Lawyer Ron returns in St. Louis Derby

Originally Posted by Pedigree Ann

Actually, I agree with you - Roman stole Varola's work and coasted on it for a few years but seems to have lost interest. But I wouldn't call Buckaroo or Apalachee horrible stallions, either.

We're talking about establishing or continuing a male line.

Buckaroo sired exactly two male G1 winners ... and Apalachee sired exactly one. Not quite the type of mass production that dynasties are built on ... or which deserve chef-de-race designation.

Were they horrible? In terms of establishing or continuing a line ... they sure were.

Do you have any other questions ... which don't involve cutting or pasting?

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

We're talking about establishing or continuing a male line.
Buckaroo sired exactly two male G1 winners ... and Apalachee sired exactly one. Not quite the type of mass production that dynasties are built on ... or which deserve chef-de-race designation.
Were they horrible? In terms of establishing or continuing a line ... they sure were.
Do you have any other questions ... which don't involve cutting or pasting?

But establishing a lasting sire line is not what is under discussion. Siring a son who can become a decent sire is what we were talking about in relation with Lawyer Ron. His buyers wouldn't care if every one of his good runners was a filly or a gelding, so long as he can sire runners, like many other grandsons of Danzig have. Furthermore, the chef-de-race distinction has nothing to do with establishing a lasting sire line; it has to do with having a lasting effect on the breed, as a sire of sires or a sire of dams, whatever. READ THE CRITERIA, either Varola's or Roman's.

What cutting and pasting are you talking about? I compose on-line using material from my own database and research materials. Write for a pedigree magazine, don't you know.