10/07/2025
I call this post;
"There is no such thing as "Hoof Balance"
(Bam. How's that to p**s some people off.)
No doubt you've been told how critical hoof balance is. In shoeing school we are all taught how important it is to "balance" hooves. But, even in shoeing school, I was dissatisfied with the explanations surrounding the topic of hoof balance. Over the course of my career my observation has been that the least knowledgeable professionals tend to put the most emphasis on "balance". Usually they are criticizing the previous farrier's work (as unbalanced) or being very performative about their effort to achieve "balance" in order to sell the perception of their skill. (I'm reminded of the words of Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride who said "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.") This routine is common when these farriers encounter a "new" owner. The skit is often repeated because it works. The new owner leaves happy that their horse's "balance" has been addressed. That owner then becomes a disciple of the church of "hoof balance", having been baptized with 20 minutes of commentary about how imperative "balance" is for optimum performance and soundness. (Too bad their idiot last farrier didn't understand that.)
It's worth noting that many of the professionals who preach balance, balance, balance as their primary sermon are not necessarily trying to scam the owner. It is what they were taught and this routine assessment and subsequent dog and pony show was modelled for them to emulate. The owner doesn't question it and they themselves have found no need to question it either. A few questions though, and the whole thing comes unraveled. Let me make my case.
Hoof balance can be divided into two common categories of assessment. "Dynamic Balance" refers to assessment of balance while the horse is in motion. The horse is led back and forth and the farrier intently watches how the hoof contacts the ground. He has likely been taught that a flat and perhaps slightly heel first landing is the ideal illustration of balance and his job then as he sees it, is to attempt to trim or shoe the horse in a manner to achieve this ideal. This farrier, or vet, has been influenced to value this and prioritize it as a worthy pursuit. Whether a flat hoof landing is truly ideal is up for debate though, and horses can land differently at different gaits, which sort of devalues the effort, but whatever, that's "dynamic balance".
Alternatively we have "Static Balance", static balance is assessed while the horse is standing. But here's the rub. Static balance and dynamic balance are mutually exclusive. In other words, efforts to manipulate the hoof to achieve one, worsens the other. If you want to shoe or trim a horse for dynamic balance, the end result will often be horrendous static balance. To call this problematic would be an understatement. In the veterinary and farrier world, you will find well respected professionals that focus on and prioritize one or the other (dynamic or static evaluations). This means the phrase "hoof balance" can look like two entirely different things to professionals on either side of this divide. The fact that a horse can be both "out of balance" by one professional's perspective and simultaneously "in balance" by another professional's perspective, begins to expose the absurdity.
But let's keep going and look at how static balance is assessed. Professionals are taught many different methods of evaluating "balance" and therefore "balance" can look very different to different eyes. Some conflate symmetry with "balance". They may use the word "balance", but they are analyzing the symmetry of the hoof. Humans have an innate affinity towards symmetry, but unfortunately asymmetrical hooves are just the consequence of the developmental process. Hooves come in distinctly right and left forms due to the body weight being center to the hooves. Even coffin bones set on a table can often be identified as right or left given the common asymmetries of each. Symmetrical force would produce a symmetrical hoof, but that would only be possible if the horse had one leg rather than 4. None the less, we have a grouping of farriers and vets, who will judge symmetry and use the word balance. These words aren't really synonymous, but whatever.
Then we have another group of professionals who conflate "level" with "balance". These professionals will sight down the hoof, holding the front canon bone, looking to see what side is "high". Sometimes they will use a visual aid called a T-square in this process. That adds to the professionalism. Unfortunately while sighting an unloaded hoof, the joint spaces are wide open, and a much different plane relative to the joints may exist when these joint spaces are closed and loaded (a consideration that usually doesn't creep into the analysis). This begs the question, what good is it for the hoof to be "balanced" in the air and "unbalanced" on the ground? But we'll set that aside. Assessing level and referring to it as balance is pretty common, and trimming this "high" side down to match the "low" side can be problematic if taken too seriously. If one side of the hoof is deficient in depth, making the other side deficient as well and calling it "balance" is like letting all the air out of your good passenger side tire when you have a flat on the drivers side. This assessment also fails to consider bone morphology that we'll look at further in a minute.
But first, yet another group of professionals are the measurers. This group assesses their concept of balance under the belief that the medial and lateral wall should be the same length. If the lateral wall is measurably longer (or visually longer as they view the hoof from the front), then surely it should be trimmed until these numbers match or the visual satisfies. This group seems to conflate the word "balance" with the word "equal". But, as we said before, hooves come in right and left shapes. Conformation and chest width have an influence, but it is common for the lateral wall to be more acutely angled and the medial wall to be more upright. (The side of the hoof subject to the most load will typically be more upright.) To show the problem with the conclusions drawn from this assessment, consider the legs on a table. They can be of equal length if they are attached at the same angle. But one leg is angled outward, it must be longer to reach the ground. When the trajectory is different, the length too must be different in order to span the same vertical distance. What would shortening the longer angled table leg achieve?
