Wednesday, January 26, 2011

A Fracture Resistance Formula

Doubtful that Larry Bramlage DVM himself would or could declare some immutable law of fracture resistance (FR). Horse racing is without reliable stats and also research except the dated Maryland Shin Study. Literally no one knows what absolutely must be done with a horse to prevent catastrophic fracture.
This ignorance results partly from slow progress in human research where only in the last 6 or 7 years has consideration been given to bone development at the nano level. That bone diagnostic instrument in the Hansma lab is but 4 or 5 years old, and the Max Planck Institute bone nano study is from 2008. If I'm reading correctly in human research, they've a ways to go.
There's also the difficulty of dealing with this--questions of science-- in the daily blog context where by the time you finally get to the end you forget what you posted at the beginning.
What I can say here is that a lot was looked at very closely, and the available evidence does seem to point in a certain direction, hopefully accurately interpreted! And, I might add that the conclusions also result from my own observations since the year 1982, and also breezes in the hundreds with numerous horses and a few races over the years.
It is somewhat relevant how my thought on this subject evolved over the 3 years on the blog. Although training since1987, at the outset of this blog in 2006, I had never myself done speed work at a greater interval than every 5 days, usually my frequency intervals were the Tom Ivers every 4 days with some dabbling with Preston Burch training at 3 day speed intervals.
As such at the outset of this Q on the blog, I had little direct idea of where the "minimum frequency" of speed work is for FR I did have additionally the large sample involved in miscellaneous observations, first as a handicapper, and later on the back stretch. From day one as an oblivious fan it started to occur that the track trainers were quickly injuring most of their stock.
What's interesting to me is that all of my info--the direct look at physiology, the trainer stats, my experience as a trainer and as an observer of other trainers--all point to the same conclusion, which is that the minimums probably are around 7 days. Trainers who are breezing their horses every 8 days or 9 days or more are injuring every horse, and that's virtually a guarantee.
This all being noted--and, with a desire to get as close to science as I personally can--it's necessary to develop a formula and then conduct just a few tests of it, which I hope to do over the next posts. Then possibly we may say, if you do speed work with your horse every 3,4,5,6, 7 or more days, this or that is likely to happen to your horse.
Training:
Tues. 1/25: riderless in deep show with some decent bursts for about 7 min.
Wed. 1/26: Off. Crunchy hard snow now. Unable to repeat without bruising.
Thurs. 1/27. Off. Office business. Melt is on!

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it possible that the frequency of works alone could mislead you? What role would distance play in your formula? Also, would the works always have to be the same distance (i.e. 4F every 5 days)? Why not a 3F or 4F very fast work (sub 12 sec.) alternated (or some combination) with an 8F (12.5-13 sec) work? The very fast short works for maximum intesity, and the longer (yet slightly slower) works for building the structural ability to withstand the duration and distance. My thought/theory here is that regular 4 (or even 5) furlong works may not be enough regardless of frequency (except perhaps for those horses only running in 6F races). I am enjoying reading your posts, they are very interesting, thanks.

1/27/11, 6:23 PM  
Blogger Bill said...

I prefer a pure speed work of 2-4F in 12's each week, and a longer 6-8F work in 13-15's. Anonymous,you read my mind - that is the type of work tab all triple crown champions adhered to.

1/28/11, 4:06 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home