Wholesome Equine Nutrition, LLC

08/31/2026

So what is the journey of a TED clinic actually supposed to achieve?

There is a deliberate order to the way I teach my clinics..

We don’t begin with shoes. We don’t even begin by asking what the “ideal hoof” should look like.

We begin much further back than that.

First, we have to understand what the hoof actually is.

The hoof capsule is not a rigid box surrounding the foot. It is a living, growing, highly deformable biological structure with anisotropic, elastic, plastic and viscoelastic material properties.

It is continually growing while simultaneously being subjected to hundreds of thousands of loading cycles.

So before we can intelligently discuss changing hoof shape, we first have to understand why hoof shape changes at all.

That takes us into material science, functional anatomy and physics.

We explore how forces enter the hoof, how those forces are transmitted through its internal structures, how the capsule deforms under load, and how repeated loading interacts with growth to progressively influence morphology.

Suddenly, flare, crushed heels, migration, asymmetry and distortion stop simply being things that we need to “trim away.”

They become evidence of the mechanical environment in which that hoof has been living.

And that creates the next question.

If forces can progressively change hoof morphology, what mechanical environment should we actually be trying to create?

That takes us into biomechanics.

We look at ground reaction force, centres of rotation, centres of pressure, moments, lever arms, tissue strain, phalangeal alignment and the interaction between internal and external forces.

And eventually we arrive at one of the central questions of the clinic.

What do we actually mean by hoof balance?

For generations we have described hoof balance qualitatively.

We want the hoof to be “balanced.”

We want good proportions.

We want appropriate load distribution.

We want to minimise tissue strain and improve biomechanical efficiency.

All perfectly reasonable aspirations.

But they describe what balance should achieve. They don’t actually define the mechanical condition that constitutes balance.

So we move from qualitative descriptions towards a quantitative mechanical definition.

Rather than asking where the hoof should look balanced, we ask where the forces acting on the digit must resolve.

At midstance, the problem becomes one of equilibrium.

The external moment created by ground reaction force must be resolved against the internal moments of the distal limb. The spatial relationships between the centre of rotation, Point of Balance, pressure-bearing solar surface and actual centre of pressure determine whether the system is operating close to equilibrium or whether additional rotational demands are being imposed upon it.

And this is where hoof balance stops being a two-dimensional exercise.

It becomes a four-dimensional problem. Three-dimensional spatial balance expressed through time.

The hoof is growing. The surface underneath it changes. The direction and magnitude of force change through stance. The horse moves. The centre of pressure migrates. The tissues deform. So balance cannot simply be a measurement frozen in a photograph.

We are trying to create the spatial conditions that allow the system to organise towards mechanical equilibrium with the lowest unnecessary internal energetic and tissue cost.

This is also why there cannot simply be one prescribed shoe, trim or external geometry for every horse.

Equilibrium is the objective. The intervention is merely how we attempt to create the conditions for it.

When constraints are removed, we can actually observe the limb self-organising towards a mechanically efficient solution. That is an important distinction. We are not trying to force the horse into an arbitrary geometry. We are trying to create the conditions in which the system can find equilibrium with minimal internal cost.

But then the clinic deliberately gets bigger.

Because the hoof isn’t attached to a table. It is attached to a horse. And the horse is not simply standing above the hoof passively.

Changing distal mechanics can change proprioceptive input, limb orientation, stabilisation requirements, muscular tone and ultimately posture.

But equally, changing posture alters limb orientation and the direction and timing with which forces return to the hoof.

So the relationship is not

Hoof → Horse.

It is

Hoof ⇄ Horse.

A continuous, bi-directional feedback loop.

Alter the hoof and the horse reorganises around the new boundary condition. Alter the horse and you change the mechanical environment experienced by the hoof. Alter that environment repeatedly enough and the hoof itself adapts and changes morphology.

And then we expand the lens again.

Because posture itself doesn’t exist in isolation.

The horse has a whole world acting upon it.

Movement.

Training.

Rider.

Tack.

Confinement.

Feeding position.

Surfaces.

Pain.

Stress.

Handling.

Social environment.

Autonomic state.

Every one of these can influence muscle tone, movement strategy, posture and limb orientation. And every change in limb orientation has the potential to change how force ultimately arrives back at the ground.

The clinic describes posture as the negotiated outcome between these different boundary constraints. The hoof is an enormously important one, but it isn’t the only one.

