PLAYER
PROFILE: DAVID "THE THOROUGHBRED MAVINSKI" GUTFREUND
In this interview Dave Gutfreund understates his success in tournament play. That's because he has that strong competitive ingredient, maybe instinct, that works so well for tournament players, and therefore he makes little to-do about his in-the-money, money-making finishes that most of us would be proud of. He's got an engaging personality and in spite of his strong convictions, he's also a good listener, which has made him successful when doing racing programs in the media. In this interview, he'll give us a few vital suggestions about handicapping and tournament play, and a lot about the right attitude for making it in this tough game. One or two of Dave's answers may seem simple at first sight. But he's arrived at these answers from having spent years in the trenches and battled with racing's great complexity, so write them down and keep them as reminders. -- Mark Cramer
C&X: Dave, please tell the C&X readers about your background.
How did you get involved in horse betting? Most folks pick it up from someone
in their family, since the media doesn't help much in passing the artform
from one generation to the next.
D.G.: As a 16-year-old, I got into a rather serious car accident and
was laid up in the hospital for a month in traction.� At the time, I was a
huge sports fanatic (still am) and the only part of the sports page from the
newspaper that I didn't read or know anything about was the horseracing section.�
During that hospital stay, I followed the races on the local replay show ('Today's
Racing') and read Dave Feldman's column.� It was six months later that I finally
got the nerve to go to the track despite my parents telling me what a bad,
low-class place the racetrack was.� That only helped fuel the fire as I was
quite the rebel as a teenager.
Since I had already played in football pools, played cards, bet on golf and bowling matches, going to the track really wasn't a stretch for my personality-type or some of my high school buddies.� Later in my first summer at the track, I discovered Picking Winners by Andy Beyer and Betting Thoroughbreds by Steve Davidowitz and after reading those books that were truly groundbreaking felt that there was method to the madness known as horseracing.
I always had a passion for horse racing and betting since then.
During careers as a commodities trader and as a national sales manager for a children's outerwear company, I continued to follow racing quite seriously and was an Arlington box-holder, a minor horse owner and an occasional contest participant, with a World Cup victory under my belt from the '80s.
I had enough of the garment business in the autumn of '95 and decided that I would take a few months off and figure out what I would do with the rest of my life.� Something good happened to me immediately following my departure from the 'real world': tournament victories, and I haven't 'worked' a real job since.
C&X: Speaking of artform, what percentage of handicapping is science or objective and what percent is art/intuitive?
D.G.: There is definitely a relationship between art and science in successful handicapping.� I would say 50 percent science and 50 percent art, with the science being the necessary fundamentals (having good info) and the art being the know-how (feel) of when to push the envelope or to lay low as well as just making proper decisions in general.
C&X: You are a legend on the tournament circuit. It seems that there's a typical burnout rate for many successful tournament players, probably because of the tremendous intensity. Do you agree, and if so, why?
D.G.: A legend ?� More like a has-been.� Though I won a small contest at Hawthorne this June, it has been much too long since a major tournament win. Pardon the digression.
Sustainable success in handicapping contests really hasn't happened for anyone in a Tiger Woods-type of way.� While I certainly had a moment in the sun in the autumn of� '95 when winning Pick the Ponies at the Las Vegas Hilton and running one-two in the Sam's Town Invitational, there has been no dominant player on the circuit to emerge.
There are some legit reasons for this, including the depth of the fields and the inherent difficulty in winning a tournament.� But it seems that tournament success does not necessarily breed more tournament success, and history might show that it is actually a burden because of the added attention.� And let's face it, this sport is constantly evolving and so are handicapping methodologies.
Regarding 'burnout' rate, to do a tournament 'right' is hard work and to compete on an every-week basis is impossible.� But with the current amount of contests out there, 'burnout' isn't because of too many contests but because of the math involved in playing tourneys.� If you are 'expected' to win 1 out of 100 contests, that means you lose the other 99 times.� After having had tournament success, getting used to not winning can be traumatic and 'accepting' that math difficult.
The more-successful players that I know (Steve Terelak and Mike Labriola, for example) aren't showing any signs of burnout, nor am I.� However, with the added choices on the contest circuit, we are more careful about with tournaments that we play in. I don't see a pattern of burnout but a pattern of a greater number of improved contest players who are better-informed and better-prepared for these competitions.
C&X: Which type of tournament do you prefer, and what strategy would you recommend?
