response is that that is not a healthy back on that horse. Looking at the protruding shoulder blades and the muscle sinking in so dramatically behind them along the withers – looks like atrophied muscles to me. The tree seems to have the right angle in the center of the bar, and in the first pictures it appears the angle at the back of the bar is good too. Yet the front of the bar has air underneath the front and even the bottom edge. In the second picture it appears the tree is falling down at the front because there is not the normal amount of muscle to hold the front end up, so the back of the tree is lifting off the horse. Fitting a horse like this would be a different thing than fitting a horse that isn't atrophied. Making sure the bar tips aren't too long would be the first thing we would do.

Interesting how the rigging position affected things. It goes against the theory that the further forward the rigging is placed, the more the saddle is held back. It fits in with the "rigging them further back lightens up the weight on the front bar tips and gives more shoulder relief" idea.

And a horse like this would also show up how important it is to block the skirts so they follow the curve of the bar and lift off the horse. We have seen saddles with thick, unblocked skirts with a very short amount of leather ahead of the bars going straight forward. Yup, the shoulder blades sure ran into those skirts!

[kseidel]

When the leg is weight bearing, there should never be pressure on it. As the horse extends his leg forward in the non-weight bearing portion of his stride, the back corner of the shoulder blade does move back.

How do you arrive at this conclusion? There is no ball joint for the shoulder like there is for the hip. The shoulder blade and corresponding leg is kind of free floating and is attached mostly with muscle tissue. The ligaments that attach the top of the scapula to the spine creates the "pivot point" and not somewhere in the middle. The back corner of the shoulder blade moves back and up slightly when the leg is weighted and moves back. This part of the scapula does not have a lot of movement since it is fairly close to the fixed point of connection.

I am no authority on scientific equine anatomy, but I have studied this subject in real world application for many years and have found the movement of the shoulder to be opposite of your description.

I mean no disrespect and would welcome more info on this subject.

Keith

[kseidel]

Ok I'm pretty much with idea #4, however, look at the accompanying photos of a warren wright tree on a registered quarter horse. Also take into consideration that it is only a small tree, seat length 15" (in the tree) The owners of this horse tried dozens of different saddles from production line stock to hand made saddles and they all slide back till they are too far back. Too far back ? who says how far back is too far? well the riders, and I agreed with them, when the back end of the skirts are hitting the horse on the hips. within a few minutes of starting to work the horse the saddles have slipped back and then with each stride are driving into the back of that scapula, to the point of giving the horse white hairs. Full position and 7/8ths rigged saddles were the worst, 3/4 position rigged saddle not as bad, but still bad. The horse is built "downhill" a bit, which doesn't show up the photos, but I've seen horses a lot more 'downhill' than this one.

So what do the experts say? should I make a tree with more flare at the front to kind of distribute the force of the saddle against the back of the scapula over a bigger area? Should I make the tree narrower than this WW tree in the photo so that it sits up more on top of the shoulders and less down the sides? Maybe just turn the tips of the bars out a little. I'd put a little extra on the front of the skirts to help ride up over that scapula as i noticed with some saddles that the front of skirts were realy "driving into" the back of that scapula.

Interested in what other people have to say.

dam

I have held the position for years that the rigging position does not determine the tree's position on the horse. In this case this horse has very wide pronounced shoulders, and the rest of the back is more slender, especially in the wither pocket. The muscles may or may not be atrophied. The pictures show very clearly that this tree has too much rocker for this horse. The second pic shows a shadow under the bottom edge of the bar in both the front and the back, and is tight to the horse from the rear stirrup leather cut back about 2-3 inches. This shape would "rock" on the horse and with the front held down by the rigging, the back would move up and down pulling the saddle back. Flattening the bar would eliminate the "teeter-totter" effect and contact more surface area of the horses back. The bar obviously needs more twist to be steeper in the front. The back twist is probably fine once the bar is flattened. This is also an area where the distance from the 14th vert. to the scapula needs to be shorter. This distance seems to be a major factor in saddles sliding forward or backward.

If you get the tree to sit properly and block enough relief in the front skirts, it should sit still even though it may be up close to the shoulders. The tree must sit behind the shoulders, and may be quite a bit narrower than one would immagine for this horse. But we are fitting to the ribcage, not the shoulder blades.

Respectfully,

Keith

[Fpotter]

Kieth,

Im glad you stated that you are “no authority on equine anatomy”. Their most certainly is a shoulder JOINT ( scapulohumeral joint) and it is in fact of ball and socket configuration. Now with that being said it is not stabilized the same as the Hip ball and socket and thus allows load bearing to be dispersed differently, the articular configuration of the shoulder joint allows the joint to be exceptionally stabilized this configuration is what allows the horse to sleep standing up with very min muscle activity. Also the rise at the back of the wither that you talk about is also opinion based. Due to the musclesketlatel configuration the upward movement of the scapula is very limited during flexion and extension of the scapula.