So by the end of the journey, we have travelled from the microscopic architecture and material behaviour of hoof horn…

to the physics governing its deformation…

to how repeated loading creates morphology…

to a quantitative definition of hoof balance…

to equilibrium of the distal limb…

to proprioception and posture…

to whole-body force transmission…

and eventually to the horse’s environment, management and lived experience.

And then, only then, do we come back to practical farriery.

What should we trim?

Where should we put the shoe?

What material should we use?

What should we support?

What should we unload?

Because once we understand the system, those decisions stop being recipes.

They become applications of first principles to the individual horse standing in front of us.

That is really what I want these clinics to be.

Not two days of me telling people how I shoe horses.

Two days of developing a framework that allows practitioners to understand why they are doing what they are doing, what mechanical outcome they are trying to achieve, and how to reason their way towards it regardless of which tools happen to be in their toolbox.

Understand the system first.
Define the desired mechanical outcome second.
Choose the intervention last.

That is the journey. So if you haven’t already booked on, is this something you want to miss?

08/30/2026

Here is a scenario the ECIR Group encounters too frequently, often after an owner’s horse has had several bouts of laminitis:

-Owner reports that their horse has been “off” for quite some time but then develops full-blown laminitis.

-Blood work reveals extremely high insulin levels, so the veterinary recommendation is to move off pasture to a dry lot with soaked hay and start an over-the-counter supplement reported to reduce insulin (no supplement names here because there are so many).

-Owner follows veterinary instructions and two days later, the horse has improved and insulin has plummeted. Owner raves about the supplement, puts the horse back on pasture and, before long, the horse experiences another bout of laminitis.

What went wrong?

The answer should be obvious, but there is research in EMS horses that shows exactly what happens when horses move from high HC pasture* to a dry lot with tested hay. In the open access dissertation of Askins (see reference), she reports the results of an experiment in both EMS and healthy horses on mixed spring pasture consisting of white clover, bluegrass, orchardgrass, and tall fescue. Horses were adapted to pasture for 24 hours, then blood sampling began at 07:00 the next day and was collected every 2 hours for another 24 hours. Next, EMS horses were moved to a drylot with ad libitum access to hay with 1.7% estimated fermentable fructan and 7.9% HC (ESC = 7.2%, starch = 0.7%). The following day, blood samples were collected starting at 07:00 and every 2 hours for 24 hours.

Peak insulin in the EMS horses on spring pasture was 850.9 +/- 11.9 uIU/mL. None of the EMS horses exhibited signs of laminitis. After moving to the dry lot, peak insulin was 99.9 +/- 77.7 uIU/mL, an 8.51-fold reduction in insulin by simply changing the diet from high HC pasture to safe hay. No insulin-reducing supplements were given, and the hay was not soaked.

This research demonstrates (again) that the most effective way to quickly lower insulin is to control dietary HC. The ECIR group has known this for a very long time and pioneered standards for soaking hay (30 minutes in hot water, 60 minutes in cold water) in 2002. These standards became part of the foundational “Emergency Diet” protocol. We’re not anti-supplement (unless it causes harm). We’re pro-science and will argue for what works.

REFERENCE: Askins, Morgan J., "MANAGING DIETARY NONSTRUCTURAL CARBOHYDRATES IN INSULIN DYSREGULATED HORSES: PASTURE, LONG-STEM FORAGE, AND RESTRICTIVE GRAZING STRATEGIES" (2026). Theses and Dissertations--Veterinary Science. 74. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/gluck_etds/74

*𝘕𝘰𝘵𝘦: 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩. 𝘌𝘚𝘊 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘴𝘰 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘴 (𝘌𝘚𝘊) 𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘯 (𝘞𝘚𝘊 – 𝘌𝘚𝘊). 𝘗𝘦𝘢𝘬 𝘕𝘚𝘊 𝘸𝘢𝘴 15.4% 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 5.8% 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩. 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘵 07:00 𝘸𝘢𝘴 7.2% 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘱 𝘯𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘧 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 15.5% 𝘕𝘚𝘊. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘵 05:00 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘸𝘢𝘴 1.2% 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘕𝘚𝘊 𝘸𝘢𝘴 7.5%. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦 𝘢𝘵 07:00 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦. 𝘏𝘪𝘨𝘩 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘒𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯, 𝘦𝘵 𝘢𝘭. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0737080619306070

08/30/2026

07/07/2026

05/09/2026

The Bow, the String, and the Corset: How Equine Ligaments and Myofascial Systems Support Movement

Introduction

The horse’s ability to move with power, grace, and elasticity is not just a matter of strong muscles or efficient limbs—it begins with an integrated support system that balances the spine, lifts the trunk, and distributes force throughout the body. At the center of this system are the nuchal and supraspinous ligaments, which act as an elastic “bow” to suspend and stabilize the topline, and the abdominal muscles and thoracolumbar fascia, which form the “string” that lifts and supports the spine from below. Layered over this is the corset-like core system, a 360° network of muscles and fascia that maintains trunk stability, breathing efficiency, and posture.

