Poor Rick - I think Talisman was probably correct - you are scared! Aggression usually masks fear. You don't scare me however as I have heard the same old nonsense from all the same old sorts over here in the UK. Why not just put your mouth on hold for a little while until you actually find out about what you're talking about instead of jumping to the same boring old (incorrect) conclusions. You'd have a great deal more credibility as a professional.

What are 'congative' resources? Or do you mean 'cognitive'?

Just a question for HoustonFarrier. Please can you tell me what research led to the development of rim shoeing? Think very carefully before you answer that one.

Not sure what this has to do with me personally wanting to see research papers by a nameless troll, but hey, I'll play today, I'm bored, it's Friday.....

Bye the way, I posted pics of my shoeing work....wonder if you could post some of your work as well????? Are you a farrier? Just wondering, since you chose anonymity in your name....

I guess we better get some clarity though....

DEFINE a rim shoe. Are you classifying the "modern" type shoe we use as a "rim" shoe, vs the Roman style of using a plate, covering the entire foot, held on my clamps and leather?

Steve

fortunato wrote: Well there's the problem, its demonstrable that you don't think.Perhaps. However, in this case, I'm the exception to the rule.ROTFLMAO! What ever makes you think I wanted to or was trying to do that?1. Its not my style
2. It is evident that I do know what I am talking about
3. My conclusions(boring and or old or not) are demonstrably correct.Demonstrably, it is not I that lack credibility. Care to guess who in this conversation between the two of us does?Thanks for pointing that out. My proofreading obviously missed that one. Mea Culpa.

Hi HoustonFarrier (that's rather anonymous isn't it?). As I do Cytek I don't think there's much point in posting any pics as you reckon you know all about it and the result would be very predictable! Not that I mind that but I don't see the point in going out to buy a digital camera specially!

Yes I mean the rim shoe as in what is currently in common useage today. The shoe that comes in various widths and thicknesses that is shaped to the rim of the hoof. Just a point of interest, the plate shoe continued long after the Romans and these were nailed on.

Hi Rick - I'm just wondering why you feel the need to hide behind your aggressive persona (as in your chosen motto at the end of all your postings). The pride you take in portraying yourself as such a bad tempered old buzzard suggests you are using that as your shield.

fortunato wrote: Unfortunato(sic)(and double entendre') you lack the ability to read and comprehend. How do I know this? Simple, At the end of each reply, HoustonFarrier signs off with his given name. To wit: Steve.Where shall we send the sympathy cards? We'll need the addresses for both you and your clients.Enlighten us O Cytec Guru. What more do we need to learn or know about the product beyond the facts that it is heavy, unshapeable, has poorly designed and sized nail holes and is a blatent poorly copied imitation/rip off of the NB shoe? Did I mention that because of its fatal flaws, it requires the individual who applies the shoe to either only find horses with feet that are that exact shape or to apply the product to feet that don't conform to its shape and then whack off any non-compliant hoof?

Please jump in at any time to correct any misconceptions or wrong observations I have or have made about this piece of junk masquarading as a worthy orthotic.Right. you can't even provide photographic substantiation. How convenient. The point would be that it would enable others to best understand the virtues of the product and your adherence to the 'Cytec way'.

Has anyone discussed with you the concept of personal accountability and credibility?Whatever is your point. What you are describing as a rim shoe is merely a bent piece of steel with holes in it, fullered from end to end. Its not a horseshoe until a competent farrier conforms it(as in shapes it) to and for the needs of any individual hoof.

Now I realize that the concept of shaping a shoe to correctly and properly fit a hoof is an alien concept for one of the Cytec persuasion, but you seem to possess a modic-u-m of intelligence, so perhaps you can in fact grasp the concept of shaping vs. not shaping.

As I re-read the description of what you are calling a rim shoe, it occurred to me that you might infact be referring to a shoe that is perimeter fit to the hoof. Since demonstrably, not every shoe is shaped as a perimeter fit shoe(and we are discussing perimeter fit as it pertains to the area from medial toe quarter to lateral toe quarter, right?) which is why, unlike the unshapeable Cyteck foolishness, these shoes are shaped by the farrier to meet the specific needs of any given, individual foot.

