Distance

The February 2008 posts here noted my fair degree of certainty the speed of :12.5 as the necessary speed to get a remodeling-FR effect. Should anyone doubt this, recommend watching a horse travel and comparing hoof to ground contact of a horse traveling in :13s compared to :12s or :12.5 and take note of the considerable difference in stride style. There is a noticeable transition point between the two speeds. And, again, do we train our horse to safely bear 9600 lbs./sq. inch of concussive that we probably get traveling in :13s, or do we condition the cannons for the 12,000 lbs/sq inch they'll experience for each stride in the race? (for perspective--human marathon run speed creates about 4000 lbs./sq. inch).

How far to take this for an FR training effect. Obviously trainers are all over the place from the 4f of the Zitos to the occasional 7f-8f of such as Neil Drysdale. 5f taken once a week seems more the present day consensus.

For whatever it's worth, I also feel fairly confident that works below 4f have little value in achieving or maintaining FR, though for reasons stated later a sprinter that consistently and frequently does 3f in :12s is going to get there. Frequent 3fs at speed since they seem eminently "safe" seem also an interesting in terms of sprinter "performance".

In late February and March 2008 posts the blog dealt with the issue of "distance" for FR. For any new reader please distinguish breezing for injury prevention-fracture resistance (FR) from breezing for performance. Different worlds!

Those 2008 posts speculated as to the number of hoof strikes it takes to commence a training effect on bone tissue. The racing stride is 25-30 times/f and hence that many ground strikes per F. To determine minimal FR distrance we have to guess at what point these ground strikes, very short in duration, begin to have an effect at the nano level. As to the "effect" we're trying to produce in terms of FR you may read two years of posts on this blog.

To get the sensation of bone concussion I conducted a hand clapping experiment by feeling the effect on my wrist bones of repeated hard claps. Indeed as you pass from 30 claps to 60 claps to 90 you feel significant changes in the way your bones are handling hard concussive force.
My conclusions were:
30 hand claps--wrist bones feel comparatively dead compared to the feeling to come.
60 claps--clapping is easier, more efficient; force and concussion seem to dissipate somewhat.
90 claps--concussion now feels like it's building in the wrist bones; a feeling of strength begins to occur giving a feeling of bone invulnerability.
Be careful trying this. Wrist bones easily strain, fatigue and fracture.
I seems to take at least 60 short strikes of the hands before the bone lattice and cells are completely engaged, and that they are still adjusting to the repeated force between 60 and 90 strikes. And, in my reading since that time certainly the process of "engagement" of nano bone to force would support that certainly the engagement requires a specific number of strikes before the bone is fully girded against the force and the chemical, physical, electrical processes involved in "remodeling" begin to operate.
Training:
Sun. 2/13: Off. Never made it back to the farm.
Mon. 2/14: 10 min. walk under tack. 2011 training officially begins. The knee is still markedly swollen.