LT/LH and Club Foot - same theories?

I should've known to put my neck brace on when I saw you posted. I shook my head so much I pulled a neck muscle.

Shhhhhh, don't let anyone know anything about those old trade secrets - They're secrets!

How do you go about learning from your mistakes when you admit you have no understanding of the application in the first place?

listen, the trainer wants it; has shod horses, trained, rode for over 60 yrs since he was a 14 yrs old; he might have learned something along the way.....as I see it; learn

Not sure why anyone would have to guess about the angle since the objective is for the hole to be drilled so that it exits the extensor process. Do you take a random guess about which angle to drive a nail?

In regards to external reference points; most of the documented references depend on points at the extremities of the hoof capsule, i.e. widest part of the foot, sole callus at the toe, widest part of the frog, collateral groves, sole plane, etc. It just seems illogical and backwards to me to make an assessment of the geometric proportions of the foot from external points on the integument that are most likely to distort.

The most extensive experiment that I am aware of that confirms the accuracy of Duckett's assesment protocol is summarized here:
http://www.forgemagazine.co.uk/site/index-1newsarchiveapr09.html

Well then, here's a handy little freeware utility that you can use to convert metric units of measure to English units of measure.

http://wscope.com/convert.htm

Sorry, no Apple or droid version.

Been gone for a day and a half while you all were pontificating here. Just caught up on this reading and now realize it's going to take me four hours to shoe my next horse.

Keep at it Bill your getting faster!!!!

On the bright side, Bill, at least now you'll be able to get two done in a day...........

Of course there was an egg but it wasn't a chicken that laid it. Chicken was a mutation from the dinosaur that laid the egg.

As for the rest of this "I'm out".

One of the first things that popped out in that article was the center of pressure. When I mentioned center of pressure you asked me where I got such a silly idea.

The study was about the geometric proportions. After reading it, it raises more questions than it answers.

Duckett's Dot -

The definition of "directly below" needs to be established.

The study mentions the center of pressure quite a bit. Here is the equipment used in the study:

Which one of these tools has the ability to measure center of pressure? How did they calculate where they thought COP would be?

Does this mean you're not going to give somewhat of a reasonable definition of support?

Indeed it appears that Mr. Caldwell is just as lazy as you are with his attention to detail in differentiating between pressure and weight. I assert that he really doesn't know the difference, but despite that, he was able to obtain ~96% accuracy using the external references.

(and, David you are welcome to tell Caldwell I said this . . .)

A scientist would take his own measurements and compare his results to the results of the study rather than pontificate on the terminology.

From what I'm understanding, COR is Duckett's dot. In order to get geometric proportions you must draw a line from SFT insertion, through DD, through DDFT and out through the frog. If you want to know where the foot would tip forward/backwards you would draw a perpendicular line from the ground up to Duckett's dot.

From what you are saying, the anatomical point on the foot, after the line is drawn though the insertion points, is the center of weight bearing. Wouldn't it be easier for you to site a reference as to how you come up with that being the center of weight bearing?

I'll try. Taking all the theories presented here, trying to figure where the foot will be at the moment of equal tension between DF and extensor, what will happen if my drill bit comes out 13/32" from the apex rather than 3/8, and factor in that the only level part of the 6000 acre ranch is where I parked my truck.
Therefore I am going to compromise between theories and experience.
When I think support, I'll set a medial branch really full to support the joints above a latterly offset hoof, a longer, wider lateral branch on the hinds of a jumper with sore hocks, and a nice wide web rolled toe shoe set back a bit with a frog pad and soft packing for a LTLH that just ain't going quite right.
Now I don't think as deeply about the internal mechanics as many of my betters here, I can't run a CAD program, and I actually quit drilling holes through the foot as it seemed to make them worse.
I do however get comments from the rancher that his 1300 to 1500 pound QHs are working longer and not knocking their feet together when they do get tired.
The trainers of the DQs and wanabe jumpers are calling wanting to know why the horse never moved so well before.
The Endurance horse that was headed for retirement won the national 100 mile title instead, and ol' Pokey wanders around the backyard even better now.

If COR = Center of Rotation of the DIJ, then I would say you don't understand.

Sort of.

Nope. Hat is not what I said. Why not cut and past my exact words instead of arguing with stuff i didn't say?

How am I supposed to provide a reference to something I didn't say?

Question how many farrier would you think can
dictate were they want that shoe to fit on a regular basis
also able to trim and balance a foot on a regular basis

Bill, I don't see where you have to make any compromises. A good scientist adjusts his theory based on testing and empirical experience. A good horseshoer is not afraid to try new stuff, and not afraid to quit using stuff that doesn't work. At some point it becomes instinct and when applied it becomes art. Similarly, one does not need to be able to read music or understand music theory to be a great musician.

Math is just a language we use to evaluate and explain our theories in precise terms. However, it is a useless language if no one agrees on the meanings of mathematical terms like weight, pressure, support, moment, fulcrum, center, line, point, vector, rotate, etc.

If GFRV works in opposition to the center of pressure would the lines i've drawn be an accurate understanding of how GFRV differ in a club foot, ideal foot and a broken back angle would do the opposite

Probably not half as many as think we can

I'm trying to understand all this. The center of weight bearing is not a vertical line below the center of p3 and Mr. Caldwell and I are too lazy to differentiate that.

Duckett's Dot is the center of p3 and is the center of weight bearing but it's not perpendicular to the ground but at the same time it's not the external anatomical reference point (3/8 behind tip of frog).

Tom, I understand when Duckett farts you want to taste it, your knees probably hurt and you might even have a special set of kneed pads to wear. I doubt anyone else wants you job so it's fairly safe to not be so vague and explain what you are trying to say a bit more clearly.

100% spot on, except where you put my name and the phrase "A good scientist" in the same paragraph. Just too close together.