Thanks, Tom, I know I can always count on you to trash my threads-rather than answer a few questions about your own statements
You did a half assed job reading the articles. Then based on what you half assed read, you ask questions based on false presumptions - to wit, Duckett did not develop or promote the 4-pint trim, Ducket has never promoted or taught or codified a "trim method," Duckett does not agree with INDISCRIMINATELY trimming the heels to the widest/highest part of the frog. You are too lazy to actually read and digest the material with enough INTELLECTUAL EFFORT to ask questions that actually pertain to what is written. Then you complain that you can't learn if I don't respond to your half assed, once over, missed all the salient and pertinent points, misread, misinterpreted, STUPID questions. You got one thing right. This thread is trashed. Trashed by your slovenly half assed approach to learning.
Absolutely correct . That trim was developed by one Mick O'Killian aka Mick the Stout and to the dismay of many, has been often replicated by a certain segment of the HCPN* ........... *Hoof Care Providers Nation
Thanks, Rick. Yea, Tom is right about that. I just happen to confuse 4point/pillar with Duckett's 4 areas of weight bearing by not reading it thoroughly.
I'd like to thank the good people who took the time to give their opinions on Duckett's Dot. There's alot of mis information on the web, and I was hoping to rely on those I trust for professional opinions. However , what I got is another trashed thread . And when I brought this to Ray's attention, he said that Tom was just being passionate about the subject matter. Now I'm understanding why Ben and George get scolded for Phil's picture being off topic, yet , the posts by Tom, which are way out of line, are called "passionate". It's favoritism. Some member(s) can continue to be a member only if they take abuse, post in the designated area, let their threads be trashed, and called lazy and ignorant, and put up with childish name calling from a man who's supposed to be a professional at the top of his field (?) Which seems to me that there is a double standard here. Something I thought I'd gotten away from at HS. Guess not! So, off I go in search of a mb where all members are equal, not the caste system like here. And hopefully , a place where members aren't abused for wanting to learn something.
Keren its only abuse if you take it that way. Even if people explain things in a bad way ( abuse) if you learn just 1 thing about it take it and continue to learn just my 2 cents Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
You admit to not reading it thoroughly, but object to being called out about it. You say you want to learn, but you want somebody else to do your homework and thinking for you. You tell lies and when I point out the truth you call that abuse. If my honesty causes you discomfort, I'm delighted. I means somewhere inside you there is a conscience.
Why does it suprise you that a Forum entitled FARRIERS forum might hold farriers in a special place. This is not the "farriers and trimmers forum" this is not the "farriers, and trimmers and horseowners, and people who want to get a horse someday forum" it is the "Farriers Forum". Stands to reason actual farriers might have special treatment here.
My bad. I stand corrected. I usually access the posts using the "whats new button" and did not pick up on which area this was posted in.
I've read it plenty and am puzzled. 1. The center of the coffin bone is the center of weight bearing when the limb is fully loaded. 2. The Dot is a point 3/8" behind the apex of a trimmed frog and refers to the center of the coffin bone. That is the only true anatomical reference point mappable on the outside of the hoof capsule that never changes. This suggests on a club foot the center of weight bearing is further back in the foot and on a low angled foot the center of weight bearing is further forward.
What is confusing is how the distinction is lost between an "approximate external reference point" that corresponds with an imaginary line through an absolute internal mechanical center. I've struggle with this myself. Edited to add: On a club foot, you can't achieve phalangeal alignment. One of the assumptions (conditions and constraints) you have to make if you're going to asses the mechanics of weight bearing from Duckett's perspective is that the phalanges are aligned through their central axis. Otherwise the proportional geometry between the COA (center of coffin joint) and the center of the coffin bone will not be consistent.
Duckett's dot has nothing to do with phalangeal alignment. It changes location in relationship to the frog depending on the angle of p3.