Now, I don't know what they teach over where you live and/or apply the Cytec contraption, but here in the good old USA , farriers are taught to shape a shoe to the shape of the inner edge of the white line. You get extra credit(and believe me you need all the credibility you can muster)if you can tell me/us why. Once said shape is accomplished, the shoe is applied , as previously stated, according to the dictates of the individual hoof.Well HI yourself, Unfortunato(I have twice taken the liberty of refining your nom de plume as in light of current information it seems to suit you better)

I didn't realize I was hiding Silly me, I thought I was real upfront and honest. Tell me O Cytec Guru, jut what is my true persona and how have you devined this? I'd really like to know.
Perhaps others can chime in and help that poor ****** schmuck out. (the door is Thatway > or Thataway < or Thataway ^ or every which way."I am what I am and thats all that I am, said Popeye the Sailor man. Tweet tweet."

Hello dear Rick - As I feared it is a pointless exercise discussing the inside out of the Cytek system as whatever you believe is chiselled in stone in your poor old brain. That's fine, but whenever you feel ready, just have a read of the cytekhorse.com.au website and try to set aside all your preconcieved ideas for a little while and look at it with an open mind. Difficult I know but not impossible for anyone who genuinely wants to find out and who doesn't feel threatened by something that questions what they have been brought up to believe as a given. I used to do the same stuff as you so don't need to try to blind me with your version of 'science'.

Re. rim shoes, any traditional shoe whether it is an eggbar, quarter clip, NB is a rim shoe - it does not support the hoof where it needs supporting and just for interest, this type of shoe came into being on purely economic grounds - it was cheap (less metal) so don't run away with the idea that it was 'researched' or developed for the good of the horse! Funny how all the remedial shoes started appearing not long after.

Sorry dear Rick but I just don't feel the need to gain any credibility points from you (and by the way, feel free to alter my name any way you like if it makes you feel better). Re. your persona, my sister works with problem kids and the ones who wear their aggression like a badge (sounds familiar?) are invariably the ones who are the most insecure and feel at odds with the world.

(Perhaps others can chime in and help that poor ****** schmuck out. (the door is Thatway > or Thataway < or Thataway ^ or every which way.)

Call in some chums to help you out if you feel the need. Did you need your chums to help you bully that poor girl on COTH? or did you do it all on your own?

all smart comments aside i have never seen to much of this type
of shoe

would like to see some different jobs
horses with different shaped feet

and mabe we can all have a look at what you mean

send on the pics

back your work up

Why should someone discuss a plagiarized system of shoeing with you?


Why should we got to look at the site, it is a plagiarized system of shoeing.




Here we go again, another religious zealot- notice the "for anyone who genuinely wants to find out and who doesn't feel threatened by something". Geez:rolleyes:



After the previous couple of statements, reformed and born again, flag waving and drum beating about a plagerized system one should be ashamed.




Ok, traction and rotational mechanics were after thoughts I guess.



A historian of farriery among us---- yippeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Also another esoteric blatherer.
Mr. Rick doesn't need help to parlay with a "born again drum beater". Reading your diatribes and formulating my own opines from this and other thread replies shows that you were trying to obscure and hide your real mantra.
Sneaky but not unseen here. Usually given enough rope and threads to reply to, the "Real Essence" of the polemic pontiff will rear their "Converted" head and hang themselves.

Ha- we "stand alone" together. Currahee!

Tallisman wrote:

Hi Mr. Talisman,

Perhaps the responses you faced are the result of this ****** and childish hiding behind an internet handle. I for one hate that. Some people participating on these boards, calling us ******, ignorant, arrogant and scared, but do not even have the decency to tell us who they are. WHO they are, not what they do and where. What's wrong with stating your full name and where you're from? What's there to hide?

Having gotten that off my chest (I just keep fighting this battle as long as Rocinante will carry me) I can tell you that your question is a valid one. But it has been answered too by several without you paying too much attention.

Personally I'd take a lot more care in claiming we all are a ****** lot. I personally think, in fact I know that among us we share a combined knowledge and experience unrivalled anywhere else in the world. That's what makes this board great. On the other hand as some might say if you have a right to call us ******, you must be one heck of a shoer! Sofar I have not seen any proof of that though.

Getting back to your question and the answering of that one. As I said your question has been answered several times. Answers that you lightly sweep aside with a gesture resembling a bored teenager being asked to eat her brocolli. No not again! True, sometimes we repeat outselves but that does not change anything on the value of the answers.

Lemme remind you:
The fact that the Cytec shoe is made out of cast iron and not to be shaped in any way, is enough for me to call it a bad type of shoe. What good is that shoe if I can not shape it to fit the ill shaped foot I'm trying to fix with it? What if the great design of the Cytec shoe just won't fit the foot without getting stepped off every third step?

The large nail holes force thoe shoer to only use the shoe on horses with pretty good hoofwalls. What if I want to use the shoe to improve the quality of that hoofwall? Should I use another shoe first to improve the hoofwall and then start using Cytec?

