KEN'S COLUMN Analyse the ‘aids’!
Recently a deluge of new ‘saddle fitting aids’ has emerged - some good, some not so good. The biggest problem is that the use of these ‘gadgets’ – for want of a better word – is dependent on a fair degree of knowledge and it is very easy to misuse them. The secondary problem relates to the fact that the gadgets can tempt horse owners to rely too much on their own judgement.
I am all for ‘aids’ that encourage horse owners to monitor the fit of their saddle. Anything that helps them to develop awareness of changes in their horses’ shape is helpful – but that is quite different from the initial fitting.
Saddle fitting is complicated for a number of reasons. Firstly, in this country – unlike most countries on the Continent – we have a very wide range of breeds and types, all of which have conformation idiosyncrasies the saddle fitter must take into account. At the same time, saddles ranges continue to expand and, while this provides greater choice, it also makes ‘choosing’ far more complicated.
It is quite possible for the saddle fitter to select a dozen – or more – saddles that his knowledge and experience indicate might be suitable for a particular horse. Preliminary fitting procedures might result in this number being reduced by half. Following the horse being ridden in each of the remaining saddles, it is likely more saddles will be discarded and the final choice may be limited to two or three saddles that have passed all the tests satisfactorily. There is no way that any ‘gadget’ or equipment currently available is capable of carrying out all the tests undertaken by an SMS qualified saddle fitter.
One of the problems occurring more and more frequently relates to internet sales. Times are hard and cash strapped horse owners are looking for bargains – and prices quoted on the internet can seem to offer really good buys. The problem is that the saddle will still need to be fitted – and what happens when it patently does not fit? Or when the fit is acceptable but the rider finds the saddle uncomfortable and/or unhelpful? Of course, the saddle can be returned – but this is time consuming and inconvenient and it doesn’t solve the problem of obtaining a correctly fitting saddle. A seeming ‘bargain’ is not a genuine ‘bargain’ if the result doesn’t fulfil needs.
Buying second-hand can be very cost effective when the transaction is undertaken by a saddle fitter who keeps a very large range of second-hand saddles. He – or she – will carry out the processes that would be undertaken when fitting a new saddle – and the fitter will also offer advice about any alterations or refurbishment needed. On the other hand, a horse owner buying from a private seller in response to an advertisement faces the same potential ‘problems’ as buying on the Internet.
Although it doesn’t actually help when money is really tight, it is worth remembering that a craftsman-produced British-made saddle represents truly remarkable value. Well looked after, a good quality saddle is an investment that can give years of service with which few other commodities can compare. Taking the price of the saddle and dividing it by the number of days it will be put into use puts ‘cost’ into perspective!
Saddle purchase should never been undertaken on a whim! The saddle fitter wants to offer the best possible advice but, in order to do this, he requires a lot of accurate information from the horse owner. When the appointment is made for the fitting, it is important to set aside sufficient time for the lengthy processes involved. It is also important to ensure there is somewhere suitable to ride – preferably a manege or indoor school – because the saddle fitter will wish to see the horse ridden in all the short-listed saddles.
My advice to horse owners operating on tight budgets is to take advice from a qualified saddle fitter. At the current time I am getting an average of four or five calls a week from horse owners who have bought what appeared to be a bargain off the internet but which has turned out to be a bitter disappointment!
The final date for Self Assessment having passed, I turn to another completely different matter. A client/friend of mine wrote a strong and heavy letter to the Inland Revenue. I have his permission to include the response in this column!
‘Dear Mr. XXXXXX,
I am writing to you to express our thanks for your more than prompt reply to our latest communication, and also to answer some of the points you raise. I will address them, as ever, in order.
Firstly, I must take issue with your description of our last as a "begging letter". It might perhaps more properly be referred to as a "tax demand". This is how we at the Inland Revenue have always, for reasons of accuracy, traditionally referred to such documents.
Secondly, your frustration at our adding to the "endless stream of crapulent whining and panhandling vomited daily through the letterbox on to the doormat" has been noted. However, whilst I have naturally not seen the other letters to which you refer I would cautiously suggest that their being from "pauper councils, Lombardy pirate banking houses and pissant gas-mongerers" might indicate that your decision to "file them next to the toilet in case of emergencies" is at best a little ill-advised. In common with my own organisation, it is unlikely that the senders of these letters do see you as a "lackwit bumpkin" or, come to that, a "sodding charity".. More likely they see you as a citizen of Great Britain , with a responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of the nation as a whole.
Which brings me to my next point. Whilst there may be some spirit of truth in your assertion that the taxes you pay "go to shore up the canker-blighted, toppling folly that is the Public Services", a moment's rudimentary calculation ought to disabuse you of the notion that the government in any way expects you to "stump up for the whole damned party" yourself. The estimates you provide for the Chancellor's disbursement of the funds levied by taxation, whilst colourful, are, in fairness, a little off the mark. Less than you seem to imagine is spent on "junkets for Bunterish lickspittles" and "dancing whores" whilst far more than you have accounted for is allocated to, for example, "that box-ticking facade of a university system."
A couple of technical points arising from direct queries:
1. The reason we don't simply write "Muggins" on the envelope has to do with the vagaries of the postal system;
2. You can rest assured that "sucking the very marrow of those with nothing else to give" has never been considered as a practice because even if the Personal Allowance didn't render it irrelevant, the sheer medical logistics involved would make it financially unviable.
I trust this has helped. In the meantime, whilst I would not in any way wish to influence your decision one way or the other, I ought to point out that even if you did choose to "give the whole foul jamboree up and go and live in India " you would still owe us the money.
Please send it to us by Friday.
Yours sincerely,
XXXXXXXXX
Customer Relations
Inland Revenue.’
Laughter really is the best medicine!
KEN LYNDON DYKES is an ex-international level three day event rider. A qualified Society of Master Saddlers’ saddle fitter, his specialities include competition horses and ‘difficult’ fittings.
KEN CAN BE OBTAINED AT HEAD OFFICE (01622 844440) or by MOBILE: 07973 501873
