Last post on Ladies event
Yesterday, I posted a long piece on the issues that I have with the ladies event. I linked to two posts by Daniel Negreanu on the other side of the issue as I think that it is important to hear out both sides of anything. I truly believe that healthy, rational debate can only be good for the game. Daniel posted a response to me yesterday which you can read here
Obviously, the first part of the post doesn’t address the arguments I made but is, rather, a personal attack on me. Whether you agree with his attack or not (which you may) that does not invalidate my arguments. I am choosing not to make this personal so I choose not to address that here.
Rather, I will address the points he makes in the second part of the post.
1) More women played in this weekend’s $1K event thus increasing participation.
This is not true. While the second starting day had a slightly higher percentage than average at about 6% the first day was lower because many women were still in the ladies. The average in open events is 3 to 5%. If you look across the whole event that percentage will still be at 3 to 5% across the two starting days.
2) I did not say whether or not I thought the LIPs tour is okay or not. I said that their buy-ins were more at the introductory level. I am actually not sure how I feel about the LIPs and HHPT events. I know I have an issue with a Ladies only Championship event. I am not sure I have an issue with a ladies night at a casino that really does introduce women to the game. I am undecided on this one.
3) I certainly have no issue with a women teaching African American kids to swim. I think that is awesome. And I am not sure how this is germane to the argument. I would have an issue with an African American only gold medal swimming event at the Olympics and I am pretty sure so would everyone else. That would be comparable to the ladies event, not the teaching of black kids to swim.
4) I have no issue, again, with the Kings having a ladies night to get women into hockey. I think it is great that they are trying to get more women into the game. But, again, this has nothing to do with my arguments. In fact, I have no issue with there being a woman’s hockey league at all since men are bigger and stronger than women.
The thing is, on learning issues, I have no problem with women being separated and congregating together to learn. In fact, I teach a ladies only WSOP Academy and the reason why is that women learn better among themselves. This has been proven in many studies. It is why there are girls only schools and no one challenges that. If you can show that women learn better when they are with other women (which you can) then there is a real reason to have a girls or women only learning environment.
I feel that if I am going to champion the cause of getting women to play the open events instead of the ladies event then I should do my part in giving women the tools to do so. So I teach an academy just for women (I also teach many academies open to both sexes). I feel this is putting my money where my mouth is. And I hope the women there get enough confidence in their game out of the process that they feel they can compete with anyone, man or woman. That is my goal anyway.
Creating learning productive environments is real encouragement and is wholly apart of championship events that are segregated.
As for this statement:
“As for needing an event specifically for women sending the message that they are inferior, that’s also not true. There are 55 WSOP events open to both men and women. Women aren’t excluded from playing in the open events and are welcome to play on an open playing field in every single bracelet event.”
This is exactly what I am saying. If there are 55 events open to both sexes where women can compete for bracelets then why on earth do we need one for women only? This statement actually makes my point, in my opinion. There a 55 chances for a bracelet. Why is there a 56th event that is especially just for women to try to get one?
I just want to say, as this will be my last post on the topic, that I am not trying to destroy this event. I think using the term “destroy” is inflammatory. I am not out in front of it every year with picket signs. I am not demanding of the WSOP brass that the event be removed from the schedule. I choose not to play in it. I encourage women to choose the open events over the ladies event. I debate the issue with people and really enjoyed the debates I would have with Jeffrey Pollack on the topic while he was commissioner (he was a big supporter of the ladies event and he is also one of my best friends). Again, I have no issue whatsoever with anyone who chooses to play in the event. If the event exists you have an absolute right to play in it and I appreciate that a lot of women really enjoy this event and look forward to it every year. Choose to play in it, that’s cool. I’ll defend your right to do that vehemently.
Instead of the word “destroy,” a more accurate description would be that I am trying to get people to think about the message that this event is sending about women and their abilities to play poker and how we compare to men in the poker world. Because I really think the event is sending a very bad message and, yes, I think it should go away.
Ask yourself, how would women react if there were a mens only WSOP event?
