WSOP Women's event

Today was the WSOP women's event. By law they must allow men to enter and as usual there were a small number of men that played. As per usual, anytime a man was eliminated there was a big cheer from the room.

Mrs. Slyther says she wouldn't play in a ladies' only event.

The question is: Assuming you had the $1000 to enter, would you play this event?

You know, in Olympic equestrian events men and women compete against each other. That's because it is a test of skill, not athletic ability. The same goes for poker.

I agree Nareed. I believe the idea behind a women's only event is to promote participation by women in poker in general.

Quote: slyther

I agree Nareed. I believe the idea behind a women's only event is to promote participation by women in poker in general.

I like poker. In fact, aside from craps, at the casino I mostly play poker-based games like PGP, 3Cp and VP. But I've never played at poker tables in a casino. I like playing with friends, for money. Had I gone to WoVCon I'd have joined the poker game. The idea of playing with strangers doesn't appeal much to me, be it a tournament or not.

I have a hard time with women's only tournaments for poker, chess, or anything where physical ability has nothing to do with it. However, I don't feel so strongly about it that I would demand to play in such women's events. If I were a woman I would boycott segregated tournaments.

Then again, maybe I don't see things the same way they do. The world of high-level poker is about 90% men, and chess about 95%. Maybe such isolation cries out for an opportunity for female bonding. Maybe they get hit on right and left to the point where it is uncomfortable. Perhaps male poker players are such jackasses, that they need the protection. I'd be interested to hear a female defense or explanation of such segregation.

Quote: Wizard

I'd be interested to hear a female defense or explanation of such segregation.

I think to some extent that's what Nareed has been trying to provide, except that she claims to be in favor of direct competition, rather than defending the women-only events. Plus the real preference was for competition with friends rather than strangers, perhaps without regard to gender, and did not relate to the high-level competition such as you were describing.

Quote: Doc

I think to some extent that's what Nareed has been trying to provide, except that she claims to be in favor of direct competition, rather than defending the women-only events.

Well, yes. In athletic competitions it makes sense to segregate men's and women's sports because men are, on average, stronger physically. In any other type of competition, such segregation makes no sense.

Quote:

Plus the real preference was for competition with friends rather than strangers, perhaps without regard to gender, and did not relate to the high-level competition such as you were describing.

There I was speaking only for myself. I know a lot of women who gamble and more who like card games of some sort, but only one who likes poker.

The thing about friendly games is that there are limits the participants are comfortable with. So they're more social gatherings than competitions. Poker games against strangers are more confrontational. Nothing wrong with that, but unlike other competitions you are taking someone else's money rather than competing for a prize or a goal. Even in a tournament, the money you may win comes from the other participants; the casinos merely allocate it.

Of course the last is also true in any casino game, but there's a difference in that you don't take the money directly from someone else. BTW this may account for the antipathy displayed sometimes by players in games like Pai Gow and PGP when another player decides to bank.

I know at one point it was believed that women were not as good as men at poker. Thus segregated poker tournaments were a bit more popular. Not only did it give women a better chance to enter into poker, but also allowed them to compete within their "own" skill level.

Now, it seems more understood that women are as good as men in poker. Although a woman still hasn't won the main event of the WSOP. But there's probably still some gender bias. Since there are some gyms that exist in which women can work out without men ogling them, perhaps some women might enjoy a women's only tournament just to stay away from men.

Quote: Wizard

I have a hard time with women's only tournaments for poker, chess, or anything where physical ability has nothing to do with it. However, I don't feel so strongly about it that I would demand to play in such women's events. If I were a woman I would boycott segregated tournaments.

Then again, maybe I don't see things the same way they do. The world of high-level poker is about 90% men, and chess about 95%. Maybe such isolation cries out for an opportunity for female bonding. Maybe they get hit on right and left to the point where it is uncomfortable. Perhaps male poker players are such jackasses, that they need the protection. I'd be interested to hear a female defense or explanation of such segregation.

Top level chess players would vehemently disagree. They would argue that the stamina needed to compete for hours on ened in a multi day tournament makes chess a physical as well as mental contest. I side with the Wiz.

Until someone can convince me that having a Penis or a Uterus makes a person any more skilled at Poker than a person who doesn't have said item of anatomy, I think segregated tournaments are silly idea.

