Champions Who Failed As Stallions
 

On another thread ... as a result of the possible retirement of Bernardini ... a youngster ... who doesn't know very much about this game ... asked me if a champion racehorse was ever a failure as a stallion.

I replied ... "Why sure, son ... there have been lots of them" ... and supplied this partial list for him to study and ponder ...

Ponder ... Citation ... Coaltown ... Hill Prince ... Iron Liege ... Tim Tam ... Nadir ... Sword Dancer ... Bald Eagle ... Crimson Satan ... Jaipur ... Ridan ... Never Bend ... Bold Lad ... Successor ... Dr. Fager ... Vitriolic ... Arts And Letters ... Personality ... Riva Ridge ... Ack Ack ... Sham ... Wajima ... Bold Forbes ... Youth ... Affirmed ... Spectacular Bid ... Lord Avie ... Temperence Hill ... Conquistador Cielo ... Devil's Bag ... Chief's Crown ... Spend A Buck ... Vanlandingham ... Turkoman ... Smile ... Alysheba ... Ferdinand ... Groovy ... Easy Goer ... Risen Star ... Rhythm ... Blushing John ... Steinlen ...Fly So Free ... Criminal Type ... Housebuster ... Arazi ... Hansel ... Black Tie Affair ... Gilded Time ... Pleasant Tap ... Rubiano ... Dehere ... Bertrando ... Timber Country ... Holy Bull ... Cigar ... Skip Away ... Lit De Justice ... Favorite Trick ... Silver Charm ... Free House ... Answer Lively ... Real Quiet ... Victory Gallop ... Artax ...

Can anyone out there add a few more ... to help educate one of our eager and deserving young friends?

Please ... please be kind.

The poster who "guaranteed" that Bernardini will be a success as a stallion ... is just a starry-eyed youngster ... who's aware that he knows absolutely nothing about thoroughbred racing ... but ...

... at least he asked a real authority on the game ... me ... for help.

Give him a little credit for wanting to learn ... won't you?

That's a distorted list. Some horses never had a chance . . . Dr. Fager for one. And the final chapter on some horses has yet to be written . . . Conquistador Cielo is an example.

Before Bernardini, how many Triple Crown races had the progeny of AP Indy won? Zero. Yet AP Indy was bred to the very best mares, his offspring sold for the highest prices, and his offspring was sent to the very best barns. Yet for Triple Crown races he was less than 1 for 1000 or so. Now he's about 1 for 1000.

Depends on how you define a failure. Maybe at $300,000 AP Indy could be defined as a failure too.

Some people say Grindstone is a failure. Yet his offspring won a Triple Crown race before AP Indy's offspring did. Think about that. $5,000 fee for Grindstone vs. $300,000 fee for AP Indy.

Seabiscuit, Whirlaway, Gallant Fox, Assault, Twenty Grand

Some excellent points Todko. AP Indy has had success served up to him on a plate.

how the hell are Affirmed, Easy Goer, Pleasant Tap, Rubiano, Dehere, Holy Bull, Free house, Real Quiet and Victory Gallop failures at stud?

I have no problem betting a VGallop horse. his offspring may not look like much, but he gets runners.
I dont have the numbers in front of me, but he produces winners at every level.


Repent

I have to agree with Repent... not all of those horses were failures at stud. Victory gallop, artax (hasnt had enough runners to judge this yet), Cigar is sterile!, Pleasant Tap, Rubiano, Dehere, Betrando is a nice CA stallion (siring Officer, and 27 other stakes winners), Holy Bull (I thought one his offspring won the derby like two years ago..). Timber COuntry has sired a lot of good horses oversea's.

Not very impressed Bold!

yeah,
HBull has proved to be a useful sire.
and Im not talking about Giacomo and Macho Uno b/c, although Grade 1 winners, those are just 2 horses out of hundreds.

HBull's do well on turf when stretched out.
maybe they are just high leveled claimers, but they are still runners.

a failure at stud is a horse that cant get his horses to the track or a stud who simply does not produce winners.
thats not the case for those that I mentioned.



Repent

Victory Gallop A Failure ?
 

I think Victory Gallop has had several Graded Stakes Winner's, so, I am not sure I would call that a failure.:)

well,
and its even more than that.
stakes races and stakes runners are such a small percentage of thoroughbred racing.

I handicap VGallop runners at Calder, Colonial, Beulah, Belmont, Inner Aqueduct, Outer Aqueduct, Arlignton, Fairmont, Emerald, ..................wherever

and they win at every level(claiming, allowance, overnight stakes, graded stakes).

his horses look terrible a lot of times. but they can run and they are competitive.
that makes him an excellent sire in my book.

he is like a poor man's Marias Mon.
marias mon is my favorite sre b/c they win everywhere. sprint, route, dirt, turf, off track, whatever..........they are runners.


Repent

Conquistador Cielo-
You see a lot of his offspring out in Cali. They seem to be allright, especialy in sprint ranks.

Repent brings up a good point about horses even getting to the track... If the Sire is producing what appear to be freakishly talented runners, but that are also freakishly injury prone, is that considered successful? How would you brand Fu Peg so far based on this point?

