What does the science say

For some riders, shoes are non‑negotiable tools that let sporthorses stay comfortable, protected and competitive on modern surfaces. For others, the barefoot (often boot-assisted) model is a welfare-forward way to build stronger, more functional feet, and many swear their horses move better for it. The truth, as usual, sits somewhere between physiology, workload, surface, conformation, and the skill of your hoof-care team.

This article reviews what research we do have, what farriers and vets see on the ground, and how to decide – pragmatically, not dogmatically – whether your horse can (or should) go barefoot.

First principles: what a hoof needs to do

Regardless of management style, every performance hoof must:

1. Absorb and dissipate force (via the frog, digital cushion, sole, and hoof wall).
2. Provide traction appropriate to the job and surface.
3. Protect sensitive internal structures (laminae, corium, coffin bone).
4. Maintain alignment and balance up the limb (reducing leverage and asymmetry).
5. Tolerate the wear imposed by work without outstripping growth.

Shoes, trims, boots, pads, pour-ins and composite materials are all just means to those ends.

What the science actually says (and doesn’t)

High-quality, controlled, discipline-specific studies comparing barefoot vs. shod sporthorses are surprisingly scarce. Still, several consistent themes emerge from biomechanics, imaging, and pressure/kinetic work:

Potential advantages seen in barefoot or minimally shod feet

• Greater hoof deformation (‘functional hoof mechanism’) on landing, which may aid shock absorption.
• Shorter breakover and sometimes a more heel-first landing pattern after successful transition, which are both linked to reduced deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) and navicular apparatus strain.
• Improved sole depth and frog/digital cushion development over time in some horses when managed on varied, firm turnout surfaces.

Potential advantages seen with shoeing

• Protection of thin soles and compromised feet, particularly on abrasive/hard footing.
• Leverage control and mechanical support (e.g., bar shoes, wedges, wide-web shoes, rails) for pathologies requiring therapeutic mechanics.
• Traction customisation via studs, which are still a decisive factor in upper-level jumping and eventing.
• Wear-rate management in horses whose work on synthetic or hard tracks rapidly exceeds growth.

What’s inconclusive or mixed

• Force plate and rein tension correlations with hoof management: results vary with surface, horse, and shoe type.
• Injury rates: no robust, discipline-stratified data show barefoot horses are globally more or less injured than shod horses.
• ‘Proprioception’ gains: frequently claimed for barefoot horses, but objective proof in the horse is limited; nonetheless, many riders report a different ‘feel’ in balance and surefootedness.

Bottom line: Evidence supports both approaches in the right horse, on the right surface, with the right trimming/shoeing cycle. Context trumps ideology.

Pros and cons at a glance

Barefoot (with or without competition-legal hoof boots)

Pros

• Maximises natural hoof function and expansion for some horses.
• Eliminates nail-hole damage, shoe weight, and peripheral loading.
• Often improves frog engagement, digital cushion strength, and heel-first landing after transition.
• Lower direct costs (though more frequent trims and environmental management can rebalance the budget).

Cons

• The transition period (often three to twelve months) can include sensitivity, reduced workload tolerance, and management headaches.
• Traction limitations in disciplines that rely on studs.
• Surface mismatch can occur where very hard, stony, or abrasive footing can outstrip sole growth and cause bruising.
• Not always competition-legal to use boots (allowed in endurance, but not in FEI dressage/showjumping).

Shoeing

Pros

• Immediate protection and mechanical options for pathology or thin soles.
• Studs for traction on grass and wet or variable show surfaces.
• The farrier can change breakover, support heels, float branches, etc., very precisely.
• Predictable comfort for many high-mileage competition horses.

Cons

• Potential for wall weakening (nail holes), peripheral loading, or crushed/underrun heels if cycles are long or mechanics are poor.
• Some horses develop flat soles and weak frogs if the shoe keeps the caudal foot unloaded for months/years.
• Can mask underlying management issues (diet, environment, trim frequency).

