Originally Posted by
Wesley36
False opposition - you took two elements of a fit, then put together an argument as to which part is better. It is a false opposition, because it is not "either/or", it is "and". You need to account for pelvic rotation AND sitz bone distance. Either parameter is less meaningful without the other, but your initial post makes it sound like we should choose one over the other. So it sets up a false opposition - these two parameters are not contradictory, both should be elements of fitting a saddle.
And yes, this is exactly how I used an ass-o-meter, and yes, there are definitely two distinct points. In terms of the physiology of how the pelvis interacts with the saddle, scroll down near the bottom of this, there are even fun pictures:
http://www.cervelo.com/en/engineerin...-saddles-.html
Since you want to be precise, tell me precisely what torso and pelvis rotation angle you used when sitting on the Ass-O-meter to determine your optimal saddle width.
I believe you spoiled the foundation of the test. The test with the Ass-O-meter is predicated on sit bone spacing with the torso orthogonal to the where you sit. The resulting spacing is interpolated as shown in the diagram above based upon riding position.