Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Post Race Bone Damage Under The Microscope


Posted the last one accidentally, and strays a bit, but, since what we plan closely relates to post-race condition of our horse, I'll leave that one up. Let's get into a bit of complex analysis that hopefully will permit us to make an educated guess as to what we can do with this horse after the race.

First, few assumptions. We're on a dirt track, and we'd like for PERFORMANCE to breeze as often as possible. In this sense we'll look at a Preston Burch training which also allows us to embark on something lesser if we choose. Burch breezes/races 10 times a month for 6f to 1 mile in :12s. We'd like to do that IF WE CAN GET AWAY WITH IT, and we note that Burch crashed Bold on this program. A bit of tinkering necessary, perhaps?

We'll further assume our horse's cannon post race were he finished 4th has slight heat at 24 hours post race and is stone cold at 36 hours, indicating a cannon in an average/normal state of development-fracture resistance.

We calculate the time to the next work with close analysis of the state of being of that cannon bone post race.

We have 1% bone cell damage but we need to examine this 1% damage.

How many of the 1% have "serious" damage, and how many e.g. lost just a branch or two of their molecular matrix which created "insignificant" damage? I'll take a wild stab at this one:

50% of the 1% of the damaged cells are seriously impaired or destroyed. SO, we have .5% seriously damaged cells post race.

If we have 1% total bone cell damage and .5% serious damage that takes 30 days (see prior posts) to repair "good as new", then in 10 breezes we'll have 10% of all bone cells in various states of repair + the 4% osteo blast/clast tear-down/rebuild mode, for a total of 14% damage end of the month.

14% damage at one time simply is unacceptable and we'd be ground to a halt by the end of the month were that the case. Since 14% is specifically unacceptable, precisely how much (diffuse) damage at the end of the month can we tolerate, next post.

Training:
Mon 9/22: Art gallops 1.6 miles snappy after warm up. Red letter day for Art. 2 years after purchase I consider this our first race prep work. It's also the first gallop two times around our course. First time around had to be stopped for lead changes. Second time around Art makes rough lead changes twice and declines change were we like to change at end of gallop. Nob loves the horse; says he's never been on one were the breathing is better. Rod trotted 1.25 miles.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello RR-

Here is the best piece I've read dealing with exercise intensity/rest periods, comes from Cambridge:

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=6&fid=1294800&jid=ECP&volumeId=4&issueId=01&aid=1294796&fulltextType=RV&fileId=S1478061507727408

Great reading material on the subject....

Bill

9/24/08, 9:06 AM  
Blogger rather rapid said...

bill, txs. unfortunately, i'm unable to get it. probably a missing diget. what's the name of the website?

9/24/08, 7:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FECP%2FECP4_01%2FS1478061507727408a.pdf&code=ffc247ebba8a81575eecd461067b11c3

direct link to the pdf

KH

9/25/08, 8:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill or others,

I hate to be negative, but my perception of that study is that there's very little useful info beyond basic exercise physiology... Maybe I'm over reacting, so could someone point to the passages with meat on the bone... When I read it, to be honest, my first reaction was, "so many 'experts' in a room and the best they could come up with was this???'

KH

9/25/08, 12:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi KH-

Figures 1 and 2 are the best part, you may have to click on them to make 'em visible.

Figure 1 illustrates the 'overcompensation' aspect of physical training. I've yet to see any trainers obey this ex phys 'law' consistently, yet it gets to the very heart of the RR blog discussions. Fast works must be closer than 6-7 days apart, otherwise there are not optimal, cumulative fitness gains.

Figure 2 shows the training effect over time. Chart A is the conventional approach, chart B is the RR/Burch approach, chart C displays overtraining.

To us reading this blog, this stuff might seem like common sense, but to nearly every trainer in charge of expensive horses without a means to quantify response to workload, they are forced to be overly cautious and train with traditional frequency. Being so careful not to overtrain horses, leads to undertraining/sub optimal conditioning/higher chance of injury.

IMO, the neat thing about this was that it presents info visually and that it came from Cambridge University rather than some nobody like myself.

Bill

9/26/08, 8:02 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home