
05-25-2008, 06:42 PM
|
Dee Tee Stables
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: The Natural State
Posts: 29,942
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedigree Ann
I'm tired of hearing this. Secretariat was a darn good stallion; he sired 1) a Horse of the Year (Lady's Secret) 2) a Preakness/Belmont winner (Risen Star) 3) a Travers/Hopeful/Vosburg winner (General Assembly), 4) a Melbourne Cup winner (Kingston Rule), plus a good number of graded/group winners. As this recital indicates, Big Red was a stamina sire, however during his early stud career Claibourne and partners mated him as though he were a typical Bold Ruler son, with stamina mares. Only after his first 2yos got to the track did they realize their mistake and start to give him mares with a bit more speed (like Great Lady M.).
Affirmed was never expected to excell at stud by the Blood Grass elite breeders; he was by Exclusive Native, who was okay but not top drawer, while the damside was distinctly blue-collar. He was never given the top level mares, yet he still sired 1) a multiple US champion (Flawlessly), 2) a Canadian Triple Crown winner (Peteski), 3) classic winners (Trusted Partner, Bint Pasha), and numerous group/graded winners, including everyone's favorite, The Tin Dude. He, too, tended to produce horses who didn't excell at 2 on dirt tracks - most were better at 3 or older and on turf. That was a truly strange breeding result - a horse who never ran on turf and whose parents and grandparents never ran on turf should become an excellent sire of turf horses. Who can figure that one out?
|
he said they were disappointments, not failures. i would agree with that assessment. considering the talent those horses possessed, and the books of mares they were sent, i would say they were definitely disappointments, altho they did manage to get a few good horses. but the same could be said about a great many sires, who occasionally catch lightening in a bottle.
|