Sire: Victory Gallop
 

Thanks, Repent ! This is probably one of my all time favorite horses and I always follow his progeny and have won a lot of money on these youngsters. I couldn't believe what I was reading.

its the whole triple crown lunacy that blinds so many fans.
Im not saying thats what BB was doing, but its the most overemphasized part of the game.

Vgallop performed well in the triple crown races.
so ppl want to see his horses do well in the triple crown races and consider him a disappointment when they do not.
its BS.
same for Free House.
he was a very good California sire when he was alive.
so what if they did not run in triple crown races.
its just 3 races, and to be honest, the Preakness and Belmont are 2 of the softer Grade 1 races around at this point.
the Haskell and Travers almost always come up tougher as far as 3Yo Grade 1 races are concerned.



Repent

This list is absurd. It includes many stallions - like Ack Ack, Affirmed, Lord Avie, Conquistador Cielo, Devil's Bag, too many to list - who had good, productive careers as stallions. So they never led the sire lists; a lot of good sires don't . Many of those named figured among the top 10 or 20 during their careers. Horses who sire 9% SWs are not failures. Now Personality, that was a failure.

Victory USA comes to mind but i cant think of another stake horse. Repent has a good point though. Too much emphasis is placed on stake races. victory gallop has produced his share of useful runners.

Pedigree Ann, I agree.
But the poster was trying to put into context how the performance of some in the shed fall short of their performances on the track.

There's also a difference between success at stud as "fashionable" and success at stud unfashionably..

Pleasant Tap is a 'success' if anyone is willing to let the progeny ripen. Through '04, Tap's stats yield 74% runners, 49% winners and 8% stakes winners. At $10,000 a clip, he's the greatest bargain in breeding.. Turf.. Dirt.. routes.. sprints.. Tap Dance City, Tap the Admiral (RIP), PT's Grey Eagle, Pleasant Breeze, Tap to Music.. And he get's his get from ordinary mares.

But the breeding industry is precocious crazy and care little about soundness and longevity, so Pleasant Tap is a "failure" at stud.. Myopic..

Real Quiet has been labeled a total failure as well, but this past year has had two grade one winners. He now stands for 5 grand, in Pennsylvania. His son Midnight Lute won over the waxcovered tires yesterday at Keeneland in the Perryville.
Big difference between commerical failure and failure in general. Most start at such a high stud fee that the expectations are insane to begin with.

Here are some stakes winners by Victory Gallop:
Louisborg, Victorious Ami, Separato, Red Lifesaver, Rousing Victory.

Now that being said....I think BB is correct to say that Victory Gallop has not been a real big success as a sire. Being a sire of decent claimers and the occasional small stakes winner is fine, but as Oracle suggests, it isn't exactly what most people hope for when they send a champion like VG to the shed.

The list on the whole I think is rather good, but I have to take some issue with Affirmed.
The Tin Man
Flawlessly
Affirmed Success
Quiet Resolve
Affluent
Zoman
Peteski

Those were all MULTIPLE G1 winners by Affirmed which makes me wonder just how many MULTIPLE G1 winners you need to sire before you are no longer considered a failure. Add those names to his long list of other graded stakes winners and his success as a broodmare sire.....and I think calling him a failure is a tad inaccurate.

I opened my 2006 stallion register, which is complete to the end of October,2005. Victory Gallop had at that time three crops of racing age, the oldest being 4; from 192 named foals, he had 67% runners (only 11 of 54 2yos), 49% winners (5 of those 11 2yos) and 10 SWs (0 2yo). Obviously, he isn't a sire of early maturing stock. If you consider only his 3 and 4yos, he had 80% runners, 65% winners from foals, and 7% SWs, which are not bad numbers for a very young stud career. No homeruns yet, just a lot of steady singles and doubles.

:rolleyes:

Not one of these horses has close to the pedigree, conformation, and race record of Bernardini. Not even close. Some on your list were not too bad either.

Just to let you know, the mares have a little to do with it too. A horse like Bernardini, mainly because of his pedigree on top and bottom, will attract nothing but the best.

I keep looking at the pedigree of Bernardini and I'm frankly confounded by all these claims of "best pedigree ever".....I see nothing that I don't see in most stakes level thoroughbreds. AP Indy (who I'm not in love with as some "super sire") is known for his pedigree...Seattle Slew atop the great Secretariat broodmare Weekend Surprise. Good enough! But his dam side leaves me less than excited...Cara Rafaela is the daughter of Quiet American (ho hum) so you get the Fappiano (double ho hum), Mr P, RAN line that until this year was considered a kiss of death for the Derby...Oil Fable, Cara's dam out of The Bid (not a rousing success at stud). What's all the fuss?????

Cigar and Precisionist are at the top of the list:rolleyes:

Cara Rafaela placed in 10 graded stakes and is a grade 1 winner. Find me all the grade 1 winning mares that have placed 10x in graded stakes.

How you don't love AP Indy is pretty remarkable. He is a Seattle Slew out of a Secretariat Mare. It looks like he will have sired 2 of the last 4 Horses of the Year.

