Re: Big bone vs small bone

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 98-06-26 02:31:13 EDT, CMKSAGEHIL writes:

<< Short cannon bones do make good biomechanical sense.  However, like any
other trait, when one becomes so enamored with that trait that they do not
consider the rest of the horse, then Katy-bar-the-door!  I have seen the same
thing with a few of the endurance people into the cannon bone circumference
thing--gee, this horse has an 8" circumference, isn't that great, no never
mind that he is 16-2 and weighs 1250, and has shallow, shelly feet, and an
upright shoulder, and a ewe neck, and bench knees, and no hip, and a long back
and weak loin, and he interferes behind.  Bigod he has 8" cannons!
 
 Heidi >>

Yeah, it's a VERY Big Picture. I don't think we'll ever know what we really
need to know about equine athletes. 27 years at it and I feel dumber every
year. And the headway you make is snail's pace. 

Let me apologize for the big fist fight, Heidi. I've had a lot of practice in
the trenches and I tend to reach for the .44 magnum these days rather than the
fly swatter. You have valid points--I was just kinda proud of the kids that
got a benefit from one of my hunches. In horseracing, with guys trying
interval training and mileage, and getting all sorts of threats and catcalls
because of it, my job has always been to defend them in public and take the
major hits. I'm getting to be like George Patton: "God help me, I love it so."

ti