I think there's some over-thinking going on. I think slyther is right, it's all about a way to market the game to women. The whole "skill" argument is, I think, a red herring. And, it makes sense, given the 90-10 proportions quoted here. The more people playing, the better for poker. If they've already got the "men" demo, anything they can do to grow the "women" demo makes sense to me.

It's their tournament, they can run it how they want. That doesn't offend me at all.

However ... to the question, "is it a game or a sport?" I like the "skill" aspect. I would call poker a "game" in that men and women have the same "starting point" physically, in other words, size/speed/strength doesn't matter like it does in a "sport." Other games are: darts, bridge, mah johngg, canasta, etc.

This is not to say that poker (or any other game) doesn't require at least some physical prowess ... attention, ability to sit up, see (for the most part), etc. ... or that physically healthy players don't have at least *some* advantage over unhealthy ones. But all those things being equal, I do think that a 90-lb. smoking, sedentary woman and a 220-lb. triathlete have the same starting point at poker, while they wouldn't at, say, biking, basketball, etc.

Why not give the ladies a chance to play without being stared at or hit on by the losers that frequent usually frequent these tournaments ?

Quote: ItsCalledSoccer

a 220-lb. triathlete..

hasn't been in a triathlon in awhile :)

Quote: ItsCalledSoccer

If they've already got the "men" demo, anything they can do to grow the "women" demo makes sense to me.

So where does this slippery slope end? Black only tournament to increase the black demo? LGBTQ and their straight but not narrow friends tournament? Mayan and Aztec only tournament? Jersey Shore only tournament?

Quote: s2dbaker

hasn't been in a triathlon in awhile :)So where does this slippery slope end? Black only tournament to increase the black demo? LGBTQ and their straight but not narrow friends tournament? Mayan and Aztec only tournament? Jersey Shore only tournament?

I don't think it's a slippery slope at all, but rather just a reflection of societal norms. I presented a paper to UNLV MHAers a while back. The topic was price discrimination (in the economic sense), which is not quite the same thing, but it does have some common threads:

Quote: ItsCalledSoccer'sPaper

As the text mentions, discrimination in this context means only differences based on price elasticity characteristics among market segments. The term should not be taken in the criminal sense: gender or race. But Joule and Sheraton do not charge different rates based on those factors. Rather, they charge different rates to women weekenders versus women New Year�s Eve revelers; or Hispanic business travelers versus Hispanic Christmastime guests.

Cultural practices and norms cloud the issue. Women are frequently offered queuing preferences, free admission, or other benefits to nightclubs that men are not offered solely on the basis of their gender. At face value, this would appear to be unlawful. But cultural norms are more powerful than law, even if law can�t or shouldn�t legislate a distinction. Men often extend common courtesy to women in forms such as opening doors and paying for meals. Nightclub privileges are, in some ways, merely an extension of these things. Some, like the plaintiff in the California lawsuit mentioned in the text, may perceive injustice. But in my opinion, cultural norms drive this dynamic and most people don�t take issue, even though it might be technically illegal.

Offering women special privileges to increase a business's bottom line is pretty standard practice, and I think it's helpful to acknowledge that there's a stronger dynamic than Law at work. I don't think a similar situation exists for Af-Ams, LGBTQ, Mayan, etc. ... at least, not an intrinsic one.

That means, if there were no American slavery and no history of mistreatment of Af-Ams and Native-Ams, there would not be "artificial" dynamics in place like affirmative action, special scholarship programs, etc. that try to do something similar. But ... if the tourney organizers wanted to make such discriminations in favor of Af-Ams, LGBTQs, etc., it would be okay with me since, again, it's their tournament ... although I would be more inclined to support, with my disposable income, such tournaments where such discriminations make sense to me, like the women's tournament.

It may not make sense to you, and that's fine ... you don't have to support it with your disposable income. And, if you see a larger societal problem with it, speak up as you are doing. I just don't see a problem with it, and I don't think it's a slippery slope.

Quote: konceptum

Now, it seems more understood that women are as good as men in poker. Although a woman still hasn't won the main event of the WSOP. But there's probably still some gender bias.

I'm not a poker player, but what gender bias do you see in a tournament?

Quote: Calder

I'm not a poker player, but what gender bias do you see in a tournament?