Hi. Very interesting topic. I just asked my wife (we’re both amateur – but serious – poker players) and interestingly we are split on the topic. I don’t mind the fact that there is a ladies event, I think there are some valid points about some women feeling more comfortable playing, as newbies, among other women. I do understand, and appreciate, your main point as well. I asked my wife if she had the choice of playing in only one event, either the women’s championship, or another open event, which would she choose. She kind of shocked me when she said she would prefer to play in the mixed open…because men are easier to read! lol. Thanks for the fun-to-read debate. I’m also a follower of yours on twitter @steveh369.
Take care, and good luck!
I think Daniel is having a bad WSOP and is taking it out on you.
I also talked to my wife and some friends who play poker. They are mixed on the Ladies Only event.
There is not going to be a solution to make all partys happy IMO.
Good Luck Annie and keep up your promoting of poker outside the poker world, something Daniel doesn’t seem to be doing very well.
Daren K
PHX
Wow this has really become a debate. I am an amateur poker player, and a woman. I don’t enjoy playing in women’s only games for the sole reason that I don’t like the energy. I find women to be tighter players (in my experience) I much prefer to play with men as well.
That aside I understand what you are saying Annie, however I don’t see the harm in having a Ladies only event. I dont’ believe that women and men play the same based on their emotional and mental differences. Just like you said that men and women shouldn’t or can’t compete in physical sports because men are physically larger for the most part. Well maybe there is some truth to that as well when it comes to the emotional and mental part. Maybe some ladie prefer to play with other ladies because they can read them better.
Regardless why don’t they have a men only event going on at the same time – then it will be equal!.LOL
Thanx for the posts I am enjoying following your updates etc during the WSOP!
Good luck!
You guys are missing and avoiding one key point. THE BRACELET DOESN”T COUNT. the event is at the world series of poker but its not a bracelet winning event, again IT DOESN’T COUNT. I think most women who play in it are there for the fun of it. They are not hardcore at all. How about instead of a bracelet, that doesnt count, they’re given a bouquet I think the field would stay the same and all the spoiled men players would leave them alone.
Ms. Duke,
With all due respect, what is the functional difference between “Destroying” an event, and “Having it removed from the schedule”, or having the event “not exist”?
————————————————-
Annie Duke Wrote:
“Before I get into why I think the event should be removed from the schedule, I want to say from the start that I have no disrespect whatsoever for anyone woman who plays in the event. I believe strongly in personal choice and if a fellow woman chooses to participate in the event then more power to her. I get why someone would love playing it. All I hope is that every woman who plays in it is making an informed decision. And If after thinking it through if a woman decides that the upside for her outweighs the downside then that is her personal choice and I totally respect that and will fight for her right to choose to play as long as the event exists.
So let me get into why I think the event should not exist and also answer some of the very common arguments that I hear for it.”
—————————————-
It appears to me at first blush that you have processed some of the information/opinions presented to you, and realize that only a Megalomaniac (an abnormal mental state characterized by delusions of grandeur in which one believes oneself to be a person of great importance, power, fame, or wealth) would wish something to go away or cease to exist because they did not agree with it. As an intelligent, rational being, you couldn’t possibly agree that anything you do not like, or disagree with, should be “removed”, or cease to “exist”. What is the real issue here? I really am trying to understand why so much focus is put on this seemingly harmless event by a few outspoken Pros. I do believe that Mr. Negraneau lost sight of his argument with some of the parallels he attempted to make in his recent post. Is the Ladies only event that reviled among the Poker Illuminati? What is the real reason? My Wife told me that she recognized many top Female Pros playing in the event, so it is certainly not universally despised. If some Pros feel it is beneath them to play with so many amateurs, I’d have to reply that a “top tier” Pro hasn’t won the main event in quite some time. Has the proletariat sullied the sacred Poker grounds? Please enlighten me, I am genuinely interested in the answer. The common folk are the sole source of all of the fame and money that has come with the “Moneymaker” effect. No one seems to be complaining that the Main event winner is now pulling down several Million dollars, instead of a few hundred thousand dollars from a win not that long ago. Should the great unwashed simply drop off their donations to the prize pool, and go back where they belong? As my Momma used to say “Never get too big for your britches and think you are better than everyone, cause none of us came out of our Mommas as “Pros” at anything”. Everyone starts at the bottom, and works hard to achieve their goals. Some people do get a leg up if they have a sibling to show them the way, but that’s just getting lucky, now isn’t it?