I noticed Patty mentioning that Cytec shoes have thungsten bits in the toe area. I went through their website and the one and foremost point Cytec is making (and a good point to boot!) is that when a foot grows, breakover moves forward. This is counter productive, ideally we want breakover to stay at the most efficient spot during the entire shoeing cycle. One way to get close to that is allowing wear in the toe to compensate the growth. Easier said than done, but that's another matter. The tungsten bits are in full denial of their very own core argument. This does not improve the overall acceptability among professional shoers here.

There is another thing. The website put a lot of emphasis on frog/sole support. I did not see any reason why the Cytec shoe would provide more of that valued support. I agree that ease of breakover helps reduce the 'sagging' effect a shoe may have on a foot but why you need a Cytec shoe for that is beyond me. You can get breakover at the same 'ideal' spot with any shoe without a toeclip.

In my opinion these arguments are good enough to warrant the label cheap rip off.

If your question was trying to persuade us to agree that reducing breakover helps alleviate a lot of the problems mentioned on that Cytec website, you could have been more open. We would not have disagreed. But the mere fact that Cytec uses a 2000 year old argument, reduction of breakover forces as a way to reduce stress to the hoofwall and it's internal structures, does not simply turn Cytec shoes into good shoes. You need more than that. So sorry to disappoint you.

You may have noticed that I did not mention two other arguments. The high costs and the vibration thing. I did not because I personally do not feel those are valid arguments against the Cytec shoes. Are those Cytec shoes expensive anyway? Why if their made out of cast iron? But anyway I'd think the costs of the shoes are pretty unimportant as far as horses well being is concerned. The vibration part did not impress me at all. I don't know if cast iron shoes would cause more vibration or not compared to regular steel shoes. But given the fact that a lot of horses are used in soft footing anyway ánd that a horses foot is very well capable of handling a lot of shock and vibration I don't really see that one as an argument against Cytec. If cast iron gives through or even generates more vibration in the first place.



Ronald Aalders

fortunato wrote: Unfortunato, you make this too easy. You state that NB is a rim shoe, ie: a traditional shoe. I'm sure that the good folks from NBS will be suprised to hear that! The doofi at Cytec will be even more suprised to hear this because they ripped off the design for thier shoe directly from the NB shoe. No alterations, a blatent, inferior quality rip off. Which, according to you, makes the Cytek (dare I say, shoe)shoe a rim(perimeter fit)shoe and quite traditional. You care to rethink and restate your contentions and position?More than likely, your poor sister took up that line of work because of her long term experience in dealing with you. Are you still being ministered to by her?Whatever are you blathering about? I'm not a participant, at least not yet, on COTH. Maybe I need to be .
But I digress. Before I offer your vaunted system up as more fodder, I am going to reference/cite two Individuals. Dr. Doug Butler and Dr. James R. Rooney.
I believe even someone as provincial as you has heard of Dr. Butler and his accomplishments, but I suspect you may not have heard of Dr. Rooney.

Dr Rooney is an veterinary equine pathologist and anatomist and renowned author.

To that end:
Dr. Butler in POHII, pp.119; "The sole is noramally arched and can support some wieght. However, its function is primarily protective."
POHII, pp. 130; "The function of the sole is to protect the sensitive parts above it. The sole is not designed to efficiently support weight..."

Dr. Rooney(excerpted from an article he wrote and can be found on his website):

"Sole Pressure and Weight Bearing

It is generally recognized, and my observation, that the initial impact of the bare foot with the surface and the major weight-bearing is on the bearing edge of the hoof wall, including the bars. The imprint of frog and sole on the surface (given that there is sufficient loose material on the surface to permit such an imprint) occurs after impact as the vertical force on the foot approaches maximum at midsupport,

No doubt the frog and sole can share the weight-bearing once the bearing edge of the hoof wall is fully loaded, particularly in marshy, sandy, or sandy loam conditions. Loose material on the surface tends to pile up under the hoof as the bearing edge plows down through it. There certainly can and will be frictional wearing of the sole and frog, under these conditions with compensatory thickening of the cornified epidermis (callus) as a result. Such thickening, however, does not imply that the sole and frog are primary or major weight-bearing structures as sometimes claimed."

Note: I added the underlining to emphasize certain relevant(to this discussion)/salient points.

The discussion will continue on my next reply

To continue. From the referenced Cytek site:

Since the start of the shoeing system, some have criticised and conjectured about the system and judge it as a rim shoe.

Cytek is not a rim shoeing system, it is a sole shoe.