By now, it should be obvious that symmetry is not "balance", level is not "balance", and equal is not "balance". It should also be obvious that a "level" hoof may not be symmetrical and an "equal" hoof may not be level, and that these are all methods that discount the validity of one another's claim on "balance".
So if things were not complicated enough, let's add another element to the discussion. All the talk surrounding the importance of hoof balance always assumes a perfectly balanced limb. That's never the reality. Distortion from an ideal skeletal structure differs from what is ideal for a distorted skeletal structure. Compensations and adaptations are part of nature. In theory, if we could attach a perfectly "balanced" hoof to an imbalanced limb, the result would not be harmonious. Hooves do not spontaneously distort without cause and it is wise to consider why a hoof may present in such a way that it is labelled "out of balance". It is my opinion that the hoof is more often the victim than the culprit. Or in other words, the hoof is a reflection of the forces it has had to endure. When those forces are not "balanced" how can you expect the hoof to be. Too often we assume the hoof is the origin of the problem, but it is where problems elsewhere tend to manifest. This is a fixed mechanical linkage once growth plates are set.
But we aren't done with this subject yet.....
Now cometh technology. Namely the radiograph. Comments on medial lateral hoof balance are often made based on a DP rad. On this view a few things can be noted. One is medial lateral joint congruency. Many vets are trained to assess "hoof balance" based upon whether the coffin joint appears "compressed" on one side or the other. So, regardless of how "level", "symmetrical" or "equal" the outward appearance of the hoof may be, if this joint space isn't congruent, the hoof may (in their opinion) require some degree of adjustment. In other words, the hoof is presumed "unbalanced" based on the joint spacing. The issue with this is the reliability of the assessment. The vet or vet tech positions the (often sedated) horse's hooves upon the blocks, dictating foot placement, stance, and posture. The position of the foot influences this assessment. The percentage of weight on the hoof also influences this assessment. A horse that is shifting it's weight or not distributing the weight equally at the time the button is pushed to take the image influences this assessment. Even the slight turning of the horse's head can influence this assessment. So we must be cognizant of these things and careful not to read too much into an image that can be misleading when used for this purpose. (I wouldn't condone it, but manipulating or let's say correcting a horse's postural stance for the second set of x-rays is often enough to resolve the perceived hoof imbalance.)
Another thing we can see on a radiograph is the M/L plane of the coffin bone. The DIPJ joint plane and the ventral plane of the coffin bone are not always parallel. The bottom of the coffin bone is prone to bone loss and remodeling over time. This M/L sole plane is often a reflection of this. In other words, the hoof will appear "unlevel" and "unbalanced" though the joint may be perfectly level and "balanced". But what happens when the vet or farrier attempts to address this imbalance? They in turn create an "imbalance" in the joint. This is why the M/L sole plane cannot be relied upon as an indicator of "balance".
{The most reliable marker to note in a DP rad is not the joint spacing or the ventral plane of P3, it is the two small dark spots in the coffin bone that show the adjacent foramen through which the medial and lateral branches of the palmar digital artery & vein enters the bone and forms an anastomosis within the bone called the terminal arch. These two foramen are constant. Uninfluenced by bone loss or stance. If you are looking for a reliable feature to assess M/L "balance", these may be your best bet.}
To wrap it up, 25 different farriers and vets can have 35 different visualizations of what "hoof balance" looks like. They all have a different preference for assessing it. Each method disregards the others, and no hoof can be "in balance" by all these standards. So, if there is no consensus. And if "balance" means different things to different people, then it is largely subjective. It is essentially meaningless and does not exist as one specific thing. The word "balance" is vague enough that a professional can use the word whenever it is convenient, but when we are using words for their convenience, that convenience is usually a smoke screen to conceal a lack of knowledge and understanding.
Is "hoof balance" important? Meh. I'll say depth is important. I'm on team depth. Hoof depth trumps balance. I don't think the ground surface is "balanced". I don't think the horse's limb is "balanced". I don't think the forces that are placed upon the hoof are "balanced". But in this sea of imbalance the hoof must be (and by who's definition)? When medial lateral disparities are severe enough to predispose a horse to lameness it is usually conformational rather than merely an inattentiveness on the farrier's behalf. I'm a fan of utilizing all the information we can derive from the hoof to inform how we address the hoof. I think all these methods together paint a picture. But then I do not believe in forcing a hoof to be what it is not. I'd rather respect the hoof it has, imperfect as it may be, with the understanding that such is nature. I wish I was 6'5". I'm not. I wish that hoof was "perfect". It's not. Whatever.