As I clearly stated, AP Indy's pedigree is unquestionable...I just don't see him yet as a "super sire" like some are claiming, he's too young...when he becomes a highly successful sire of sires, I will re-evaluate, for now, he's an excellent sire...as are many of the sires that appear in the pedigree's of top horses. I'm not in love with Unbridled either...early success does not always translate into anything more! Cara Rafaela was a classy runner but didn't win much, she brought the RAN curse with her...it was broken this year but still...hard to get super excited about RAN in dam's sire line. I will mention a few recent runners (there are many more) who's pedigree I prefer to Bernardini's...Empire Maker...that RAN line in the preferred sire's sire line with Unbridled in place of Quiet American, and the great Reines-de-course Toussaud as the dam, Sinndar and Giant's Causeway.

Not sure how you came up with this.. maybe its not the "best pedigree ever" Bern has one of the best pedigree to ever hit the track. Some of those Personal Ensign babies come to my mind as great, as well as Weekend Surpise babies and a ton of other quality and champion mares (I understand there were tons that were before my time), but to say that Bern doesnt rank up there with those with great pedigree's is not right. Then, you have to consider Bern's conformation and how fluid he runs.

He may not have enough races under his belt when he retires to be an "all time great", but you cant say that he is not the total package. Great breeding, confirmation... he has it all. Oh yea and 3 grade 1 wins and 2 grade 2 wins in 7 starts doesnt hurt either.

Again, don't put words into my mouth...I never said the pedigree was bad, I simply question those claiming it's somehow superior to all others...simply isn't so! I listed three horses with imo better pedigrees, I could if I wanted to take the time probably list a dozen or more. Bernardini's confirmation, movement and racing prowess were NOT the topic here...only his pedigree! I have never said he wasn't a special horse!

There are nearly 70 horses on my list ...

... you cite two ... neither of whom remotely established a male line or had a sizable string of graded stakes winners. They were failures as stallions.

The only name on my original list that I would withdraw is Ack Ack ... whose male line still exists ... albeit by a thread.

I'm defining success by racing performance of their offspring ... and the establishment of a male line. Financial success doesn't count ... because most of that occurs immediaitely on syndication ... and disappears when the kids can't run.

You totally ruined his world. There are people who cannot separate good runners from good lookers.

How are they failures?

None of them even remotely came close to establishing a successful male line ... nor did any of them sire a long string of successful graded stakes winners ... that's how.

Siring allowance winners that you cashed a bet on is not the measure of a succcessful stallion.

Out of nearly 70 horses on the list ... you cite 9 of them as possible exceptions ... yet none of the ones you cite ... without mentioning the 60 others ... has come close to establishing a successful male line ... although it's remotely possible with Bertrando if Officer becomes a success as a stallion ... or has produced a long string of graded stakes winners.

None of their names will likely appear as the male progenitor of future champions.

Just a few more recent runners who have pedigrees I'd prefer to Bernardini:
Fusaichi Pegasus
Aptitude
AP Valentine
Medaglia d'Oro
Saarland
War Emblem
Birdstone...you want a special dam side, his dam, Dear Birdie ranks with Toussaud, a Reines-de-Course and Blue Hen!
Noble Causeway...that one is up for debate perhaps.

Victory Gallop sired a handful of stakes winners ... none of them G1 ... in his first three crops.

It's extremely rare for a stallion's offspring to get better as he gets older ... so it's very, very unlikely that Victory Gallop will ever produce a series of G1 or other graded stakes winners ... nor that any of his sons will become successful stallions.

Stallion success is measured by the quality of the runners they produce (sires of runners)... and whether or not any of their sons become successful sires (sires of sires) ... and/or if they produce a string of daughters who become successful broodmares (sires of broodmares) ...

... not by the number of bets you cash on claiming and allowance races.

Sires of Runners: There is a statistic called the Lifetime Average Earnings Index (Lifetime AEI) ... which provides a good measure of success as a sire of runners. Only stallions with Lifetime AEI's above 3.00 are generally considered to be successful sires of runners. I don't have that figure for all of the stallions I cited ... but I doubt if any of them are anywhere near 3.00. Also important is the percentage of stakes winners ... which should be above 10% ... and as high as 15% or more for the great stallions. None of the stallions I cited comes close to those figures.

Sires of Sires: This becomes evident when a stallions sons go to stud. It's a bit early for some of the more recent horses on my list ... but it's highly doubtful that any of them will produce one or more sons who are success at stud.

Broodmare Sires: Same as Sires of Sires ... but on the female side.

The list is "absurd" you say ... but ...

... of the nearly 70 horses on it ... you cite only 5 possible exceptions ... and provide no data ... none whatsoever ... to support your insipid ... as always ... assertions.

Hey Annie-Phonie ... why don't you cite their Lifetime AEI's ... or their SW% ... or their Broodmare CI's ... or their lists of successful sons at stud?

Huh ... huh ... huh? Or could it be .. once again .. that you're full of crap ... and haven't the slightest idea of what you're saying?

Please don't confuse this discussion with facts ...

... it's the emotional reaction that counts.