I'm not properly qualified to get into a technical debate on this, but from my affiliation with several professional race-engine builders I do know for a fact that they prefer old "seasoned" blocks for building professional drag racing motors. I believe that the "creep" referred to by jfraser is absolutely valid and factual, BUT.... that creep is rather irrelevent compared to the negatives attributed to building with a new unseasoned block. In short, the positives outweigh the negatives. In most cases, a block will wear out to the point of uselessness in the bores before it fails due to fatigue. Most blocks that fail under fatigue, that I see, either:
1. Were so old and used that the bores were "sleeved" in order to keep the block in service, hence the fatigue factor had enough time and use to become the weak link, or...
2. The block had a casting defect that over however much time, became critical. Or...
3. The engine had been overheated, which will alter and accellerate the process..
As with most processes in forging or casting metals into parts, you're always faced with structural defects due to environmental contamination, material temperature and controls, and hundreds of other critical factors. It's not a perfect science, otherwise race cars would never break!!
But, as a GENERAL RULE, race engine builders love to see an engine block that is still stock-bore, but has 20-30K miles under its belt. They don't generally talk very scientifically, they simply say that "it's seasoned", and that it's "stable" and won't move around and alter exacting tolerances after several heat soaks. Of course, they still break blocks, but that has more to do with the rpm and horsepower demands they put on the blocks, be it old or new.
I think that everybody is correct here, it's a matter of getting all the great info into proper context.