When these systems work in harmony, the horse becomes a true “back mover”—elastic, efficient, and sound. When they don’t, the result is a “leg mover,” where the limbs overcompensate for a weak or hollow core, leading to stiffness, inefficiency, and strain. Understanding how the bow, string, and corset interact—along with the myofascial lines that tie them together—offers powerful insight into equine biomechanics, performance, and long-term soundness.

1. The Nuchal Ligament (Ligamentum nuchae)

Location: Runs along the top of the neck from the back of the skull (occiput) down to the withers, where it blends into the supraspinous ligament.

Structure: Made of two main parts in the horse:
Funicular part – a thick cord-like band from the skull to the withers.

Laminae – thin sheet-like extensions that run from the cervical vertebrae (C2–C7) up to the funicular part.

Function: Acts like a built-in elastic “sling” to help support the heavy head and neck without constant muscular effort.

Stores elastic energy during lowering of the head and releases it when the horse raises the head. Provides passive support to help stabilize the neck during movement.

2. The Supraspinous Ligament

Location: Continuation of the nuchal ligament — runs from the withers down along the tops (dorsal spinous processes) of the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral vertebrae, nearly to the sacrum.

Function: Connects and stabilizes the tops of the vertebrae. Works with the nuchal ligament to store and release elastic energy during movement.

Provides a tensioning system that helps resist excessive spinal flexion (sagging of the topline).

3. The “Bow and String” Theory (or Bow Theory)

This is a classic model used to describe how the equine topline works.

The Bow: Represents the horse’s topline — the supraspinous ligament, nuchal ligament, and vertebral column together form the “arched bow.”

Provides passive elastic support.

The String: Represents the abdominal muscles, thoracolumbar fascia, and related ventral structures that run beneath the spine. Just like the string of a bow, they create tension that lifts and stabilizes the spine when engaged.

How It Works Together:

If the “string” (abdominals, fascia) is engaged → the “bow” (dorsal ligaments and spine) is lifted and stabilized, creating a rounded topline.
If the string is slack → the bow collapses, and the topline sags (“hollow back”).

Movement efficiency comes from the dynamic interplay between these two systems.

In Practice

A horse with strong abdominal engagement and free, healthy fascia → carries the back lifted, topline supported, and movement elastic. A horse with weak core or fascial restriction → bow collapses, supraspinous ligament overstretched, and the back hollows, leading to stiffness or pain.

✅ So, the nuchal ligament + supraspinous ligament form the dorsal elastic support system (the bow), and the abdominals/fascia form the ventral tension system (the string). Together they explain why posture, core stability, and fascial health are essential for soundness and performance.

4. Bow-String Model (Topline vs. Core)

Bow = dorsal support Nuchal + supraspinous ligaments + vertebral column. Provides passive elastic suspension of the spine and head/neck.

String = ventral support Abdominal muscles + thoracolumbar fascia. Provides active lifting of the back and stabilization of the spine.

This explains the horse’s longitudinal support — head to tail, topline to underline.

5. Corset Theory (Circumferential Core)

Describes the horse’s cylindrical, 360° core stability system:

Front & sides: re**us abdominis, obliques, intercostals, sternum and ribs, pectorals.

Back: thoracolumbar fascia, paraspinal muscles spine and ribs.

Support: diaphragm.

Floor: pelvic floor and abdominal wall. When these work together, they form a corset-like pressure system that stabilizes the trunk and supports breathing, posture, and locomotion.

This explains the horse’s circumferential support — stabilizing the trunk in all directions.

6. How They Work Together

The corset theory gives us the why behind the string of the bow-string model:

Strong, coordinated abdominal and fascial tension (corset engaged) = the string is tight → lifts and supports the spine → bow is effective.
Weak or inhibited corset = the string is slack → spine collapses → bow overstretches.

The bow theory explains the mechanics of how the spine is supported front-to-back. The corset theory explains the systemic stabilization around the entire trunk.

👉 In other words: the corset makes the string strong, and the string makes the bow effective.

