You mean Street Cry, it would have been interesting had he been around for the triple crown, would Point Given had even made the Hall of Fame? Think about it...We know who the better sire is.

Is Barry Bonds going to the Hall?

I always liked Street Cry going back to his 2YO season, but how is this relevant to anything? Some of today's top sires were not champions on the track (i.e., Distorted Humor, Smart Strike, Indian Charlie), but outperformed more celebrated race horses in the breeding shed.

Obcourse it isn't a knockout punch in terms of who is the better horse, however it is a stiff left, more so than a jab. We also know he was a pretty good horse when he was right, somehow from watching him I think he could have gone down as one of the greats if he had a longer and healthier career. It's one of my regrets that we didn't see more of him.

No but Pelle Lindburgh might make the NASCAR hall of fame

You might have to explain this comment to the non following hockey fans, otherwise they might think you are referring to the aviator rather than the goalie. RIP.

charles and pellle- two dead flyers

It really doesn't count for anything, nor should it. If we are going to engage in the sort of analysis that you suggest, do we lessen the racing accomplishments of horses like Alysheba, Risen Star and Skip Away because they were not standouts in the breeding shed? Are Danzig and Malibu Moon the greatest "what ifs" because they became successful sires?

no Smarty and Point Given

I can't really disagree with anything you said, there are no certainty's with this type of discussion. But do good sires elevate a horse's rep? Would Northern Dancer be considered as great a horse today had he not been such an outstanding sire? I'm not saying it is wrong or right, but we know it does.

I agree that becoming a good sire will help a horse's reputation, but there's a big difference between reputation and accomplishments. Another place this happens is how often the sale price of a yearling/2YO will impact that horse's reputation. For example, would Munnings have had the reputation that he enjoyed up until the Carter if he wasn't a $1.7 million 2YO?

Breeders are obsessed with bloodlines, we know this, look at Green Monkey, he was bought as a sire prospect despite being a complete failure as a racehorse.

The Alydar - Affirmed comparison is a perfect example of how people perceive horses as to how they fare in the breeding shed. I'm sure many still regard Alydar as the better of the 2.

satish sanan bred the green monkey and sold him for 400K before he went for 16million at the 2yr old in training sale.

Gary Stevens said that Point Given was the "best horse never to win the Triple Crown." Who am I to disagree?

At 9-3-0 out of 13 starts, I sure would have enjoyed seeing him campaign another year.

I just threw up in my mouth.

I doubt that The Green Monkey "was bought as a sire prospect." He stands in Florida for Hartley-DeRenzo, his 2YO sale consignors. Besides, it's not like Forestry is anywhere near the perceived stallion that he was a few years ago (down to $17,500 advertised fee from $100,000).

That being said, I do agree that modest race horses with good bloodlines may be given a chance at stud. Not that I am trying to make him out as more than he is (a decent NY stallion), but a horse like Freud would have never been given an opportunity at stud if he wasn't a sibling to Giant's Causeway.

OK... what was he bought to be then, a ride for the kiddies at a carnival?

That's a silly statement.

The Green Monkey is not a good example of breeders being obsessed with bloodlines. He surely wasnt purchased as a cheap stallion prospect based on his pedigree.

I don't know anyone who thinks Alydar was a better racehorse than Affirmed. I also don't know anyone who thinks Affirmed is a better sire than Alydar.

I'm sure Spectacular Bid would beg to differ. Man o War just rolled over in his grave as well.

Maybe I should clarify my thoughts. I doubt they paid much, if anything, to re-obtain him.