What about the seniors event?
He’s right, and you decided not to address the issue of your site saying “Best female poker player in the world” when you say you dont want men and women to be separated in the poker world. It doesn’t make any sense. If you really did, you wouldn’t have that headline up on your site.
The only reason there is a womens event is because there is less female poker players than men. Around 5% of players in some events i looked at are female. There is a dealers event and a over 65′s event. They just have these because there is a smaller field of these players. The Winners gets an unofficial bracelet so why does it matter. Why not hold an all male tournament? There would be no point as the majority of poker players are male. It makes sense to have an all female event. If they want to play it, let them.
I do find it interesting how you took DN’s post to be personal. He made some decent points and some VERY poor ones and instead of choosing to keep the discourse positive you took it personally.
WSOP has a seniors champ, a casino employees champ, a “players” champ, and a “World Champ” in each discipline. Having a ladies champ, is an homage to ladies like the others are to the others. I think it would behoove you either to remove the moniker “Best Ladies Player” or embrace events that would allow you to earn that title.
Your other choice could be to claim “Most Accomplished Woman Player”, “Most Well Known Woman Player”, or “Best Poker Playing Lederer”
You are certainly intelligent and a darn good player, but by fighting the woman’s event you in a way belittle women players by suggesting that winning/playing a tourney without men in it is not worth your time nor should be played. Like men “make the game”.
Finally, men playing a women’s tourney is a joke. They play to mock it not to be “classy”. Showing up in drag (unless you lost a prop bet to Gavin Smith) is not a way to show respect for the people playing.
With all this said, maybe you and Daniel could start a bigtime flame war and debate it on all sorts of TV shows to get more exposure for the game. Otherwise, you two are both great players, very intelligent, and above continuing this debate in a negative manner.
Good luck in WSOP
Annie, why does your website say that you are “The Best Female Poker Player in the World” – how did you achieve such an exalted title? Did you win the 2009 WSOP Ladies Event?
Im with daniel on this. There is no need to put any sort of social issues with this. Its not providng any inferior implications, its provding a fun event for 1000 women.
My guess is a lot of these women are people who are wives/gf of people who are playing in other events, and they just want to try there hand in a fun game.
We dont need to take away a fun event from people who enjoy it.
Annie it’s not fair (and very hypocritical) that you’re not addressing the issue that is at the heart of Daniel’s posts on the subject. How can you rally against female-only events yet make the delineation that you are the Best Female Poker Player in the World?
Do you even understand the hypocrisy?
“With all due respect Ms. Duke, i must take Daniel’s side on this argument. His blog was not a personal attack, he was simply stating what seems to be a contradiction.”
The point of his blog was clearly not to just state what seems to be a contradiction, as he continued to argue in favor of his position. Just wanted to clear that up Lol.
God Annie, just answer Daniel’s question regarding “greatest female poker player in the world”. We all get the arguments that you 2 are debating, BUT we all want to know why do you think you are the greatest female poker player in the world. We can all debate the other issues about the ladies table all night long, and we all get the issues on both sides, so PLEASE, PLEASE, address the one issue that you keep skirting around. You’re making yourself bad by not addressing it. So just answer it.
Respectfully, this is not true.
