This might be a stupid question but…
Why do so many top performance horses have feet that look so long? Is it to give protection should they lose a shoe? Or to enhance movement? The feet look reasonably balanced - there’s just a lot of it!
I assume these horses are shod by some of the top farriers, so I’m assuming it’s intentional and not incompetence. I see it pretty often and have always wondered.
Examples:
Nothing can be determined about the feet in the angled front pics.
Nothing can TRULY be determined about the feet with side views since we don’t know where in the trim cycle they are.
That said:
However, in the US, there is a huge issue with way too many farriers (and trimmers) not doing their jobs well, and creating long feet. Because it’s so rampant, those who don’t know better, see it as normal because that’s ALL they see. Which means, they keep using the same hoof care “professionals” who keep doing a poor job
Agreed that the pictures aren’t ideal. It’s hard to find good conformation shots, even of Valegro!
“Tall” is a better word for it, thank you.
Usually we can find good confo pics of stallions, (in the sporthorse world at least, and several other breeds like drafts and even Arabians, not so much the stock horse world!) not so much geldings or mares. I know of 2 confo-type pics of Valegro but you’re right, there aren’t many of him!
“Long” is really the best term. Good quality feet don’t crush when they get long, they get taller. Weaker feet start to crush in the heels, which exacerbates the look of a “long” foot
For Uno Don Diego, do you think they allow his fronts to get long to make him more uphill?
I’d hope not, because that’s a terrible reason, and doesn’t serve anything for him anyway - he’s already so functionally uphill, AND has withers taller than butt (which has nothing to do with being functionally uphill, it can only increase that factor, or detract from it)
And, I don’t even see those as being all that tall, though I wouldn’t want that to be a fresh trim because I wouldn’t want them to get (much) taller
It has become so common that even professionals are shocked by how “short” my horse’s feet are.
I agree with JB and Snowdenfarm - my last “top sporthorse farrier” with the $$$ bills to go with it kept my horses feet long. Plus he’d always been late for his appts so she’d get REALLY long. And my trainer thought it was fine. All her other students thought it was fine. Eventually I couldn’t take it (losing shoes, clips digging into the hoof wall, it was just awful) so I switched farriers to someone she thought butchered horses feet by cutting them too short. Well, it turns out the year of long feet from the old farrier had left us with NPA in several feet, and that has been awful to try and fix. The new farrier keeps her toe shorter, she’s more comfortable, and all I can think is that I wish I’d listened to my gut earlier about the length.
My experience is that European farriers, top sport farriers (who mostly trained in Europe), prefer what Americans and American farriers view as longer/bigger feet. Shoes are also set larger to encourage growth/movement/etc.
Americans hate losing shoes and having to get a farrier out to reset…which I think contributed to tiny feet and shoes. Professionals expect this inconvenience, and many can and do reset their own shoes.
Particular breeds have characteristic feet too, so here are some big generalizations. TB feet are notorious, particularly for low heels. Halter QH seem to be bred for very small feet. WB often have “mule feet”, being tall and narrow, viewed with disapproval by ISH breeders used to big feet to deal with mud.
Preference is irrelevant when it comes to a properly functioning foot 
Long feet by default start contracting. Heels run forward, no matter how well they stand up, and contract the heels. The more run forward the foot is, the more the sole is stretched and thinned.
Yes, fitting a shoe fuller can encourage/support beneficial hoof expansion if they’re already contracted, but trimming/shoeing to facilitate flaring which produces a bigger footprint, is detrimental to hoof health.
There are far, far more overgrown long/tall feet in the US, than tiny feet. The desire for teacup feet is largely in the halter QH world (maybe halter Arabian, I’m not nearly as familiar with that), and most of that is bred into them, while some of it is trimming
Most of what I see are shoes too small for the foot (yes, to prevent grabbing and pulling) but then put on a foot that is still too long after a trim, let alone what it looks like at the end of a cycle
Hmmm, I can’t say I’ve noticed that over the last decades - ? Bigger feet yes. I DO see more of the European-trimmed WBs tending towards the taller and more narrow feet BUT, like I mentioned in my first comment, I am pretty positive that is a result of the style of trimming, not genetics. A great % of WBs in the US have European sires or dams, or are brought over here directly, and that look isn’t nearly as common here, so it can’t be just about being a WB.
I think I was using the word preference to kindly say a lot of our farriers are bad, and make bad choices 
to be fair, I know nothing about normal horse farriers in Europe, only top sport farriers, so it’s entirely possible that their normal farriers also put too small shoes on because having to go out all the time and nail shoes back on is a pita.
Well, you aren’t WRONG that some of those things ARE preference But any time we “prefer” something that is counter to what makes the horse healthy and happy, we need to walk away
There are a few different things at play. I don’t think European farriers are any better than Americans as a rule. Geography does play a role in hoof health, though - with certain horse keeping practices being a norm in UK that aren’t a norm in say, Tulsa OK. Animal husbandry will impact how hooves grow, from nutrition to horse use.
There are different trimming styles too and the UK in particular has a more upright trim philosophy. In Europe (generalization incoming) trimming styles tend to facilitate a more upright hoof, which visually can look taller. Europe is more condensed and the availability of top quality studs, yards, and liveries are all right on top of each other geographically speaking – so the available pool of knowledge and experience is much deeper in one central area. Whereas in the US, it is spread over a greater distance, with certain farriers having an established locale and not really able to travel much beyond that. There are brilliant farriers in the US too, so it is not a knock on the US in terms of quality, it is just another way US is at odds with UK because of inconvenient geography alone.
