re: Stride Length

[Sue Brown <sbrown@wamedes.com>]

>  The horses that I see coming up lame are the ones with long "big" 
>strides that really catch your eye--the ones you watch trot and say "wow!"  
>My thought about them is that there is a lot more concussion, which, of 
>course, would go hand in hand with the increase in vertical acceleration.  
>(What goes up must come down, and all that.)  And yes, they don't tend to be 
>100-mile horses, which would indicate that they also expend too much energy 
>just getting 50...
> 
>Heidi >>
>
>I'm a little foggy on this, because the discussions were so long ago, but I 
>talked to either Jim Rooney or George Pratt about this. What they were 
>talking about is a kind of "dwell", where the forefoot extends forward so
far 
>that it has to at some point "catch up" with the hind legs, slamming down
and 
>impacting before the leg orientation is vertical.

Okay...now *I'm* foggy as well.  Are we talking about suspension (hang
time) -- or stride length due to shoulder angle and bone lengths -- or
excessive action in the legs -- or a major case of impulsion from the rear
end?  I thought a longer "hang time" was good since it led to less
footfalls and therefore less concussion.

Sue  


sbrown@wamedes.com
Tyee Farm
Marysville, Wa.


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=