I don't play in tournaments anymore. If you're asking if *I* think there are problems with genders in tournaments, then the answer is no. If you're asking if other people have a problem with mixed genders in tournaments, then I would say, yes, some people do.

I remember playing in one tournament where it was very obvious that one guy hated any women players. He would attack their chip stacks mercilessly. Further, if a woman won a hand, she was 'lucky'. If he won a similar hand, it was due to his 'skill' as a player.

The problem is that there was a time when some men felt that women were not as good at poker as men. I think this was one reason that women may have even avoided playing poker in the first place. It's not much different from the bias in the educational system that convinced girls that they were not suited to be good at math.

The younger generations may not have an issue with women being in poker. I do think that some older men still have the old fashioned value that poker is a man's game, and women just are not as good at it.

Another thing that could be looked into, but again, my experience is limited as I'm not in tournaments anymore. When I was, all the tournaments I entered were run by men. It may be interesting to see if a tournament was organized and run by a woman, if it would be any different. By this, of course, I do mean that the woman would have complete control over all aspects of how the tournament was organized and run, and not be simply following rules by someone higher up. I'm not saying that the tournament would be done any differently, but it may just be interesting to see if a woman has different ideas. Usually, this is the way that things get improved.

Also, I guess one could state that the simple fact that there is a women's event, is proof of a gender bias.

Quote: konceptum

The problem is that there was a time when some men felt that women were not as good at poker as men. I think this was one reason that women may have even avoided playing poker in the first place. It's not much different from the bias in the educational system that convinced girls that they were not suited to be good at math.

On average, men are better at math than women. But 1) the difference isn't that big and 2) the average tells you nothing about a specific individual.

As for poker, I'm not aware of any statistics broken down by gender at all.

Quote: Nareed

On average, men are better at math than women. But 1) the difference isn't that big and 2) the average tells you nothing about a specific individual.

As for poker, I'm not aware of any statistics broken down by gender at all.

The best poker players, with a few exceptions, use very simple math. A woman has a great advantage playing against men in that they almost always underestimate her. And of course some jerks are determined to prove to her poker is a man's game LOL

Quote: buzzpaff

The best poker players, with a few exceptions, use very simple math. A woman has a great advantage playing against men in that they almost always underestimate her. And of course some jerks are determined to prove to her poker is a man's game LOL

There's a classic Jeopardy clip, way back from the 80s, I think, where the contestants were one man and two women. The man picked the Football category saying he's against two women. The ladies split the questions between them, never letting the man even buzz in. So sure, that can happen.

Moments ago, I posted in another thread with a disclaimer that I have never played Pai Gow. Similarly, I have very rarely played poker and never in tournaments, so a similar disclaimer is warranted here.

I suspect that if a man regularly plays poker against women and maintains the attitude that women just can't play the game as well as a man (and plays his hands that way), the result will be that the man will lose a lot of money to women.

Are you lying about your poker career ??

�Never play cards with a man called Doc. Never eat at a place called Mom�s. Never sleep with a woman whose troubles are greater than your own.� Nelson Algren, A Walk on the Wild Side (1956).

Never even heard that quote before. :-)

Ladies tournaments certainly make sense from a casino's standpoint. Many women are more comfortable playing in a tournament without men so they can draw in more people and make more money.

From a personal standpoint I think it is ridiculous. By dividing men and women you are inherently suggesting that they are not equal. Now in most sports there is a reason for this because most females cannot compete with males in games of strength. Having a women's tournament suggests that women cannot compete with men in poker. If I were a woman I would not enter in such a tournament unless I was convinced that this was true.

There are various skills needed to be a good poker player and, generally speaking, controlled, aggressive play is considered the best way. Men tend to be more aggressive than women and so this genetic tendency lends itself well to poker.

Another important part of poker is patience and I believe that women would have the upper hand in that department (generally speaking).

Basically, you can break down poker into so many aspects - aggression, patience, stamina, logic etc and you will find that overall men are better than some and women are better at others. The same goes with something like Indy racing, various skills are used in that sport - a tremendous amount of concentration and stamina is needed but patience would be low down on the list.

Even just driving a car highlights the differences between male and female. Men seem to have a better spacial awareness and are more competent at parking and reversing in general - however, they are very aggressive and inconsiderate at times. The male hormone seems to affect the gas pedal by making it stick to the floor more often :-) Discussions about which sex is the better driver are often divided depending on what traits people consider being more important. Of course, poker sums up all of the skills and you get an end result albeit with some luck involved too.