7. The Thoracic Sling

The Unlike humans, horses lack a bony clavicle. Instead, the ribcage is suspended between the shoulders by a fascial and muscular “sling,” primarily the serratus ventralis and pectorals. This sling integrates with the ventral lines, corset system, and front limb fascial connections.

Provides shock absorption for the forehand. Suspends and stabilizes the ribcage between the shoulders. Links the forelimbs into the spine and core system. This makes the thoracic sling a key junction where the bow, string, and corset systems meet.

8. Hindquarter Connection

The horse’s true engine lies in the hindquarters, but for that power to translate into effective forward motion, it must pass through a lifted, stable back.

If the bow-string-corset system is active → energy flows forward smoothly, lifting the withers and freeing the shoulders. If the system is collapsed → power from behind “leaks,” forcing the limbs to overwork, leading to shortened stride and uneven loading.

9. Elastic Energy Recycling

Fascia, tendons, and ligaments don’t just stabilize—they act like https://koperequine.com/the-bow-the-string-and-the-corset-how-equine-ligaments-and-myofascial-systems-support-movement/

04/27/2026

Where is the limitation of barefoot? Even in the perfect management environment?

There’s a conversation happening in the comments on my barefoot posts. It keeps missing the actual premise.

So let’s separate two things that are being blended together.

Yes, better management matters.

Yes, more movement, varied terrain, social interaction, and environmental complexity absolutely improve hoof quality, tissue resilience, and overall robustness.

If you take a domestic horse and move it closer to a natural environment, you will often see stronger, more functional barefoot outcomes.

I agree with that.

But that is not the discussion I am having.

We are talking across premises.

The question is not:

“Can better management produce stronger barefoot hooves?”

The answer to that is clearly yes.

The question is:

“What happens when a horse’s conformation or posture drives persistent off-axis impulse through the hoof?”

Because that is a completely different problem.

This is not about whether the hoof is “strong enough.”

This is about how it is being loaded.

A horse can be in a great environment, have good horn quality, good stimulation, good movement…

…and still load the limb asymmetrically.

Because conformation and posture dictate the direction of force.

If that force is biased, even slightly, and repeated thousands of times, it creates:

Asymmetrical impulse
Asymmetrical deformation
Asymmetrical proprioceptive feedback

And that is where the cycle begins.

The hoof adapts to the load.
The morphology changes.
That altered morphology changes how the horse loads.
That altered loading reinforces the posture.

That is a bi-directional pathological loop.

And here is the key point people keep missing:

A better environment improves capacity.

It does not necessarily change directional bias of force.

Now bring Darwin back into it.

In the wild, many of these conformational and postural inefficiencies don’t become a major issue.

Why?

Because the workload is intermittent.

The horse moves a lot, yes, but it is not subjected to repeated, structured, high-demand loading in the way domestic horses are.

It runs when it needs to.

It rests when it doesn’t.

So subtle inefficiencies can exist without being driven into pathology.

Now put that same horse into a domestic system.

Ridden work.
Circles.
Arenas.
Repetition.
Surface constraints.
Training demands.

Now that same off-axis loading is no longer occasional.

It is repeated, structured, and amplified.

And that is when it becomes a problem.

So when people say:

“Just improve management.”

Yes. Do that.

It will reduce the number of horses that need intervention.

But it does not eliminate the population of horses whose conformation or posture inherently drives off-axis impulse.

And those are the horses we are actually talking about.

If we don’t acknowledge that, we end up applying the same solution to two completely different problems.

One is a capacity problem.

The other is a direction-of-force problem.

Only one of those is solved by environment alone.

That’s the distinction.

Image shows gross hoof imbalance caused by poor posture.

04/18/2026

04/18/2026

THIS!

You cannot force posture onto a horse when the hoof is telling the body to stand differently!?

One of the biggest misunderstandings in modern equine therapy is the belief that posture can simply be “corrected” by manually placing the horse into a new shape. I see it all the time, body work and veterinary treatment being done to a horse while I look at its feet and just sigh.

Stretch it.
Massage it.
Mobilise it.
Strengthen it.
Train it into position.
Jab it with steroids.

And whilst all of those things may have value, there is a fundamental truth people keep missing.

You cannot sustainably change posture if the horse’s proprioceptive system is still demanding the original compensation.

Why?

Because posture is not something the horse consciously chooses.

Posture is the visible output of the nervous system’s constant attempt to organise the body in response to incoming information.