[Denise]

I am no expert in equine anatomy either but I have been restudying the subject lately, reminding myself of things I learned in anatomy class more years ago than I care to mention. Keith is correct in that there is no bony attachment between the front leg and the body wall, but there are no ligaments that attach those two things together either. So there is no fixed point of connection. The only attachment is by a number of different muscles, which means that the shoulder blade can basically slide along the body wall until the muscles are at the extent of their reach in any direction. Most of the muscles that connect to the shoulder blade attach to its upper half. Some attach to the outside and some to the inside of the shoulder blade. Some attach to the cartilage that comes off the top of the shoulder blade. Most of them have a section that pulls forward and a section that pulls back. Some come down from the top of the spine. The large Serratus Ventralis muscles come up from lower on the body and connect to the underside of the upper half of the shoulder blade, basically acting to suspend the chest from the front legs as they also assist in moving the legs relative to the chest.

So there are a number of muscles pulling forward and back and up and down on the shoulder blade and which muscles act in which phase of the stride still is not totally understood. Because the muscles are connected to large sections of the shoulder blade, it does not pivot from its top but rotates around some point along its length. I have yet to find out if there is a consistent "pivot point" or not. It probably varies with gait and phase of stride. If you walk alongside a moving horse feeling his shoulder blade move, you recognize that the top does tilt backwards compared to the bottom as the horse extends his leg and unless that tilt occurs as if the shoulder blade was hanging from its upper tip (which it isn't), then the back corner has to move backwards as the bottom moves forwards – i.e. when the leg extends.

I have seen a number of YouTube videos demonstrating how if you lift the horse's leg and pull it forward, that back corner of the shoulder blade can go back a few inches. I think those demonstrations show an extreme movement caused by overstretching, but I do believe that is the motion that happens during the normal stride of a horse. Exactly how much during each gait has not yet been determined. To learn about movement, the research technique commonly used is to put reflective markers on the skin over points like the hip, knee, hock and fetlock and then analyze video footage of horses on treadmills. You can't do the same thing with the shoulder blade because it moves relative to the overlying skin while the other points they use don't. There is still so much to learn and our technology is still not good enough in many cases.

[bruce johnson]

Good explanation Denise. The other complicating factor in determining the extent of movement is deciding what is bone, what is the cartilage, what is contracting muscle, and what is relaxed soft tissue being compressed and raising up during the different phases of a stride and between strides. Then factor in that those have to vary from one horse to the next. Like the tootsie pop commercial with the wise old owl - "The world may never know". The top of the scapula is an interesting area.

[Saddlebag]

I'm thinking you might need either a crupper or breeching to hold this saddle away from the edge of the shoulderblade. I don't care for the way this tree sits the horse but I certainly wouldn't have it sitting up on the shoulder blades. The trapezius muscles that the saddle would be sitting on are responsible for lifting the leg and injury to these muscles can result in a lame horse. This can then take up to a year to recover. What's interesting is people will call the vet or farrier and look at the hoof or lower leg thinking that is the source of the lameness.

[Denise]

When I was in vet school I was taught that about 90 percent of all lamenesses were in the hoof, especially in the front legs. Now vets are realizing that back problems not only cause unsoundnesses, but may be related to leg lamenesses too (though which comes first is a matter of controversy). Michigan state has even opened the McPhail Equine Back Pain Clinic. http://news.msu.edu/story/5593/

Clinic director Rob van Wessum said very few veterinarians are equipped to comprehensively diagnose and treat back pain in horses. He said at least 10 percent to 15 percent of equine lameness problems can be traced to problems in the back.

"If we did more research, I wouldn't be surprised to find that the percentage is actually higher," he said. "People will often try to treat the lameness as a problem in the leg, when the problem is really in the back."

The problem is that few vets understand much about how saddles work (saddles are not a high priority when you are trying to learn the anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, diseases, treatment and surgical procedures of all non-human species), and most saddle makers don't have a great understanding of the anatomy and biomechanical function of the equine back. That is not a knock against either profession. It is just a statement of fact. The more vets and saddle makers can work together and learn about the other's areas, the sooner we will get better fitting saddles and healthier horses.