1) I am a women, a female. I can believe that the event is not legal and still refer to myself as a woman. I can believe women can compete with men and still acknowledge that I am a women. If there is a black senator rallying for equal rights he can still call himself a black senator. On Daniel’s argument, if I said I was a female poker player, period, this would invalidate my argument. Obviously, this is ridiculous. I have countered everyone one of his arguments and his only response is to say I can’t speak because I have a tag line on my site. I would prefer for him to actually point by point respond to the arguments in my posts. I am also happy to agree to disagree. But to claim that all of my arguments are invalid (which they can’t be since two of them are legal arguments so it wouldn’t matter who was arguing them) because I refer to myself as a female poker player, best or otherwise, is illogical and diverting the attention away from the real issue which is Harrah’s had to let the men enter because the event is not legal.
2) I challenge you to find anywhere aside from this one tag line on my site, where I ever refer to myself as the best player at all. The tag on the site is a marketing line for UB to increase SEO. I am sorry if that offends you but you will find nowhere in print that *I* say that I am the best, female or male. Google it.
3) I also challenge you to find anywhere that I say anything personally negative and degrading toward another pro, including DN. I challenge you to find the same for Chris Ferguson, or Phil Hellmuth or my brother or any of the other people who have been the object of his affection in his blogs in the past.
I did. See above.
Your obviously talking a load of crap and can’t accept that Negreanu is right as well as being a far better poker player than you could ever be. Shaun Deebs a knob anyway so he doesnt count
You and Daniel both have strong opinions on this subject. I will admit that your debating skills are very good and the points you raise are all very well thought out and explained. However, you sidestepped the “Best Female Poker Player in the World” question by saying its a UB tagline. You claim you never say it in print but its the first thing on your personal website which I assume you have great control over. If you don’t believe it to be true or believe that men and women should not be segregated in the poker field, isn’t it hyprocritical to have that statement appear on your own website? Since it is not a quote from anyone and appears as a statement by leaving it up, it implies you endorse it.
Has it occurred to you that women are more comfortable at the ladies event because they, or someone they know have been subjected to harassment by men at the tables which Shaun Deeb is perpetuating. If you have respect for women how can you condone this behavior?
The thing about the World Series of Poker is that there are so many events. The Olympics only have a few events. Why can’t 1 of the events be a women’s only event. It’s not like there are only 3 or 4 NLH events. I feel if a women plays in the women’s only event they will feel more comfortable play in an open event. Hey, they may even want to play the Ante up for Africa tournament. Nike has a women only marathons.
A little clarification on my previous comment. The Olympics has only one event for each discipline.
Meaning only one 100 meter dash, one pole vault, one long jump. The World Series of Poker has 5 $1,000 NLH events and 6 $1,500 NLH events. They are the same event, but are on different days. This is why I feel it is ok to have a ladies only event, because there are a lot of other events people can play. It’s not like there is one other $1,000 NLH event men can play.
Annie….
While an all Black event (not African American, because as we all know, not all Africans are Americans!) at the Olympics would be out of the line, using the Olympics as an arguing point is just dumb. You do understand the Olympics are split into MENS, and WOMENS events. Weird. Fight another fight. Enough said.
Because the events are measuring physical ability, which is different among men and women. I said that in the original blog.
I don’t condone harassment. In fact, at the WSOP the rule for abusive language used to just be about f***. A person could not say f*** but could use the c-word without penalty. I, along with others, was instrumental in getting the abusive language rule changed. If we really work to enforce these rules, then women would not feel uncomfortable at the tables because there would be civility and politeness there. Hopefully we can all treat each other well enough that no one feels like they will be abused at any table.
Nick, from your June 15th comment. You said it better than I did. I agree that she should have more control over what UB puts on her blog. Their continual bad publicity makes me wonder why any pro wants to be associated with them, except maybe they hope they’ll clean up their act. So maybe she should help them clean up her blog. Amen to you Nick.
Most people reading both sides of these opinions are missing the background of the origin of the WSOP Ladies event. Jack Effel spoke very elloquently the day of this event when he explained that the rich history and integrity of this event was and will continue to stay in tact and preserved.
In 1977 this event is rumored to have been created to give male players spouses and girlfriends an event to play when the “open” events were predominately male dominated. Two years later the ladies event was growing and evolving as the numbers of women players attended. From 7 players in 1977 to 1054 players in 2010, the proof of sucess cannot be denied by anyone.