That information comes from everywhere, but one of the richest and most mechanically important sensory inputs in the entire horse is the hoof.

The hoof is not just a block of horn at the bottom of the limb. It is packed with mechanoreceptors, proprioceptive structures, vascular structures, and deformable tissues that continuously feed information into the nervous system regarding load, pressure, deformation, balance, and orientation. 

Every time the hoof meets the floor, it tells the horse’s nervous system something about where the body is in space.

It tells the horse whether the limb feels stable.
It tells the horse whether the load is symmetrical.
It tells the horse whether one side feels overloaded.
It tells the horse whether the system feels comfortable under compression. And this information can be distorted by imbalance.

And the nervous system uses that information to organise posture accordingly.

This means posture is not simply muscular habit. It is an adaptive response to sensory input.

Let me put that another way.

If the hoof is repeatedly telling the nervous system that a certain position reduces discomfort, improves balance, or better distributes force, the body will organise around that signal. In a webinar with Dr Gellman we discussed the horses understanding of upright..

https://equineeducationhub.thinkific.com/courses/proandpos

The horse will stand in the way the nervous system believes is safest.

So if you manually straighten the horse, stretch the horse, or try to train the horse into a new posture without changing the proprioceptive and mechanical signals that caused the compensation in the first place, what happens?

The horse simply returns to the original posture.

Because from the nervous system’s perspective, nothing meaningful changed.

You altered the output temporarily.
You did not alter the input.

This is precisely why so many practitioners see temporary changes after treatment, only for the horse to revert days later.

Because unless the underlying sensory and mechanical drivers are addressed, the nervous system will keep returning to the same solution.

My upcoming book discusses this as a closed loop.

Hoof mechanics alter proprioceptive input.
That proprioceptive input alters muscle tone and fascial loading.
That altered tone changes posture.
That posture changes limb orientation and movement.
That movement then changes loading back into the hoof. 

It is a self-reinforcing system.

Once established, it will continue feeding itself until the dominant driver is changed.

This is why I have repeatedly said hoof balance and posture cannot be viewed in isolation.

If the hoof is imbalanced enough to create altered loading, altered proprioceptive feedback, or altered comfort under load, then the body will compensate around that.

And until that signal is reduced, you are asking the horse to ignore its own nervous system.

That is not rehabilitation.
That is fighting biology.

Imagine trying to stand perfectly upright whilst one foot is on a slope and one foot is on flat ground.

Could you force yourself straight for a moment? Yes.

Would your body naturally stay there? No.

Why?

Because your nervous system would constantly reorganise your body to accommodate the information coming from the feet.

The horse is no different.

This is why I often say, you cannot expect to change the architecture upstairs whilst the foundations downstairs are still crooked.

Now to be clear, this does not mean every postural issue is hoof derived.

Far from it.

The relationship is bi directional.

Higher limb pain, saddle fit, rider asymmetry, visceral tension, autonomic stress, trauma, and pathology can all alter posture first, which then changes loading into the hoof. The hoof may then adapt secondarily. In the same vane, farriers can struggle with the same perpetuations when higher postural drivers are not addressed!

But the principle remains the same.

Once the hoof becomes part of the compensatory loop, it becomes one of the drivers maintaining that loop.

And if you ignore that, you will struggle to create lasting change.

This is why multidisciplinary work matters.

The farrier cannot always fix posture alone. Or hoof balance for that matter!
The physio cannot always fix posture alone.
The vet cannot always fix pain alone.

Because the horse is an integrated system.

But equally, anyone trying to change posture whilst ignoring hoof proprioception is working with one hand tied behind their back.

Because no matter how good your treatment is, the horse will always listen to the signals coming from the ground.

The hoof is the horse’s interface with reality.

And reality always wins.

Something discussed in depth in both my webinars with Celeste-Leilani Lazaris

https://equineeducationhub.thinkific.com/bundles/yogi-sharp-and-celeste-lazaris-webinar-bundle

04/18/2026

I believe in meeting the feet where they are. Trimming to build them from the inside out takes years. Every foot has a shape of it’s own that changes before and after a trim, from one trim to the next, and from the beginning of a rehab to the end where you’ve built a fully developed foot. It’s up to the trimmer to be looking for the shape that each foot wants to be, not forcing it into a preconceived shape that they think it ought to be.

The true shape of a foot through every stage of development can be found by rolling the wall to the peripheral edge of the sole, including around the heels and along the bars…along with preventing the dead frog from building up and causing excessive internal pressure.