I have always liked this quote of Doyle Brunson concerning professional poker players and large field tournaments.

�It's like hitting the lottery. We've got more tickets than everybody, but you've still got to hit.�

Quote: Nareed

As for poker, I'm not aware of any statistics broken down by gender at all.

Neither am I, which is why I find it amazing that some men will still think that women are not good at poker. But again, maybe a female winning the WSOP will finally change that sexist attitude.

Quote: Doc

I suspect that if a man regularly plays poker against women and maintains the attitude that women just can't play the game as well as a man (and plays his hands that way), the result will be that the man will lose a lot of money to women.

When I was in high school, I had a sexist attitude. I was the 2nd ranked member on our school's tennis team for boys. I got into a verbal altercation with several members of the girls' tennis team with the ultimate ending being a match between me and the 1st ranked member of the girls' team. I lost. Not only did I lose, but I lost in straight sets. And not only did I lose in straight sets, but I lost in a best of 5 match as opposed to a best of 3 match that girls normally played.

To say I learned a lesson would be putting it mildly.

Quote: iwannaiguana

Now in most sports there is a reason for this because most females cannot compete with males in games of strength.

Quote: Switch

Basically, you can break down poker into so many aspects - aggression, patience, stamina, logic etc and you will find that overall men are better than some and women are better at others. The same goes with something like Indy racing, various skills are used in that sport - a tremendous amount of concentration and stamina is needed but patience would be low down on the list.

Ignoring the amateurs or people just trying to make or prove a point, I am inclined to think that a woman sitting down at the poker table, whether ring game or tournament, is probably going to know what she's getting into, what the game is, how long it will take, what is required, etc, etc.

You don't see many women playing American handegg, but if one decided to do so, she might tend toward being a bit beefy and large. Obviously, she would know what the game is all about, and the physical requirements and tolls it would take on one's body. Again, I'm ignoring someone stupid or just trying to prove something. I'm only considering that person who is serious about playing the game. I would think the same of any sport.

Yes, it's true that most sports are gender segregated. But there was a time when they were racially segregated as well. Perhaps a time will come when the skill of a person's play will greatly outweigh the ability to "slam dunk" or any other similar, purely power-related, sports maneuver.

I knew a female Nose Tackle and a female Wide Reciever (this is British Amateur Hand Egg, so a very different game). The Nose Tackle was poor. The WR had the beating of your average Cornerback in our league, and some of the top ones as well until they wised up and played as physical as if it was a man.

Anyways, one of my buddies is a very sharp poker player, and she always plays in the women-only events when she can... easier pickings, she says (considering the number of times she's cashed, I'd say she's right)

I'm not the type to make a Bucket List, but if I were, playing in the Main Event would be on it. However, these days the tables are dominated by cookie-cutter young guys who make it a career, or kind of butthead type guys who I would avoid in any other situation. So now I would be paying 10 grand to sit at a table for 10 hours a day if I'm lucky with people I wouldn't enjoy being with and praying for someone personable like Daniel Negreanu to sit with even though he could clean me out in a heartbeat just to relieve the tedium.

So I'd probably play in a women's event just for the social aspect. I'd want to have some fun.

Quote: FarFromVegas

So I'd probably play in a women's event just for the social aspect. I'd want to have some fun.

Likewise. That's how I played with friends. The buy-in for the night was ridiculous, around US $4, and no re-buys were allowed. We were playing for fun, with a little money thrown in just so the betting would be taken seriously. So mostly we sat around a table and talked while we played. After the game, we'd go out for a late supper.

Quote: FarFromVegas

I'm not the type to make a Bucket List, but if I were, playing in the Main Event would be on it. However, these days the tables are dominated by cookie-cutter young guys who make it a career, or kind of butthead type guys who I would avoid in any other situation...

I had the opportunity to play the ME a few years ago and I highly reco it.

At one of the WSOP Deepstack events last week I got moved to a table that had 6 women at it. It was among the most enjoyable tables I've ever sat at in terms of friendliness/demeanor, etc

Quote: Switch

Men tend to be more aggressive than women.

You haven't met my mother!