To fully understand sole shoeing it is best to take a look at the History
page, after which to fully understand rim shoeing The Problem page and then finally the The Solution page to give both sides of the story.

Cytek Shoeing System Gives :-
1. Reduced Shoeing Cost
2. Prevents Lameness
3. Increased Performance life of the horse
4. Increased Interval Between Shoeing
5. Improves existing ailments

(I wonder if it also heals the sick and raises the dead? Or is that claim reserved by the cult of Strasser?)

Yet more;
Point 1

The skeleton structure of any animal supports and holds up

the animal.

Point 2
for some reason it didn't copy through :confused:

Point 3

With the unique way the Cytek shoe is fitted, the horse gets to wear it's toe:-

Point 4

By supporting the pedal bone and allowing dirt to press upwards pressurizing the sole, it creates a thicker sole, stopping bruised soles.

The point of break over occurs at the tip of the pedal bone, so no leverage.

The horse always wears out the front of the rim shoe, with the Cytek shoe the horse doesn't have to wear the toe.....it's gone.

As the horse walks over hard ground there is no leverage effect when using Cytek, I'll put it into
human terms:-

The pictures above are that of a horse which has just gone 12 weeks, the pictures to the right are just after it was shod. If you look at the heels, even after 12 weeks the horse still has support.

If the horse is allowed to wear it's toes then the shoe isn't pulled forwards. ie.....

Because your horse doing the trimming, you have a longer time interval between sets, saving money. The horse's break over point is un-altered, so the new growth is constantly in line with the pedal bone so it remains unstressed and stronger.

With the Cytek shoeing system, there is no front wall rasping. The wall is allowed to grow and wear away, so there is no need to damage the front wall by rasping it.

By leaving the outer horny wall untouched, strength is retained in the hoof, the wall is the same thickness all the way up the hoof so why touch it?

Using the Cytek system, the farrier can get the point of break over further back under the horse without damaging the wall. As time goes by the wall re-grows straight without rasping it.

Point 5

The Cytek system, gives full support to the heels.

The sole grows at the bottom of the pedal bone, unless you lower the heels correctly you won't see the end of the sole.

If you don't see where the sole ends at the heels then how can you find the end of the pedal bone?

See the hoof to the right, with the Cytek shoeing system you can afford to lower the heels, to what is know as sole-a-plane (SP).

The sole naturally exfoliates sole horn, up to a point, underneath this flaky sole is a solid sole, which won't readily
fall out unless cut out (SP).

It is at this point the sole is lowered to and no lower, the heel to the left is lowered correctly, notice how much further back the heel comes to when lowered. The heel on the right, well put in human terms...... Stiletto's. A contraction of the tendons collapsed heels and other problems............

By correct lowering of the heels, the horse will stand further underneath its self, thus more weight supporting, in human terms when women wear Stiletto's they have to stand further forwards unbalancing themselves. eg.......

The Benefit:-

Because the heels are now lower and wider, they are now supported by the solid sole-a-plane, you don't get collapsed heels.

Point 7

Now the heels are down, so's the frog. eg.....

The Benefit:-

The frog is meant to bear weight, by bearing weight it prevents thrush. If you don't use it you lose it! By letting the frog bear weight, it thrives. Why do you need the frog? Blood circulation, shock absorption and brake (Why else would it be wedge shaped?)

Point 8

The Cytek system, drastically reduces concussion to your horses, How?
With the shorter toe the hoof is allowed to land flat on the floor, not heel first.

In conventional rim shoeing, they place pads under the rim shoe to reduce concussion and still land heel first. It doesn't matter what pad you use, if it's not landing right the pad will have little or no effect.

Putting it into human terms, keep your toes straight and without bending them jump forwards. Hard to do? Not only that but you landed heel first. By keeping your toes straight, you moved your point of break over from the ball of your foot to the end of your toes, long toed hoof.

The Benefit:-

Simply by the hoof landing flat, this greatly reduces the strain on the hoof capsule. The heels land parallel with the toe thus preventing Navicular Syndrome and bruised heels.

Plus

if the hoof doesn't have to go in to orbit with the long toe, it goes further forwards thus it is bio - mechanically more efficient.

Plus

If the hoof is landing flat on the floor you stop forging and over-reaching.

Point 9

The Cytek shoe has the benefit of having two pins in the front of the shoe, which stabilise the point of break over.

The Benefit:-

With the pins stabilising the break over, the horn is then
allowed to grow in a constant angle without change.

Growth is consistent as the wall is without stress.

The pins also form a straight line to take off from, making it far more stable.

