Getting The FR Horse

Last post dealt with quibbles about the trainer stats, accuracy problems, interpretive problems etc. I'd originally gone back to looking at trainer stats to see whether those stats might support conclusions based on physiology.

Two sources,--I'm supposing-- of info concerning minimum requirements of fracture resistance (FR):

1. Direct evidence that we have concerning physiology, and

2. Circumstantial evidence provided by available trainer statistics.

We'd like to put these together, see if one supports the other, and then hopefully discern:

1. minimum requirements for FR, and

2. ideal requirements for FR.

Simplistic of course since this blog has dealt with the subject for two years. The aim is to arrive in general with an intelligent injury preventing exercise program.

Start this off by reviewing that in the numerous posts putting together the physiology of FR on this blog, as info piled on info, so difficulty in concluding also piled up. Yet, based on several of the processes operating on the equine cannon bone under stress, as perceived and interpreted, these pointed to a 7 day period as a minimum frequency much like the trainer stats.

To be sure, for some of the "processes" operating, "calcification/ossification" being an example, no conclusion was ever reached for the reasons of lack of definite info, and to avoid going to far astray with the posts.

And so, with regard physiology, I have left it and rest on the conclusions that I did make. I think they are enough, and probably fairly accurate.

First note that all of the physiology pointed to a more than every "8 day" frequency (of speed work) rate to be insufficient for FR. And, the trainer stats seems to point exactly in that direction. If the trainer is doing speed work on average only every 9 days, this is probably an individual that is going to injure the horse most likely sooner than later.

At 8 days the physiology pointed to some slight benefits. The FR producing processes were in their last gasps on day 8 post race, and yet, I am supposing the physiology shows that a horse that consistently works at sufficient distance and speed every 8 days over a lengthy period probably will eventually get to FR.

But---and, but again--the 8 day period is problematical. The horse will get there only after months and months of it, and only if it luckily avoids injury in the mean time.

The next is an every 7 day period--both physiology and stats also show 7 days to be problematical. There is still physiologically on day 7 a lingering positive FR effect, but it's weak, and significantly weaker than day 6 and day 5. Again, in terms of consistent work over time however, everything shows that speed work every 7 days will eventually get the horse there, again with threat of injury before you get there.

Frequency every 6 days in the manner of Dutrow seems to me to be a common sense conservative exercise schematic for those thinking working a horse every 4 or 5 days is too much. It is an extremely educated guess to me to think that working every 6 days will get the horse to FR geometrically faster than 7 or 8 days as long as we also understand that everything also seems to show that's it's much safer to breeze every 4 or 5 days than it is 6.

Training:

1/22: riderless 7 minutes in the snow with bursts.

1/23: Off

1/24: Off

1/25: riderless in the snow. Rodney was into it initially and performed about three 2f bursts as fast as the snow allowed before succumbing back to refusal mode. Was decent enough work for the conditions. Melt coming.