Why would “anyone” want to interupt a tradition and opportunity to continually grow poker interest?
Please read my first post on the topic to see what I say about the tradition argument.
I think it’s time to end this. The event will go on. Both sides have made their point. To keep it going is not productive. If it goes on any further it is just character driven.
How can you work to have the ladies event removed from the WSOP schedule and then state: “Choose to play in it, that’s cool. I’ll defend your right to do that vehemently”?
Because as long as the event exists and the WSOP offers it, it is anyone’s right to play in it (man or woman since men have a legal right to play as well). I am not trying to speak for all women here. I am only stating my own opinions about the event and whether it complies with NGC rules, Federal Law and my own stance on women in poker. I do not speak for anyone else and if a woman wants to play in it because she finds it fun or good equity or whatever I will defend her right to do so as long as the event is offered. I would never expect or force any woman to take my stance on the event. I only offer up my opinions as thoughts on whether the event should exist or is good fro poker or women in poker in particular.
Someone had a fantastic idea. Instead of having a Ladies Event have women poker players get together and choose one of the $1K events and storm that. Imagine if 1000 women showed up to play one of the $1K open events? How amazing would that be. There are certainly enough organizations in poker for women that could orchestrate that. I would definitely play that day as well.
I’m not really on any side here but, your comment referring to an all African American swimming event in the Olympics is flawed. I don’t think the ladies event counts as winning a wsop bracelet. So it doesn’t compare. it would be like while the Olympics are going on they had an African American swimming competition to promote swimming within Black community. would you argue that it wouldn’t be good for the sport of swimming?
The WSOP itself counts it as a bracelet. As an example, when the presented the woman who won a the event this year with her bracelet they said that this was only one of 5 bracelets to be won by a French person in the history of the WSOP.
Hello Annie, You have had a successful poker career and that point no one can argue, however, i find it ironic that you also happen to be the sister of a famous and very well respected poker player by the name of Howard L. I read in your bio how “at the encouragment of your brother” you came out to vegas and participated in your first WSOP event something that I am sure gave you confidence and possibly a “head start” if you will when you were first starting out as a rookie tournament player. I am sure he introduced you to his friends and they made you feel comfortable and welcome after all you are Howard L little sister. Perhapes your beggining attempts at poker playing without your brother around made you feel uncomfortable or perhaps at that time unwelcome but you decided you liked the game to much to quit so you decided to move to Vegas to have Howard L get you through the initial jitters and steely eyes of your competitors. Remember back to how you felt with your brother around to kinda watch your back and when he wasnt there back before you moved to Vegas. I would venture that his prescence made a difference in how you were generally accepted by “the men” at the WSOP tables. After all when you first started i dare say female players were far less in numbers. Well here is my arguement why cant you embrace the Ladies Tournament and the WSOP’s decision to have a female only bracelet (which does not count but still would be a huge accomplishment for a female player to win as playing the “big brother role” that alot of female players, unlike yourself, do not have the privledge or advantage of having. Let the ladies have there own tournament why not? You should champion WSOP decision to take on the role of “big brother” and acknowledge that there are women out there that want to play poker for “fun” with other women, with a chance to win some money, but are not interested or confident enough that they want to compete against a bunch of poker pro’s that are going to intimidate them. I dare say your brother stuck his neck out for you when females were not that popular at the tables well i say dont backtrack now that you are an established poker pro and you have fame and money. Sometimes in life people need a “big brother” and someone to watch they’re six. Men that play poker want to compete against the best “whether they are female or male” but often times females feel more comfortable playing poker with females that’s human nature.
