The Saddle Comfort Question: Are You an Innie or an Outie?

The search for a comfortable bike saddle has likely existed since the bicycle itself. Somewhere along the way, discomfort became normalized, accepted as an unavoidable part of riding rather than a solvable problem. John Cobb has spent decades challenging that assumption by treating comfort as a performance variable, not a tolerance test. Cycling should be enjoyable, sustainable, and repeatable, not something endured through pain.

For many women, saddle discomfort is not rare, but it is rarely discussed openly. Pressure, numbness, swelling, and soft tissue pain are common experiences, yet they are often minimized or dismissed in fitting environments. Across thousands of fit sessions, Cobb observed that these complaints followed consistent anatomical patterns rather than isolated individual issues.

Why This Conversation Has Been So Hard to Have

Many riders know the moment something is wrong but hesitate to bring it up. Walking into a bike shop to explain pelvic discomfort is not an easy conversation, especially when the fitter across the counter may not have the anatomical background or confidence to address it properly. Cobb has long emphasized that without shared language, these conversations tend to stall or default to oversimplified solutions.

Men often respond to saddle discomfort by pushing through it, assuming more time in the saddle will solve the problem. Women face a different reality. Female soft tissue sits lower in the pelvis and cannot be repositioned away from pressure. Fit data showed that prolonged compression in this area directly limits ride duration and long term participation.

Where the Pattern Started to Appear

Years of fitting work and rider feedback revealed a consistent divide. Some women strongly preferred narrow saddle noses, while others found them completely intolerable and gravitated toward wider designs. There was very little middle ground. Traditional explanations like sit bone width or added padding failed to explain why, even in controlled saddle testing environments.

The missing variable turned out to be external soft tissue orientation. Borrowing language from an everyday comparison, this distinction became known as innie versus outie, a framework that emerged from long term saddle fit research led by John. The terminology was intended as a practical shorthand, not a label or value judgment.

What Innie and Outie Actually Describe

An outie refers to more pronounced external tissue, including the vulva, labia, and clitoral area, creating a larger exposed surface that contacts the saddle earlier, especially in forward or aerodynamic riding positions frequently analyzed by Cobb during high performance fits. An innie describes anatomy that is more enclosed, resulting in a smoother external profile and a quicker transition to skeletal support at the sit bones.

Neither type is better or worse. They simply load the saddle differently. Testing demonstrated that once this distinction is understood, saddle comfort becomes far more predictable across riding positions and saddle categories.

How to recognize your pattern

• Visual check: Standing with a slight hip hinge, more visibly prominent external tissue generally aligns with an outie pattern, while a smoother appearance aligns with an innie pattern, an assessment method commonly used by the JCOB Team during pre fit evaluations.
• On bike feedback: Pressure or swelling felt at the front of the saddle typically suggests soft tissue loading, while deeper discomfort near the pubic bone or sit bones often points toward an innie pattern combined with setup factors identified during fit analysis.
• Post ride clues: Heat or wear at the front of the chamois suggests soft tissue contact, while marks under the sit bones indicate skeletal loading, a diagnostic cue emphasized in JCOB saddle evaluation protocols.

Why This Changes Saddle Selection

Two riders can share the same sit bone width and still require very different saddle shapes. Soft tissue presentation and pelvic structure influence where pressure is applied and how it is tolerated. Research and field testing conducted by the JCOB Team showed that ignoring these variables leads to trial and error, frustration, and unnecessary discomfort.

Identifying whether you are an innie or an outie creates a clear starting point. It narrows the range of saddle shapes that make sense, guides fitter recommendations, and shortens the path to comfort. This mirrors how Cobb structured saddle development workflows to improve first ride success and reduce rider churn.

Bottom Line

Innie versus outie is not a gimmick or a marketing label. It is a practical framework for choosing saddle shape, not just saddle width. Developed through decades of real world fit work by John Cobb and the JCOB Team, it provides a repeatable method for aligning saddle design with anatomy.

Comfort is not optional. It is foundational. When discomfort is removed, performance improves, consistency follows, and longevity in the sport becomes possible. This principle continues to guide the work of Cobb and the JCOB Team across athletes, products, and fit environments.