The farrier trim style will shape the growth of the hoof. If you have a farrier who tends to not correct a gradually running forward heel, you will eventually run into a too long toe, collapsed and low heels. Doesn’t matter the quality of the hoof the farrier is holding, if he doesn’t know how to trim, his trim won’t be balanced.
Some warmblood lines are know for more ‘upright’ pasterns and hoof capsules - I would put UNO Don Diego in that category, coming from both sides there was an established phenotype there. Certain anatomy will also accentuate the perception of a tall hoof, like more upright/less soft pasterns/fetlocks.
Certain breeds have a predisposition to grow out their hooves a certain way. Drafts are well known for large, flat dish feet – Arabians for hard, broad, deep feet. Warmbloods and TBs as a general rule will grow good hooves but allowed to get too long, start to develop serious pathologies in the hoof - some grow more upright and some will grow forward and long.
Then, finally, the work they do and the substrate they live in. Hard work will change the way the feet grows especially if the trim is unbalanced. This is where TBs begin to get low heels and long toes - they are shod to improve breakover(*), reset way more often than even performance show homes, and have shoes on at an early age (usually when they are long yearlings beginning their track training - that’s under 2 years of age). Whereas most warmbloods won’t be started or even shod until they are closer to four or five years, having much more time for their bodies and hooves to fill out and mature. That extra year of an unrestricted hoof truly makes a difference in the final product.
The substrate they spend the most of their time in also changes the hoof shape. Living on rough sand can shear away the hoof wall and sole, much like seen in the ‘mustang roll’, where living in mud and/or deep footing tends to encourage a flatter, broader hoof capsule.
Even in my own personal horses that are barefoot, I notice a change in hoof shape depending on the season. It is subtle but it is there - in the years we’ve had unprecedented rainfall where they are living almost 24/7 in boggy footing, their feet are not as healthy as when footing is hard and dry.
(*) - I don’t believe this trim style improves breakover, but it is the prevailing style for TB racing.
From what I could see I wouldn’t call them too long. I have to confess that in some cases I see feet here that almost look too short.
I am no expert but you can’t do all feet the same can you? Some may do better with a bit longer toe where others can’t ?
Wouldn’t the horses conformation play a role in how you do the feet to some degree?
None of the feet pictured are too short, that much can be seen, even in the front angle pics. Which one in particular are you seeing that almost look too short?
You definitely cannot trim any 2 feet, even on the same horse, to look the same way. But you CAN apply the exact same set of principles, of questions to ask, in order to trim each foot to its perfect health. The outward appearance of the foot will then end up whatever it is, based on genetics, injury, and how the hoof was allowed to grow (or not) in the first 5 years of life when a foot grows just like the body does.
The correct trim may mean 1 horse has a front face toe length of 4" from coronet to ground, while a full sibling might be at 3.5", and while another unrelated horse might be 3".
Absolutely. You cannot trim a foot to point forward if the entire leg deviates outward. You trim for as laterally a flat a landing as you can without invading live tissue or even trimming the wall flat to the sole. This means both heels hit at once as much as possible, and ideally it’s a heel-first landing as well but not all horses are meant for that. Worst case they land flat. A toe-first landing isn’t acceptable.
Sometimes, a horse is so deviated in a leg that they wear one part of their foot more than they “should”, and sometimes if you try to trim so that things are “correct”, you make the horse sore, so sometimes you have to trim to how his conformation, or injury/lamenes status, dictates.
How a hoof looks is like weight. If we do all the right healthy things - eat right, exercise well - our weight will be what it is.
The outside hoof shape from a single picture says little. I would not judge one of these horses without x-rays to see the bony column. At the same time, a very educated eye such as many performance farriers can see how the hoof shapes around the bones.
Who knows how the hoof grows on these horses? Are they chasing a lateral growth or some other genetic predisposition?
You also neglect to consider the living situation of these horses as well as the fact all of your examples compete and train on highly engineered surfaces
Actually, I don’t. The question is aimed at these types of horses specifically. I’m not talking about Joe Blow’s mustang in the mud pit of a field, I’m talking specifically about top-level performance horses.
I’ve just noticed that I see “tall” or “long” or “tall looking and narrow” feet in these horses more often. If these feet were posted on here for any kind of critique, that would be one of the first things mentioned, even if the overall balance is correct.
It’s just something I noticed, and I try not to hold back on questions because that’s how I learn something.
I think its a breeding thing as much as a farriery thing.
Here in Canada Farriers do not require a license or schooling. IMO, this should be something they should have, a license and proper education. Apprenticing for years isn’t enough for me.
Long toes, pushing appointments, not showing up, always late. I can’t stand it. I want a farrier who properly schedules and stays on top. Just because they don’t grow enough, doesn’t mean you push it out. My TB has poop feet but we stick to 5 weeks. Because of this, his feet are doing better than ever since switching to a better farrier last August. The angle is correct, there is heel starting to grow, the shoe is bigger to support, not held on small and tight to avoid the shoe coming off.
I think we as horse owners need to be more educated because there are just too many bad farriers out there now.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