It may just be a terminology difference, but I wouldn't say that the trapezius muscle lifts the leg. It has two sections - the cranial (front) one originates on the nuchal ligament that runs along the top of the neck and is the top most muscle (under the skin and its muscle) in front of and on top of the shoulder blade. It inserts on the spine of the scapula - that ridge running relatively up and down that sticks out from the center of the shoulder blade. The caudal (back) part orignites from ligament that runs along the top of the spine (the supraspinous ligament) between T3 and T10. It also is the outer most muscle in that area (under the skin and its muscle) behind and on top of the shoulder blade, and it too inserts on the spine of the scapula, but primarily on a specific knob that is about 1/3rd or so of the way down from the top. So this is the section that gets pinched and damaged between the saddle and the moving shoulder blade if the saddle held is too far forward or doesn't fit well at the front. If it is badly damaged, it atrophies (shrinks) so there is more of a hollow behind the shoulder blade than there was before, the back of the shoulder blade is more visible (since there is less muscle covering it) and often the spine of the scapula is more visible too. The front section of the trapezius pulls the shoulder blade forward and up. The back section pulls it backwards and up. If both work together they do act to move the shoulder blade up compared to the withers, but there isn't a lot of room for movement in that direction. And they act only on the shoulder blade, not further down the leg.

Probably way too much information, but as I said before, the more saddle makers learn about anatomy...

[ccpowell]

Very excellent points- I think that the other thing that all of us need to remember is that what we think we know and what we think has worked and therefore is correct could actually only be partially correct or worked for reasons other than what we thought. When this thread was started, I thought that I had some good information and a good case in point to reference regarding fitting those odd shaped horses, only to discover (thank all of you who imparted wisdom on this subject) that I likely fit the horse by having the tree custom fitted, and my thoughts on rigging position were dead wrong and inconsequential to the outcome. I am glad that the situation worked out for the benefit of the horse and owner despite what I thought I knew! It goes to show that what we think we know, even if we have experience to back it up, may not actually be fact. I always liked the 3/4 and 7/8 rigging positions best as a cowboy, but thought as a saddle maker that I needed to change based on what I had read. Now with more reading and thought on the subject, I am headed back to what I inherently felt was right. I have been seeking out information on rigging position as well as how to attach the rigging to get more even pressure on the bars, and am glued to the forum looking for more tidbits of knowledge. I hope that I can remain open minded, and encourage everyone else to consider the same- it is when we think we have it all figured out that we stop learning!

Chuck

When I was in vet school I was taught that about 90 percent of all lamenesses were in the hoof, especially in the front legs. Now vets are realizing that back problems not only cause unsoundnesses, but may be related to leg lamenesses too (though which comes first is a matter of controversy). Michigan state has even opened the McPhail Equine Back Pain Clinic. http://news.msu.edu/story/5593/

The problem is that few vets understand much about how saddles work (saddles are not a high priority when you are trying to learn the anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, diseases, treatment and surgical procedures of all non-human species), and most saddle makers don't have a great understanding of the anatomy and biomechanical function of the equine back. That is not a knock against either profession. It is just a statement of fact. The more vets and saddle makers can work together and learn about the other's areas, the sooner we will get better fitting saddles and healthier horses.

It may just be a terminology difference, but I wouldn't say that the trapezius muscle lifts the leg. It has two sections - the cranial (front) one originates on the nuchal ligament that runs along the top of the neck and is the top most muscle (under the skin and its muscle) in front of and on top of the shoulder blade. It inserts on the spine of the scapula - that ridge running relatively up and down that sticks out from the center of the shoulder blade. The caudal (back) part orignites from ligament that runs along the top of the spine (the supraspinous ligament) between T3 and T10. It also is the outer most muscle in that area (under the skin and its muscle) behind and on top of the shoulder blade, and it too inserts on the spine of the scapula, but primarily on a specific knob that is about 1/3rd or so of the way down from the top. So this is the section that gets pinched and damaged between the saddle and the moving shoulder blade if the saddle held is too far forward or doesn't fit well at the front. If it is badly damaged, it atrophies (shrinks) so there is more of a hollow behind the shoulder blade than there was before, the back of the shoulder blade is more visible (since there is less muscle covering it) and often the spine of the scapula is more visible too. The front section of the trapezius pulls the shoulder blade forward and up. The back section pulls it backwards and up. If both work together they do act to move the shoulder blade up compared to the withers, but there isn't a lot of room for movement in that direction. And they act only on the shoulder blade, not further down the leg.

Probably way too much information, but as I said before, the more saddle makers learn about anatomy...

[Janice]

This is a wonderful discussion everyone, thank you for this.

"It is when we think we have it all figured out that we stop learning!"

SO true Chuck!