I read this thread with a little surprise, and a healthy dose of skepticism. I've ridden upon many, many, MANY saddles. A whole bunch of them simply aren't for me. I need to be comfortable when I ride. And of course everyone knows the old adage: YMMV. So, when I say that a Brooks Pro fits me very well (it does), and a Brooks B17 does not (it definitely does not), there's plenty of us on here the opposite proves true. I've got a brother-in-law who very comfortably rides very upright on one of Brooks' "big butt" saddles - I've tried, and I feel like I get lost on it. Personally, I really like the Cambium C17, but others have had different experiences than me. But that's just Brooks. One of my ride buddies loves his Anatomica but it left me feeling kind of "meh." I love the Regal too, which, like most Brooks, is still made and sold.

I find it a little weird that the only two C&V posts I've read recently where I felt like one of the posters had incongruously found himself in the wrong place were both written by the OP: here and over in the thread about updating a bike. Both posts were fairly tough bashes on two of the most storied of bicycle components - Brooks and 531 steel.

I'm not a doctor (just married to one), but I thought the connections to cancer and impotence and bicycle saddles had largely been disproven. Adequate fit - something that many of us on these forums seem to know quite a lot about - has been shown to alleviate most concerns "down there." Or at least that's what I've been led to believe. If I'm wrong about this - and gosh knows that wouldn't be the first time - someone please set me straight.