"After 1990 the waters were muddied tremendously with the interjection of the feral follies" -George Geist I really had to think about what you were saying here, it was funny-when I finally got it!
Before Duckett found his D-spot, I read that he tried to teach a 4 point trim, but people found it too confusing, so he went with the dot. So, what's one got to do with the other? In fact, is a 4 point trim a good thing? Seems controversial. (edited) seems I misunderstood the quote, see quote below in another post
I seem to have 80% of my practice performing at high levels barefoot. Shhhhhh dont tell the horses that they can't do what they are doing without shoes.
Nope. Never been to any of Dr. Reddens things. I am a "Natural BS" guy and I find that "BS" to work rather well. Guess horses are easily persuaded by my rhetoric and story telling. Despite the fact that their feet are balanced incorrectly they "believe" because of my gift of gab, slight of hand and prestidigitation that "feel" that their feet have been balanced very well and they go out and dominate their competition . Its a classic case of mind over matter.
Which immediately followed Duckett's presentation at the Bluegrass Laminitis Symposium where several attendees including the host took the material presented and created their own cook book trim protocols and terminology based on their own interpretation of the material. Unfortunately those who have done so are great salesman and piss poor engineers. None of the trim protocols developed by these pretenders actually use physical law and geometric proportion (physics, geometry) as their basis. Like their predecessors, they reduce farrier science to carpentry because they don't have the capacity elevate it above that.
Can you give examples of what these "cooks" have changed? Or what they have specifically mis interpreted? What specific trim interpretations have been shown to damage a horse ?
George, is it possible that the current 4 point trim is far exaggerated from what it was supposed to be? Would a four point trim be acceptable if less exaggerated?
Here it is http://www.anvilmag.com/farrier/taimuty1.htm Here's the part I was talking about quoted from Duckett's reply "I wish to clarify that this system is totally separate from that which I have established and taught in the United States since the early '80s. Rick Redden has stated in the past that the Four Point Trim method was based upon my work also, though I have never been consulted on that of which he now promotes. However, it does use elements of my work, specifically the four weight-bearing areas of the foot. I see the confusion in many practitioners' minds between the Four Point Trim and the four weight-bearing areas" I may have misread some of this-
DUH!!! No kidding. BTW, Matt Taimuty spent today with me shoeing horses. He is not just a friend to me, he is family.
Since you've already demonstrated your own ability to grossly misinterpret the written word you make a convenient example of exactly what I am talking about. I'm sure you can imagine how others could make the same mistakes as you have done in this thread. Taking material presented in a lecture and trying to develop an entire system based on information they gleaned from said lecture. So exactly the same as you, they tried to make something up from information they did not have the educational background in physics and geometry to understand. And there are plenty of folks who will take whatever good parts have resulted from that misinterpretation and distort it even further with their own misinterpretation of the misinterpretation - as you have done here.
There's a difference between misinterpretation and misreading. And you haven't answered those two questions I asked you. How can I learn if my questions are avoided?
Tom, you haven't even attempted to answer my opening question. I would think you would jump at the chance to educate me with all your knowledge and years of experience.
I was giving you the benefit of doubt with the term misinterpretation. Bus if you insist that you misread, then there is no doubt regarding your comprehension of the written word. The answers to those questions were answered very succinctly in the article to which you posted a link. Your questions begin with false presumptions. This question << is a perfect example of that. You presume that you can learn, yet you fail at reading for comprehension - which is a REQUIREMENT for learning from the written word. You presume that I avoid answering. But the question you pose is based on a false premise. Thus if I answer the question, I validate your false premise. Karen, have you stopped beating and starving your horse?