D.G.:� At this point, there is really no format that I prefer to another, though I prefer contests that use real money as opposed to fake-money wagers.� There is already too much info out there regarding contest strategy but at this point I am not giving anything away by saying that you can't win these tournaments with a steady diet of chalk.� I know what I'm about to say sounds simplistic, but here goes: PLAY TO WIN!� You can't win if you don't give yourself a chance to win.� Don't play scared!
C&X: For me, public selecting has been more stressful than my own betting. It seems that few readers seem to have read one's column when he picks a $67 winner, but they always remember when he blanks. As one guy I worked for told me, 'They don't care that you have a flat-bet profit at the end of a meet. They want a winner now.'� Do you have a philosophy for public handicapping? Go for percentage of winners or for a positive ROI, which is not always the same?
D.G.: Play to your audience.� Different products demand different handicapping.� Through July, I was making the CDSN Tip Sheet for Churchill Downs, Inc., on which I made full-card selections for Calder, Ellis and Arlington. On a full-card, race-by-race basis, there will be plenty of chalk and plenty of winners (31 percent in July). However for folks looking for 'spot plays' from around country, looking for 'price' plays is more of the way to go as those folks don't want anything less than 2-1.
Yes, this is a 'what-have-you-done-for-me-lately' business.� As crazy as this sounds, I am my toughest critic.� The pressure that I put on myself to perform is far greater than any pressure from the public or my clientele.
C&X: Why is it that so many good handicappers get bad results? What do you think the greatest weakness is of such good handicappers? And how to overcome that weakness?
D.G.: Because the art/science of handicapping races is a skill unto itself. Putting that skill to use successfully into betting the races is a completely different skill altogether, with the decision-making model being such a key.
Usually the culprit for a failing talented handicapper is some form 'destructive' mental behavior, which can come in many forms.
I would think the best way to overcome that weakness is to be objective and accountable for your own behavior.� Keep notes of your activities and see if patterns emerge.� If a big losing day happens under similar circumstances on multiple occasions, try to do things differently in those same circumstances next time. A good handicapper has to work hard and continue to learn.� When one thinks that they are good and no longer have to improve is when the backward spiral begins. Keep working hard, keep learning, and have a good attitude.� Those are the best ways for good handicappers to remain good handicappers.
C&X: What about adapting to changes? How do you see the game as having changed over the past two decades, and how have you adapted? And in the same line, C&X readers are well aware that the more a handicapping concept is used by the public, the less value it has. Which factor do you think is most overrated today, and which one is least used or understood by the public.
D.G.: Just look at the DRF.� The info available has grown substantially over the past few years and will continue to do so.
Betting on the horses has changed drastically over the years with all of this added info out there.� The key for long-term success will always be making sure that you are receiving 'value' on your wagers.� To receive value, one must see/know something about the animal that isn't obvious to everyone else in a quick glance of the pp's.
Pace analysis and track bias will always be very important handicapping angles, even with added information available.� Those are both subjective angles that can't necessarily be quantified numerically, and a sharp handicapper can get an edge on the public by being in-tune at the track they are following in those categories. Lots of folks look at pace and bias, but not everyone uses or understands those concepts well.
Beyer Speed Figures are the most overrated tool because they are used by anyone with a DRF.� Overrated, yes, but necessary to know nonetheless because of their effect on the odds.
The change that has affected me the most is the incredible spread of simulcasting.� By having such an array of choices, I can be much pickier and stay with the type of races/angles that I prefer.� It seems that I am finding fewer races to play than in recent years.
C&X: I'm sure I must have left out a thing or two. Any parting shots?�
D.G.: While I don't always have the right answer in this department, having a proper mindset/attitude is crucial to success in handicapping horses. Having good and proper information is a given, but there are just so many individual decisions that a handicapper is faced with on daily basis and how one makes those decisions can be the difference between success and failure.
On the other hand, if in a poor state of mind due to outside influences, stay the heck away from a racetrack.
[Editor's note: David Gutfreund has been a contributor to the Youbet.com Weekly Update since December 1998 and is the handicapper for the CDSN Tip Sheet, available free of charge at CDSN racetracks and off-track facilities.� The Thoroughbred Maven still has a few private subscribers to a handicapping service. Mr. Gutfreund can be reached via e-mail with questions or comments at horsemaven@earthlink.net.]
You can subscribe to the C&X report, at the Cynthia Publishing Online Store
Cynthia Publishing • 11054 Ventura Boulevard, Suite
377 • Studio City CA 91604
Voice (323) 876-7325 • Fax (323) 874-1591
info@cynthiapublishing.com