In conclusion, as “the best female poker player in the world” you should be standing at the head table welcoming all the female players to the tournament, some of which probably are attending an WSOP event for the first time in they’re life and are scared #$%^less but would really appreciate an encouraging and welcoming voice from a noted professional female player like yourself. Annie in my opinion you are throwing away a chance in a lifetime to make female poker players feel more comfortable around the highly competitive “super arena” of the WSOP and quite possibly discouraging a future female “10,000 main event champion” (but maybe that is what you want in the first place?) from returning to the WSOP entirely. After all if a female pro discourages the idea of a ladies only tourney than maybe they will just abandon the idea of experiencing the WSOP all together. Annie that is not being a leader after all just imagine if all those years ago Howard L did not embrace you but rather discouraged you. What he gave you was a chance.
Instead of a bracelt why don’t the women play for a WSOP Broach. Something that the winners can be proud to wear and that would be recognized that only winners of the ladies tournament would wear making it the same but different than a bracelet (wsop) or a (wsop Europe ring). just a thought .
Annie, this is a tad absurd isn’t it? Why are you putting so much energy into this? If women found it offensive or thought it was bad for women in poker they wouldn’t play in it. You were on the apprentice and did very well, so like in all forms of business the customers will decide what they want. Judging by the turnouts there are a lot of women who like to play in the event. And even if the WSOP does say its a bracelet event, its with a * by it. Nobody with a womens bracelet will get the same kudos/respect as someone winning an open event. This seems like a waste of your time and energy, go put it into your charities instead! Good luck at the tables!
If you don’t believe in gender differences in poker then does this web site advertise you as the best female poker player? Aside from the fact this is not true, you are using gender to separate yourself from men poker players, which is the very thing for which you are railing against the womans event.
Perhaps it should say Annie Duke, the worlds 212,000 best poker player in the world.
Dear Annie,
First off I have to admit that this continuing fued beetween yourself and Daniel is quite entertaining for myself and all the other bored pokerplayers roaming the internet to kill some time – and it would seem that Daniel at the present is winning.
I mean, we can all relate to his description of his first encounter with you (the cup-comments) – and although most of us probably do not display the same semi-silly tendencies when playing live – the fact that an established player would ridicule a newbie is seen as really bad.
I have obviously only read Daniels description of that spot, so perhaps you could elaborate in some matter.
When it comes to the issue of the womens event I can see your arguments, but im not a huge advocate of government imposed rules regardings exes – if a private enterprise decides to have a womens only poker tournament/chess tournament/ wet T-shirt competition/etc it would seem no buisness of mine.
When men decide to dress up in drag as a protest, it reminds me of those guys on summercamp who would look for any excuse to dress as women because of the “proper context”. I have few decent words for such people, with the exception of actual transvestites its just really really silly and semi-pathetic…
On another note I find it courious that you are still associated with UB and not FTP, is there a contractual obligation to be considered here?
Lets face it, Howard is probably the richest poker player out there because of FTP – and a transition might seem proper?
P.s. I mean no offense, as I do not personally know you or ever met you – Im merely reflecting the general impression laid upon me and the guys following NVG on 2 plus 2 in general
.
.
Also, excuse my English – its not my first language
Hello all. As far as I can tell, Annie has good reason to challenge the legality of the ladies only event, which appears to be her main concern. The idea of a “First Timer Tourney”, in place of the ladies event, would surely address both Annies and Daniels p.o.v’s, as I’m sure Daniels PA would now be confident enough to step up to open competition. One question though……would everyone be happy to see a newbie going home with a bracelet? As for Annie expecting us to believe that UB are responsible for the “Best female player” liner, on HER website(do you have no say Annie?)….pull the other one! Might be a good idea to remove that…..
P.S Shaun Deeb had every right to play in the ladies event. If having breasts gains you entry then I will not argue. I judge people by their actions, and not what they try and tell you once they’ve realised their ignorance(which was plain to see) has caused offence. Prop bets on Deebs bra size anyone?
ok everyone it is legal to have a ladies only event a mens only event an employees only event etc… what is the difference…. and no men should not play in that one and if there is mens only event women should not play in that one… They are events … so the agreement should be do we stop all side events celebrity, senior men women.etc.. who cares you are right anniw and Daniel… it is an opinion… If the men are going to try and mock this event then the deal should be you cannot dress up come as a man and determine it that way… if you are mocking it go away if you feel strong about it be careful whatyou ask for… Just an opinion
My brother gave me a chance to play in the open events and taught me well enough to do that. I do embrace female participation in the sport. I teach Ladies only WSOP Academies to encourage women to learn the skills necessary to play in any poker tournament out there.
