Toe Grab Studies

1. 2001 OSU Vet School Study: "Lengths of toe grabs were not a significant potential risk factor in catastrophic suspensory apparatus injury in this study." Same study: Severity of under run heals was significantly greater in racehorses experiencing catastrophic suspensory injury.

2. Grayson Jockey Club Research Foundation "Research Today" Newsletter, Volume 24, 2007 from U. Florida, AJVR, Vol 66 No. 8, August 2005: This study cites the difficulty in getting a large enough sample size since severe and catastrophic injuries are rare. "Results regarding use of toe grabs as a possible risk factor for catastrophic injury were inconclusive." What was conclusive? "...an extended interval since, and reduced exercise during the 30 or 60 days preceding injury were risk factors for catastrophic injury".--i.e. those idiots that keep their horses in the stalls instead of sending them to the track.

3. UC, Davis AJVR, Vol 65, No. 11, November 2004: "Marginal associations were detected between moderate ligamentous suspensory apparatus injury and age and height of toe grab".
Lack of exercise was again fingered as the primary culprit in serious injury by this study.

4. The highly prejudicial 2001 study at UC Davis by Sue Stover DVM with her preconceived notions concerning the detriment of toe grabs results in the admission by Ms. Stover (see my last post how my own ideas developed on this) that "injuries are multifactorial and many of the causal factors are interelated. This results in 'confounding'--any finding that one factor (e.g. toe grabs) appears statistically related to injury." Ms. Stover speculates how the toe grab meets the ground or dirt surface and expresses her suspicion that toe grabs contribute to suspensory strain. (RR take: she's probably correct, BUT, I'm other than totally sure. Horses sliding around in queens plates also cause strain. Quite obviously overly long toe grabs should be banned. The correct length awaits more study, and polytrack is completely new.)

5. The RR studies at Eureka Downs, 2001: Mypersonal experiment with shoes types was small scale systematic and intensive. For years I'd wanted to change up shoes and do the observation for reasons of competition and injury. In 2001 I found the time and energy to proceed.

We used several different shoe combos on two horses over eight weeks. These horses galloped almost daily and breezed every four days. We had ample opportunity for direct observation. This personal study was without camera, video, applied force studies etc. The only thing done was to stand a trackside and closely observe hoofs hitting the ground and the gallop and seeming comfort of the horse in terms of stride length, stride efficiency, ease of turnover, traction and probably several other things that I'm unable to recall.

In the late nineties all my horses wore Queens XTs with their tiny relatively inconsequential grab. For my study I ordered several sets of low toes, regular toes and level grips from Thoro'bred Racing Plate Company.

When they arrived I visually inspected each type of shoe very carefully and attempted to imagine the effect of the particular configuration on what we were about here: strain on the fetlock and suspensory apparatus, delay or hindrance of turnover, traction or the manner in which the hoof would hit the ground, the effect of the shoe configuration on the heel first landing (note the thick heel buttresses of the Queens compared to the thin buttresses on the Level Grips.) Ivers observed that as hoofs hit the ground there is a natural give or sliding effect. He was worried about shoes that held the hoof on impact and prevented the sliding. Is this a legit concern?

With these thoughts in mind I then went track side to watch the horses gallop. I closely observed hoof impact, turnover, all the things stated above, and added intense observation as to what I was seeing in terms of stride length, stride efficiency, ease of striding, confidence of the horse in the landing of its feet. Also of great concern was whether having different "types" of shoes and lengths of grabs on the fronts and hinds would have any effect.

My conclusions:

Queens XT fronts
Low Toe Hinds: Compared to XTs on all fours this configuration produced a very obvious improvement in Aylward's stride. I'd owned and galloped the horse through six years of disappointing performance. Suddenly he looked like a new horse out there on the track.

Low Toe fronts
Low Toe hinds: Aylward looked better still, though the margin of improvement was smaller. I was seeing out of the horse much more stride length and power and confidence in his feet landing compared to what I had ever seen out of this horse.

Low Toe fronts
Regular toe hinds: more definite improvement though again a smaller margin of improvement. But, suddenly Aylward looked like a talented race horse on the track. He was motoring around now like he meant business. I'd never ever seen this in his queens. His trainer at the time, Mary Smith, was likewise wowed by the difference. Aylward showed this on the track. In four consecutive races he won three and finished second. (Aylward then promptly got himself kicked in the nose and was sent to MU Vet School for a $3000.00 nose job.)

Groovin' Wind: Level grips on all four: Wind showed a less dramatic change than Aylward. There is a reason for this that I'll discuss next post. But, there was the same sort of obvious improvement in Wind's stride compared to Aylward. Wind would soon in his first race hold his own with a horse of the meet and win his second race by 20 lengths. These were different horses wearing the grabs.

What about injury and these grabs. This and my overall conclusions, next post.

Training: It's other than a happy Easter at the RR farm. The hoof injury is significant. I'll post pics. soon.