I would agree that a bad blacksmith and toe grabs (on front feet) can be a problem but you said shoes.
As for the "top horseman" who files all the toe grabs off...why not just shoe without toe grabs and save the poor farrier all that extra work?:)

I admit that I allow shoes to be used on ALL of my horses in training, but I also believe in my blacksmith...If I watch my horses go and think that they are shod poorly and they aren't breaking over cleanly and correctly, then I will bring it to my trainers attention AND YES I HAVE DONE IT BEFORE...as a matter of fact, the only thing that I disagree with my trainer on is the shoeing....

[quote=Cajungator26]I added to my post above just to let you know. We usually take the shoes off the horses in the off season and put them back on when we start heavy training again. You almost have to use or do have to use them when you are training them, jumping them, and showing them. Riding horses is just hard on them period.

[quote=kentuckyrosesinmay]We did the same thing... it's tough in Florida though because technically there is no off season. LOL I'd want to take them off in the summer, but it rains a lot here and thrush runs rampant. We also see a lot of crumbling soles and hoof walls due to the moisture. Frustrating stuff...

[quote=Cajungator26]Yeah, we don't normally show in the winter on the NC and VA circuits because in gets too cold (I hate cold weather!). We actually just went to our last show for the year last weekend, and will pick back up in March. We usually work with the babies, yearlings, and two-year-olds (well I don't anymore because of school:mad:) during the winter to prepare them for the spring. The weather usually holds up well enough for this. Plus, we have indoor riding space. I didn't think about horses feet being tough to handle in Florida. Huh, interesting. We don't have those kinds of problems up here unless it rains, and rains, and rains for days (which it does do sometimes).

Funny that this toe grab issue came up.. Dan Fick of Jockey Club was on the show tonight and one of the topics we covered was the Grayson Foundation call for toe grabs to be eliminated.. Here's Hegarty's piece on it from DRF and a report from Anvils magazine from a few years ago when the California study elaborated on the issue:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15319949/

http://www.horseshoes.com/advice/alkane1/tgrbandi.htm

Good article, thank you.

My TB has good feet, and is always barefoot. We do some light jumping and showing; unless he walks on gravel he's fine.

I recall reading about toe grabs in the past; had never known they were correlated w/ breakdowns :(

It primarily has to do with a horses stride and its bio-mechanics IMO....horse with a sloppy stride and bad break-over are the ones to logically have issues hitting the ground poorly and off balance - and toe grabs would only magnify that effect on many cases......A HORSE'S MECHANICS AND THE WAY THE HORSE IS SHOD ARE THE PRIMARY FACTORS TO PREVENTING UNSOUNDNESS (well, and good luck :D )....

let's just keep moving this game ahead. polytrack is here to stay and more tracks will convert soon. the biggest issue for fans is the health and safety of the horses. face the facts.

This is not the proper solution......I don't mean to digress

I own many horses and i have more interest than the fans in keeping them sound, and even I know Polytrack is hardly the firm answer relative to the concessions in other areas you have to make....

thanks chromer,
oh, and you too titan.

[quote=Kasept]Funny that this toe grab issue came up.. Dan Fick of Jockey Club was on the show tonight and one of the topics we covered was the Grayson Foundation call for toe grabs to be eliminated.. Here's Hegarty's piece on it from DRF and a report from Anvils magazine from a few years ago when the California study elaborated on the issue:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15319949/

http://www.horseshoes.com/advice/alkane1/tgrbandi.htm[/QUOTE

i saw an article about toe grabs and their evils a few weeks ago...makes you wonder why everyone doesn't do away with them...

also, about shoeing...what about glue on shoes? i know they've been used on some horses due to hoof problems, are they a viable alternative? i would think if you don't have anything to correct that you could just use those, right?

[quote=Danzig188]the thing with glue ons is that they are very expensive it adds about $100 per pair to your shoeing bill (not that that should be a problem in the racing industry) the glue will alter the integrity of the hoof composition long-term (dry's it out big time).
One of my best friends is a farrier...he says: a glue-on shoe will not fully bond to the hoof wall for about 2 cycles...the glue takes all of the moisture out of the foot...after the first cycle you are left with a dried out 'shelly' crmbling hoof...until the foot is acclimated to the glue the foot is really a mess...if anything goes wrong and the glue ons are not working there is no viable hoof wall left to put a nail into...and you have to wait until the foot regraows (up to 9 months)
they are difficult to put on and remove...and if a horse happens to step on it and get it off they usually take of a significant portion of hoof wall with it...unless they are using 'Sigafoos' shoes that have a kevlar cuff that goes over the foot and does not detatch when the shoe falls off.

so not a really good alternative....wonderful.

but see, if there was a winter break (rather than running on poly at turfway) you could pull their shoes off and let them romp.

yeah, like that's gonna happen.

[quote=Danzig188]I like them for horses with bad feet, but they are VERY expensive and need to be changed frequently....they're not really economical for anything other than top allowance and stakes horses....

Joel,
Up here in the summer our local newspaper prints the previous days handle and shows what the running total to date is as compared to the prior years handle after the same number of days.
I predicted that Keeneland would show a bump early on handle then slow down later. Can you get any stats as to where they stand in regards to handle compared to the same number of racing days last year at the fall meet?
Calder just reported a 2% increase in handle without "polytrack" at their recently concluded 112 day meet, and Fresno out in California was reporting a 4% handle increase. Since this seems to be the trend in with tracks these days, I'd predict an overall handle increase at Keeneland to be within 2-4% at meets conclusion. Anything less than that will actually be interpreted as a negative sign in this corner.

The one thing to consider about Calder though was that they had their Festival of the Sun card last weekend and had a good handle day with all of teh stakes on the card and good weather.....I like your logic, Mike, and I think it'll play out that way....I really do because I know I won't bet Keeneland now as much as I used to hammer it.....I just won't, and I know other advanced handicappers will find an alternative too beore they give the edge they've created over the general public over the years back.....we've worked too hard to acquire a better understanding of how to play the races over teh yaesr to play on a level playingfield with casual fans - and that is exactly what Polytrack does...

I would almost lay the odds at '"pick 'em" in a handicapping contest at Keeneland with a lady spending her second day ever at a racetrack who doesn't even know how to read a program.....she seriously has as much chance as I do of making money runnng over that crap....

I have no clue what their handle was last year but it you download the full charts on equibase it gives you the full handle for each individual day at the end. Keeneland and Belmont are fairly close in overall handle most days. Not sure how they compared last year.

I think there's some definite positives and negatives re: Polytrack to us bettors. Lets look past the breakdown stuff, and kickback and look at it strictly as bettors:

Any time something new occurs, the better horsebettors adapt quickly. For instance, I believe KY didn't have any turf racing until 20 years ago (or thereabouts). Those able to adapt profited. It also brings up a whole new dynamic or how trainers treat surface switches to/from the artificial surface.

But there could be major negatives if the Polytrack is too widespread. I believe California reacted way too quickly to mandate every major track to install an artificial surface. The game is still about speed, as well it should be. The last thing we want is the majority of tracks to go to artificial surfaces. A few of them as a novelty is good but hopefully the Polytrack/Cushiontrack folks don't run the game in a few years.