The effect of horseshoes and surfaces on horse and jockey centre of mass displacements at gallop.
Authors: Horan, Kourdache, Coburn, Day, Carnall, Harborne, Brinkley, Hammond, Millard, Lancaster, Pfau
Journal: PloS one
Summary
# Editorial Summary: Horseshoes, Surfaces and Centre of Mass Displacement at Gallop Hoof-surface interactions fundamentally alter how forces propagate through the horse's body and onto the rider, yet the biomechanical consequences across different shoeing and track combinations remain poorly characterised. Researchers fitted 13 retired racehorses with four shoeing conditions (aluminium, barefoot, GluShu and steel) and galloped them on both turf and artificial tracks whilst recording tri-axial acceleration data from the horse's girth and jockey's kidney-belt using smartphone accelerometers, then integrated these signals to quantify centre of mass displacements across cranio-caudal, medio-lateral and dorso-ventral axes. Surface type produced the most pronounced effects, with artificial tracks generating 5.7 mm additional downwards displacement in the horse and 2.5 mm in the jockey, likely reflecting greater hoof sink on impact and increased push-off during propulsion; shoeing condition significantly influenced all displacement parameters except medio-lateral minima in the horse, with barefoot and aluminium shoes behaving similarly to each other but distinctly differently from GluShu and steel shoes. Steel shoes combined with artificial surfaces promoted the least forward-and-backward movement in the jockey—potentially enhancing stability—yet the divergent displacement patterns between horse and jockey suggest the dyad compensates to maintain stability within functional limits, with the horse increasing vertical movement whilst the jockey decreases it. These findings implicate both surface compliance and shoe mass distribution as biomechanical interventions, though practitioners should recognise that optimising centre of mass displacement patterns for injury prevention and performance requires further investigation linking these displacements to actual hoof kinematics and functional outcomes.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •Shoe choice and surface interact significantly to affect horse and jockey movement patterns; practitioners should consider both factors together rather than in isolation when managing racehorses
- •Artificial surfaces produce substantially more vertical movement than turf—this increased impact loading may influence injury risk and fatigue in both horse and rider
- •Barefoot and aluminium shoes produce similar biomechanical responses that differ from composite (GluShu) and steel shoes, offering practitioners alternative options depending on performance and comfort goals
Key Findings
- •Artificial surfaces caused significantly greater vertical (DV-axis) centre of mass displacement compared to turf, with 5.7 mm additional downwards displacement in horses and 2.5 mm in jockeys
- •Shoeing condition significantly affected all displacement parameters except medio-lateral minima in horses, with barefoot and aluminium shoes showing similar patterns that differed from GluShu and steel
- •Steel shoes combined with artificial surface promoted the least cranio-caudal (forwards) movement in jockeys, potentially providing greatest stability
- •Horse-jockey dyads demonstrated compensatory displacement patterns (offsets between dorso-ventral and cranio-caudal axes), suggesting they operate within displacement limits to maintain stability