---

Case profile

• History: Chronic underrun heels and recurring sole bruising despite pads and frequent resets.
• Intervention: Transitioned to barefoot over nine months. Diet adjusted (trace minerals, lower non-structural carbohydrate in the diet), turnout increased on firm track with pea gravel and rubber mat loafing areas. Short trim cycles of four to five weeks.
• Outcome: Sole depth improved from six to seven mm to twelve to thirteen mm; digital cushion thickness on ultrasound increased. Horse returned to 1.40 m competition without studs, but management relied on surface selection (no slick grass), meticulous conditioning, and occasional non-competition hoof boots for hacking on roads.
• Trade-offs: Avoided certain shows due to footing; required a disciplined environment and a committed team.

---

Transitioning to barefoot: what it really takes

1. Time: Expect three to 12 months to rebuild the sole, frog, and digital cushion. Workloads may need to be reduced temporarily.
2. Environment: Varied, firm turnout surfaces (tracks, pea gravel, road work) stimulate the caudal (back part of the) foot. Constantly soft arenas or lush paddocks don’t.
3. Nutrition: Forage-first, controlled NSC, and robust copper/zinc provision (often low in hay/soil) to improve horn quality.
4. Trim frequency: Four to five-week cycles (sometimes shorter) to manage leverage and flares.
5. Boot strategy: Know the competition rules; use well-fitted boots for conditioning, hacking, rehab, or endurance competition.

When not to pull the shoes (yet)

• You need studs for your discipline/surface.
• Thin soles (<8–10 mm), pedal bone close to the ground, or chronic solar pain.
• Significant conformational deviations or pathology that currently depend on mechanical shoeing (e.g., sheared heels, collateral ligament strain requiring rails, advanced navicular disease needing wedged support).
• Owner logistics don’t allow short trim cycles, surface modification, or a slower reconditioning plan.
• High wear rates (e.g., trotting on asphalt regularly) exceed growth capacity.

What farriers, vets, and riders commonly agree on

• There is no single ‘best’ model. The right answer is horse-, job-, and surface-specific.
• Short cycles, balance, and mechanics matter more than ideology.
• Poorly managed barefoot is as harmful as poorly managed shoeing.
• Measure, don’t guess: Sole depth, palmar angle, digital cushion, medio-lateral balance, landing pattern (video/slow-motion), and force plate/pressure data should be used where available.
• Nutrition and environment underpin hoof quality regardless of approach.
• Boots and composites (glue-ons, cuff shoes, urethane) are expanding the grey area between ‘shod’ and ‘barefoot.’ They are worth looking into.

A decision framework

Ask these questions with your farrier and vet:

1. Workload and surface: Does your sport/venue require studs or heavy concussion protection?
2. Foot morphology: What is the sole depth, digital cushion quality, and heel integrity right now?
3. Pathology: Are we trying to treat or manage a mechanical problem where a shoe is giving us leverage/control?
4. Owner capacity: Can you commit to short trim cycles, turnout surfaces, and a transition plan?
5. Rules: Are hoof boots or composites legal in your sport?
6. Risk tolerance: Can you afford a temporary dip in performance during the transition?

Your answer may be: ‘Stay shod but improve mechanics and cycles,’ ‘Go barefoot behind only,’ ‘Transition fully barefoot in the off-season,’ or ‘Use composites/boots as a hybrid.’ All are valid if they serve the horse.

---

Quick FAQ

Q: Can a top-level jumper/eventer go barefoot?
A: Sometimes, but traction requirements (studs) make full barefoot uncommon. Some compete bare behind or use composite/glue-on solutions.

Q: Is barefoot always better for the caudal hoof?
A: Often, if the environment stimulates it and the trim is correct, it is better for the caudal hoof. But shoes with careful mechanics (e.g., frog support pads, wide webs) can also develop the caudal hoof.

Q: Are glue-on/composite shoes a compromise?
A: Yes, and a good one for many. They reduce nail damage, can flex with the foot, and allow creative mechanics, but still protect soles and accept studs in some formats.

---

Take-home message

The ‘barefoot vs. shod’ question isn’t moral; it’s mechanical, biological, and practical. Some sporthorses thrive barefoot. Others quite literally need shoes to do their jobs humanely and safely. The best hoof-care decisions are evidence-informed, team-based, and made for the individual horse you have, not the philosophy you prefer.

Measure the foot. Respect the workload. Feed the hoof. Control the leverage. Then choose—and re-choose—as your horse, surfaces, and goals evolve.