Onto Some Final Thoughts On FR

The formula again:

4f in :12.5 sec/f every 7 days theorized as minimums for race appropriate fracture resistance (FR) up to 1.25 miles.

The aim is providing a control sequence to the horse's exercise schematic. Theorize: consistently less with any of the three variables distance, speed and frequency may jeopardize the horse.

This formula comes with all sorts of caveats involving things as common sense, etc. Avoid detailing for the present for it should be enough that this formula is expressed in bare minimums where the careful, intelligent trainer would obviously be doing more, and probably a lot more.

Do the three prongs of the formula have our equal confidence?

The :12.5 speed speed, and 7 day frequency are true FR dividing points imo-- as analyzed on the blog. Going slower than :12.5 sec/f even at longer distances such as 7 or 8f fails to engage FR processes due to insufficient concussion at that rate of speed. The obvious question: if you hit the cannon bone often enough at :13 sec/f would FR processes engage? The question should be would the race appropriate FR processes engage? My answer, for what it's worth, is in the negative. If we extend :13s even further, 1.5 miles e.g. would FR processes engage? For race appropriateness--imo--more distance than 1.5 miles in :13s might be required. I would feel unsafe if my horse's work were limited to :13s.

7 days as a frequency dividing line has a little more concern since the blog has identified slight FR processes working into the 8th day out from the speed work. Yet, I think there's enough evidence with trainer injury stats and consideration of the physiology to say with a degree of confidence--speed work every 7 days and your horse likely will survive in terms of bone soundness, and that more than 8 days increases injury odds geometrically.

The 4f distance has less certainty to it since the FR engagement process at distance will vary with speed and to some extent with frequency. There will be a stronger FR effect doing 4f in :12s as compared to :12.5, and who knows exactly what the difference is in final effect if we do 5f in 1:00 compared to 4f in :12.5. e.g. I'd think that if the trainer does limit the horse to 4f that a :48 would be significantly safer than a :50. Remember that at the slightly faster speed the gallops in and out will be longer, and that concussion increases geometrically also as the speed goes faster than :12.5. You can feel this if you're on board. Additionally, I believe the 2f in :12s will fail to engage FR processes, and that distance before engagement requires at least 2.5f. Less distance than that there are an insufficient number of hoof strikes. The horse fails to increase FR effect if it goes faster than :11.5 imo because the time of hoof to ground contact starts to reduce at the blazing speed--i.e. there's actually less total concussion.
Some final thoughts, next post.

Training:
Since 1/10/11 we're back to perpetual wet in KC, but the clocks go back this weekend, thank baby Jesus!
Sun. 3/6: short pasture romp produced some speed for the conditions.
Mon: 3/7: good pasture romp conditions this day and horses get at least 4 x 2f racing each other. RR impressive. We decline pasture work as the track portion is too soft yet.
Tues. 3/8: Rain. Off.
Wed. 3/9: Off. arrive with intention to work, but unable without creating hoof depressions in the pasture that we want to avoid.