F**K cup boy, he’s completely out of line on this attack on Annie. Daniel, grow up and let it go.
As a poker pro’s fan period…I think points were missed on both sides here. They’re both trying to promote the game of poker for women. Here’s how:
Annie is trying to promote the fact women need to get into so called “open events” as oppossed to the “ladies event.” It’s a great point. It would be great for the game to see a bigger women based WSOP. It only increases the games popularity to both genders and acceptance among all people worldwide.
Daniel is trying to promote the fact it is a great starter game for women to get a good feel to it all. The “ladies event” in his eyes is a great way for the uncomfortable to get comfortable to move to the next level of the “open events.”
With all the personal attacks aside they both have really valid points. As it might not be beneficial for Annie to play in the ladies event (she has the experience to not benefit from it as it’s not considered a bracelet event), it really would be for a woman’s first event. We all know men play the dominant role in poker (as far as people playing)and for a woman to be ridiculed by nine other men at the table can be very intimidating. Now people will make the point it can happen to anyone wether man or woman. Very true but on more than one occassion I have seen a woman ridiculed about their gender rather than their poker playing ability. As far as women playing more events is a great point by Annie. Her approach is a different way but still a very valid point. It would only help the game of poker.
As far as the personal rants about each other…It definitely is entertaining but doesn’t help either’s case
How do you feel about being nominated in the “Women’s” in Poker Hall of Fame? Will you accept this honor if you win the votes?
My opinion is you are not the BEST female player around but you are a good one. I’d consider quite a few more women players way better. Aside from that good luck on finding your nuts, I’m sure someday they will grow on you. Smile
Annie…
As long as we can get more women in poker…that’s the ultimate goal. I agree with you Annie though…Why do we need a seperate tourny for women? Since there in no physical strength involved in this game…women should play among the men….but many women can be intimadated by men and their actions. Not only have I been a stock broker for 20 years in male domintated business, but I’m a poker player too in a male dominated business. Men hate to lose to women and can be such jerks whens they do..They continue to try and bully me at tables….til they get their a.. kicked again and again…Having a brother that plays poker has nothing to do with your ability to play….he turned you on to the game..PERIOD….But hey..if women feel more comfortable playing in the women’s tournament, let them be…but I believe in equality in playing poker and many other things that are irrevalant here…
Lynn
I wonder if because the WSOP started in the USA if it has to do with anything. We are a democratic society and if there was enough interest to start a ladies only event, I’m the powers that be listened and took action. Could it be that simple?
as a woman and an amateur poker player (who is, in fact, currently scared witless about playing in ANY WSOP tournament, but not because i’m female — because i still have a *lot* to learn!), i find the idea of a ladies tournament demeaning. physical strength plays no part in poker (unless moving a hefty chip stack is a problem, which i’m willing to worry about
it all smacks a bit of the whole “separate but equal” business. of course, no one keeps women out of the Main Event, obviously, so it isn’t a legal issue of any sort the way “separate but equal” was back in the day… but having the ladies tournament gives the appearance that ladies need a tournament with training wheels… which so many women players, like yourself, have proven time and time again that we don’t.
So, I finally took the time to look up this issue, and just read Negreanu’s blog posts. Just another typical arrogant male, I guess. He doesn’t even know how patronizing he is. I keep thinking we are making some sort of cultural progress, but….
He really has an issue with “The Best Female Poker Player in the World” doesn’t he? I always thought it was a bit tongue-in-cheek, myself – what with the other big name UB pro proclaiming himself the best – sort of a ha-ha – maybe DN would feel better if we all awarded him a title, too.
But I swore I was going to stop being such a bitch in public and as he has the crown for *that* locked up, anyway, soooo .. I guess I’ll just hush….
Lis~