Champions Who Failed As Stallions

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

The basic rule of thumb for measuring success of sires of runners is ... 10% stakes winners AND a Lifetime AEI of 3.00 or more.

That combination indicates both quantity and quality. Having one without the other makes the success more marginal.

The greatest stallions had 20% stakes winners AND 5.00+ AEI. Bold Ruler had the all-time best numbers of 24% and 7.78..

Aaah. Finally, you defined what you term successful, aside from that male line thing. So you are talking about elite stallions, the top 0.5% of the breed. The Northern Dancers, Storm Cats and Mr. Prospectors. Most people define successful more leniently - since the breed average for SWs is just under 3%, the accepted figure for a good sire is 6% SWs, anything above is doing well.

I find AEI without the inclusion of a measure of the mares' quality can be deceiving. For instance, from a 2006 stallion register, Grindstone has an AEI of 1.53 but a CI (Comparable Index for his mares produce from other matings) of 1.90, while Indian Charlie has an AEI of 1.86 and a CI of 1.46. Indian Charlie's offspring from his mares are generally better than their other produce, while for Grindstone it is the other way around. Storm Cat's figures are identical - his AEI and CI are both 3.72; his mares' offspring from other matings are just as good as their Storm Cats. This to me is eye-opening.