Country Star

[cmorioles]

I'll be shocked if she is a star on dirt. She doesn't run like a dirt horse. Now, there is a lot of money to be made winning on synthetic and turf, nothing wrong with that. But the chances she is even equally as good on dirt as she is on those surfaces is minimal at best.

[alysheba4]

ummmm o.k.

[blackthroatedwind]

What's confusing? Please provide the list of horses that have been exceptionally talented on both turf and dirt in the past.

Country Star showed in her debut that she was very talented on grass. In her subsequent starts she has run well ( OK in the Alcibiades and well on Sunday ) on artificial surfaces that are often very kind to turf horses. Now, dirt horses also often handle the cushion, so she may well like dirt too, but history says her excellence is likely to only encompass one real surface.

[blackthroatedwind]

I didn't say there were no horses....just not that many. The odds are substantially against it and at a short price I will take my chances against Country Star in her dirt debut....especially if it's a tough race.

[Riot]

Country Star is by Empire Maker (no dirt slouch) - Unbridled - Fappiano - Mr. Prospector (dirt sire) combined with Le Fabuleux (France). Toussauds family has turf influence through El Gran Senor, but she produced both G1's Empire Maker and Chester House. Dams side, Seattle Slew over a full brother of Mr. Prospector? Plenty of dirt in that pedigree.

As far as her running style, I'll take powerful, long, low strides as perfect for a dirt horse anytime. She looks alot like her sire in that respect.

We'll see. I hope she does turn out to be something amazing.

As an aside, Barbaro started on the turf, and against the conventional thought of his pedigree, did just fine on dirt. With a different running style than Country Star.

Yeah I hope to see her run alot. And one thing is for sure, Frankel likes to run them alot.

Oh sheesh who the hell am I trying to kid? Nevermind.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'll be shocked if she is a star on dirt. She doesn't run like a dirt horse. Now, there is a lot of money to be made winning on synthetic and turf, nothing wrong with that. But the chances she is even equally as good on dirt as she is on those surfaces is minimal at best.

This is intriguing, as I'm really clueless when it come picking out these little nuances. Question?

I've looked at CS' races very closely, focusing, in particular, on the way she finishes ---is she straight, does she stay on the correct lead, when under pressure, etc. There's been vast improvement from race to race. So much so, that I wouldn't put much past this filly --though I could be wrong.

Now, since you're able to posit that this horse won't handle the dirt, I wonder what your opinion was/is concering the dirt ability of Mushka and Backseat Rhythm; the latter finishing ahead of CS on the turf; and the former behind her; both getting worse trips than CS. When watching that race, or looking at your figures for that race, were you able to project that BR would run a good 2nd behind Indian Blessing in the Frizette and that Mushka would win the Demoiselle in (perfect trip) visually impressive fashion?
Of course, you might not think much of these two and when opining that CS won't be very good on the dirt, you level exceeds that of these two presently.

Additionally, what were your thoughts about Lear's Princess (poly, turf, dirt)? Did you think she would handle the dirt and, if so, what was the difference in her running style?

[blackthroatedwind]

Backstreet Rhythm had already demonstrated she was OK on the dirt. I realize her races may not look good on paper but there were extenuating circumstances and what she really needed was more distance ( I did make her a hidden horse on Playing to Win off her Saratoga races ). However, her suck up second in the Frizette was not nearly as good as her turf race and while I can understand them trying dirt stakes for obvious reasons I think, based on her maiden win, her real future lies on the lawn.

As for Mushka, she ran much better on the dirt ( albeit a wet track ) in her maiden win than her turf debut and as you pointed out she benefited from a great setup in winning the Demoiselle ( though she still ran OK ). Just because two OK dirt horses happened to run in the turf maiden race of Country Star's hardly increases the likelihood that she's a turf horse. I can't understand your logic in that....if that's what you're implying.

I will say that Lear's Princess, however, is a great example of a horse that is talented on all surfaces. She is much more the exception than the rule.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Just because two OK dirt horses happened to run in the turf maiden race of Country Star's hardly increases the likelihood that she's a turf horse. I can't understand your logic in that....if that's what you're implying.

You lost me. All I'm trying to understand is how one can determine from turf and poly efforts that a horse won't be as good on the dirt.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

You lost me. All I'm trying to understand is how one can determine from turf and poly efforts that a horse won't be as good on the dirt.

I understand....I was just confused.

CJ is capable of doing anything. I am capable of little.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'll be shocked if she is a star on dirt. She doesn't run like a dirt horse. Now, there is a lot of money to be made winning on synthetic and turf, nothing wrong with that. But the chances she is even equally as good on dirt as she is on those surfaces is minimal at best.

Can you tell me, and I really am interested not trying to be a wise-ass, what makes you think she does not run like a dirt horse?

NT