LT/LH and Club Foot - same theories?

Fair enough. So duckett's dot is only the center of weight bearing when p3 is at a certain angle.

Yes. Exactly.

Then explain this proof. As it is very easy to find a point where all the moments cancel.

Hey Tom, any chance Duckett's Dot can go pick me up a pizza?

I don't think the external reference point for the center of weight bearing cares what angle the foot is or whether or not the foot is bearing weight.

What I can prove very easily is the situation in the last diagram. Doesn't matter what angle the foot is trimmed because it reduces all the anterior/posterior GRF moments to a single point. If you move it anterior the foot will tip back, and if you move it posterior, the foot will tip forward.

In that diagram you dropped a plumb line down from the center of p3.

Yes.

To find that point in the center of the bone, the external anatomical reference would be Duckett's Dot. And if you drill a hole there such that it exits the top of the foot at the extensor process, that hole passes through the center of the attachment of the DFT, the center of the bone, and the proprioceptors of the DIJ.

Tom if we used your analogy that as the angle increases the line of ducketts dot moves rearward in the foot. How would one know what angle to go by to get to the extensor process or center of the coffin bone. According to Duckett the line should be perpendicular to the bearing surface of the foot, which IMO would mean that as the angle increases the center moves forward. Which is why we get a toe flair in club feet and as the angle decreases we get crushed under run heels.

This contradicts what you are saying.

The problem with Duckett's work is everybody has to rely on 3rd party sources. I don't know if what I read on taimuty's is accurate or if what you say is accurate.

Could that be explained in a club foot that the extensor moment and flexor moment are not opposing each other with equal force? What I have read of Ducketts work he was applying it to a 'normal' foot.

Thats why I put it in commas just couldnt think of a better word as I was typing

It is not an analogy, it is a hard physical and anatomical fact that can be easily demonstrated in a dissection.

Well if you get the angle wrong, then the hole will not pass through the center of the bone and exit the extensor process.

Should be can be a long way for ALWAYS IS. "Should" refers to and "ideal."

Yes the center of the bone moves forward when we increase the toe angle. And as the toe angle increases, what happens to that hole we drilled through the foot?

On a cad drawing it is an anology. As angles increase or decrease hoof morphology adapts to the GRF placed upon it. Which will change the relationship of the points compared from one foot to the other. The point would still be 3/8 behind the apex, but the apex will have a different orientation to the rest of the foot.

You showed it moving back, which might be ok for a horse in lateral recumbancy, a cad drawing or an artificial increase or decrease in angle, because it would still remain perpendicular to the foot. But hoof morphology tells me different.

The trouble as I see it is that people want to leave out the trees and chew on the bark.

So hoof morphology changes where the extensor and flexor connects to the bone?

Hoof morphology changes the center of the bone?

Hoof Angle changes the attachments of tendons and the location of joints?

Are Pat Reillys videos force plate experiment videos somewhere online to look at?

If I drill a hole through the center of a solid sphere, I have drilled through the center of gravity of said sphere. If I rotate the sphere, the hole rotates. But the CG is still in the center of the sphere.

Tom, I'm fairly certain everyone understands what you are trying to say.

You have demonstrated clearly the center of weight bearing is a plumb line directly below the center of p3. What is the significance of moving the dot as p3 rotates and drilling a hole?