Is there an Industry Standard that we should all go by?

Or is it just a term that over the years has been used loosely to service whatever purpose that you want to use it for?

e.g. I remember a stud ad years ago, PRE-FROZEN SEMEN, that such and such a sire was NOW PROVEN. It wasn't about siring a winner, it meant that he was able to actually sire a litter of pups

I would like to get people's views on what constitutes PROVEN in their eyes?

Its not a witch hunt, because the word can mean different things to different people and I am just interested to see what it does mean to the readers here on the Forum

There is no right or wrong answer

But my purpose is to try and get some consensus on what we are talking about when we say something is PROVEN and possibly develop a standard we can all go by when we start talking about certain sires or dams etc

See how we go

Myself being a prime example. Bernardo had 2 litters racing but they contained Dr Tucker, Aussie Secret, gold driller so after 2 litters because I already had one eye on Bernardo I'd seen enough

Yet Flying Ricciardo has had 35 individual winners and 80 odd winners overall but because all our broodies come from Barcia bale lines he's not on my radar and without looking it up I wouldn't have known how good he's started

Another example is Shima shine and Tommy Shelby have started phenomenal and currently are very much on par with each other, but I'd taken a lot more notice of Tommy Shelby barring a couple of Shima shine pups

Probably if they're not super supported a city winner makes them proven, but if they've had every opportunity and a handful of successful broodies they probably need a track record breaker or group winner to be considered proven

Zero, however I do like to see x path being a proven one, meaning the combination top and bottom half of the ped in x worked previously with at least around a handful of quality country or city racers.

Thx for the topic.

Lol well said Ryan ! You make me laugh

We race under 3 grades , city being the pinnacle . When he throws a chaser that wins at this highest grade available ! He has officially thrown at a level of quality that you would only describe as .. proven .

Same for a brood/dam , thats why when advertising pups , its all thats needed to be said

Regardless of flaws in offspring later found or the flows of ups and downs in constant winners or group wins , is irrelevant.

This is all decided over time to each individuals eye .

Ps .If your happy to see a stud throw 50 winners at provincial level over 400 mtr and say he throws winners and is proven , you simply have a different level of personal quality

That's highly amusing because I seen you say for example. Bekim Bale is a "proven" brood sire who when put to particular sires produces percentages higher than the average. Even when you haven't used the exact term proven, there is the inference.

[Edited Admin]

[Edited Admin]

I can only repeat this comment.

If you don't like the term PROVEN, try shown or demonstrated.

I've seen plenty of sires go up in fee prematurely and studmasters shoot themselves in the foot because the only person that considers them proven is the studmaster, not breeders

The only issue with zambora brockie is getting a straw. Rare as hens teeth now

Might be safer/more likely to get a son of zambora brockie

Any examples?