Quote:
Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite
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.
|
The successful stallions are those that establish a successful male line. Right. So that lets out many of the leading US sires of the 20th Century - horses like War Admiral, Count Fleet, Round Table, Bull Lea, Blenheim II, et. al.
Siring RUNNERS is the measure of success of a stallion, not this male line obsession you seem to have. And several of the horses on your list did sire many graded SWs, even if you didn't notice. I listed for you once before the G1 winners sired by Chief's Crown and you dismissed them as irrelevant to his success as a sire, a position I found peculiar at best.
You made a great sweeping statement without a scintilla of proof - "these stallions were failures because I say they were." The burden is on you to demonstrate your assertions are true, not on me to refute them. Your audience here may not have the resources to check out what you write, but I do and felt it my responsibility to point out that your statement was your personal assertion and not a statement of the opinion held by most members of the breeding industry.