Duragrouch

Let me further qualify what I said, after a day of thinking: What I described in terms of compression on top and tension on the bottom, that applies to a *rigid beam*, supported at the ends, with a load in the middle. An example is a floor joist, supported at the ends, with you standing in the middle. However, the saddle leather is not a rigid beam; It has *some* beam stiffness, due to the sides of the saddle formed downward, that provides much better stiffness than just a "tape" strip of leather on top and no sides; However, it still relies on keeping the leather in fore/aft tension by the steel frame, to keep it from collapsing in the center under load, so it's a combination in function of a beam, and a "sling". That sling tension might cancel any beam compression forces at the top. A good analogy is spokes; the spoke at the bottom when rolling, is never loaded in compression, it's always in tension, but when at the bottom, the tension is simply *reduced*, and if the spoke tension goes to zero, it's a problem, that's how spokes loosen. Accordingly with your seat, because it is partly a beam, that would imply some compression forces on top when loaded, but for the saddle to not collapse, I think there is sufficient tension (or should be) such that the top is never in true compression. Having said that, where most saddle forces are applied, aft, it does not have the depth of shape as further forward, so more sling forces there, so perhaps, to get the right feel aft (under your butt bones), the tension may be such that there can be some slight beam compression (and wrinkling) on top where the saddle has deep sides. A lot of that can depend how you like your saddle to support, butt bones, or further forward under your crotch. My preference has shifted aft over time.