(more to come)

And finally:

Point 10

Correct balance, as explained earlier the pedal bone has the entire weight of the horse to support. So you've got to support the pedal bone, makes sense?

The bone is made up mainly of two types of bone, Cancellous and Cortical bone.

Cancellous bone has holes running throughout its mass, why?

Well it lightens the load but gives structural integrity and shock absorbing quality.

The second type of bone is cortical bone, hard, strong weight bearing bone.

The thicker the cortical bone the more weight the horse bears in
that region.

Or put another way, bone grows thickest were
ever greatest weight is placed upon it.

The bone even has a rolled toe, with the toe lifting up. In front of the blue arrows 1/3 of the pedal bone remains, and behind 2/3.

Hence what ever you place upon the hoof has got to mirror the same ratio.

The Benefit:-

If your horse has the 1/3 - 2/3 support ratio, then the pedal bone is correctly supported, so corns become a thing of the past.

The foot lands flat on the ground greatly reducing concussion preventing navicular syndrome."

Thus ends the propoganda. Though I must add that to get the full flavor of this nonsense you have to see the pictures that accompany this snake oil rhetoric.

Apart from fabricating a blatently inferior ripoff of the NB shoe, Now the Cytek robbers have ripped of the main elements of the Concepts/theory behind the NB shoe, added in a bunch of incorrect or misleading commentary, packedged it up in some pretty Christmas-like wrapping and are now foisting it off on the public. If nothing else, I think Phineas T. Barnum would be proud of this effort.

While there is much to comment on with regard to the Junk Science presented, I think that the comments on sole weight bearing, the preference of flat foot landing over heel first landing, etc. bear special scrutiny.

You will all note that not one word is said about the inability of the installer to custom fit the shoe to each individual foot.

Unfortunato,

Since this is what you claim to be representative, substanitive, ad naseum,
you obvciously and patently lack the knowledge , skill and ability to offer farrier services to anyone.

By the way, you are a member of the WCF aren't you? Do they know what you're promoting and practicing? Probably not, which explains why you hide behind a screen name. Perhaps Simon Curtis or Billy Cruthers, et. al. or any other reputable member of the WCF should be made aware of what you are doing and promoting.

Since Billy will be in my neck of the woods in a few weeks, I think I'll take that opportunity to update him on your shennagians.

fortunato in gray, deletia

As I feared it is a pointless exercise discussing the inside out of the Cytek system as whatever you believe is chiselled in stone in your poor old brain.

You confuse belief with knowledge. Despite your fervent belief, the Cytek "system" is demonstrably indefensible in terms of biophysics.

That's fine, but whenever you feel ready, just have a read of the cytekhorse.com.au website and try to set aside all your preconcieved ideas for a little while and look at it with an open mind.

Been there, done that. In order to accept the many errors contained on the Cytek cult's website, one would have to believe that physical law is no longer in effect.

Difficult I know but not impossible for anyone who genuinely wants to find out and who doesn't feel threatened by something that questions what they have been brought up to believe as a given.

Unfortunately for your argument, physical law is immutable and not dependent on belief.

I used to do the same stuff as you so don't need to try to blind me with your version of 'science'.

Does the scientific method differ Down Under? If not, then even a cursory examination of the Cytek website will reveal it's comprised of wishful thinking in terms of applied science.

Re. rim shoes, any traditional shoe whether it is an eggbar, quarter clip, NB is a rim shoe

Other than in the newspeak of the Cytek cult, a "rim shoe" is any shoe with one side of its ground surface web higher than the other. Examples that come to mind are the old Nature Plate and the many proprietary inner and outer rim shoes used for flat racing, barrel racing, and polo.

Perhaps you have reference to those shoes designed for a more-or-less perimeter fit for non-pathological application - which covers just about every horseshoe on the market, with a few exceptions.

- it does not support the hoof where it needs supporting

The need for support - other than that afforded by the wall - is based on conformation, the existence of certain pathologies, and use. Most shod horses do not need support of the frog and sole in addition to that afforded by the ground during the support phases of movement.

and just for interest, this type of shoe came into being on purely economic grounds - it was cheap (less metal) so don't run away with the idea that it was 'researched' or developed for the good of the horse!

Your statement is in factual error. Despite what your handlers at Cytek may have led you to believe - whether hand forged, drop forged, machine turned, or cast - the cost of Fe or Al is minuscule in comparison to the cost of the energy and labor necessary to fabricate any horseshoe.

Kinda makes you wonder doesn't it? If Cytek will lie about one thing, they've established a tendency and will probably lie about something else.