I would <3 this! There were so many Ladies Events last year during the WSOP Ladies wknd--why not have one $500 ME qualifier with 1 optional rebuy? I think it would attract some interest, especially with a nice guarantee and/or overlay.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

You should earn a ban for even suggesting this person should get banned for that post. He's absolutely right, **** your political correctness.

Real talk.

All the best anyway ladies.

It is hard for me to understand that there are folks out there who really believe that Renee changed her gender so that she could play on the women's tour. If you read her story, she had struggled with her issues for a long time. She transitioned because it was what she needed to do, and should never have been demonized simply because after the change she wanted to play some tennis again.

There are getting to be way too many posts ITT about sex changes that make it sound like someone would or could just run in and get modified so they could play as a female; it is a long process that I doubt any man would really think was worth the money or time. Not to mention the whole irreversible thing.

It's one thing for a degenerate gambler to be willing to undergo a reversible procedure like getting breast implants in on a prop bet or The Tiltboys to play dress up for a day (can't get their link to work today) to play in a ladies tourney, but does anyone really think that any guy is going to give up his manhood for the rest of his life for a shot at some money? It seems very far fetched to me.

I think that a lot of us would like to see more women playing in the WSOP ME and most other events as well, and there may be some merit to using incentives to increase participation. I agree with those who say that getting more women brought in though deals and satellites makes much more sense than increasing the payout though a huge bonus.

Shauna

What I fail to understand is why do people think the ME, with a huge buyin is the place to start this.

Give them WSOP Circuit vouchers, not ME vouchers. Get the movement started locally and then go on ESPN in the ME ... everyone seems to think (in this topic) that the only tournament in the world that could possibly influence the percentage of women playing poker is the WSOP ME. That's absolutely false. It's probably quite the opposite.

The main event is the most popular and publicized poker tournament in the world, so it makes sense that people are talking about it.

No other poker tournament gets the amount of TV coverage as the main and for many, many people, this is their only and first exposure to poker. This event has such far-reaching influence that it does makes sense to think that evening out the numbers in the main would influence the general poker playing population overall.

Women already face no social or biological disadvantage in poker. The only thing that will work short of explicitly giving female players something better than equality is to simply buy/sponsor more of them in and let the numbers play it out. 5% of the field going in is going to be hard pressed to make 1/10th of 1% too often, assuming the "dead money proportion" is about the same as it is for men.

Giving $10 million to the highest finishing female, however, might make it correct EV for a number of people to train their non-poker-playing SOs with a sufficiently detailed "Sklansky System". $10k to outlast 100 women to win $10 million, that looks like a nice overlay.

The fact that such lunacy would be mathematically correct, or Shaun Deeb getting a sex change, etc., suggests that this is a solution looking for a problem. Women are at no biological disadvantage and no social disadvantage at poker. They play as complete equals, or I suppose I should say they WOULD if we ever backed off and let them play as equals. Convince poker culture to treat them as equals, convince the poker media and the poker marketers to stop focusing so rabidly on the gender of female poker players (but good luck with that), ensure no discrimination or hostility occurs to any female player, and if you really want more females in poker, just buy them in and let the chips fall where they may.

Know what will get women into the game? Treating them with respect, not condescension.

And yet, ironically, all I was doing was pointing out the absurdity (Not to mention the illegality) of deliberately discriminating against people on the basis of sex, or race

If you want to promote, then promote to women. You could

i) Give a red rose to all entrants. They can pick it up at the start, or when they get knocked out
ii) Have sponsors like spas, massage vouchers, and the like
iii) Give all the ladies a ''terminator button". When one is knocked out, then you get a grand. Note that the prize pool would be diminished (or, more correctly, flattened) slightly, but this is always the case in knockout or terminator pools
iv) Fashion parades of men and womens fashions
Just look at what the horse racing industry does to bring in the ladies.

Giveaways. I note that previously, many women poker players who are on here (who lets face it, would prolly be above 90-95% of the skill level of the average person who randomly bought a seat) felt that things like lip balm giveaways were simply kitch, and detracted from what they wanted to do, which was to play for some cash.

I would suggest a few other things (that would cost nothing ) to make the tables more lady friendly.

i) Read everyone a few rules to start with. Literally spell out- Manners, please and thank you are very much appreciated. Swearing, anything above, say, a **** would be a ten minute time out. Make it say 20 and 40 minutes for the fbomb and c bomb. I have played many a game, and the problem is that the average ******ed gambler is male, young, drinks booze and thinks that the whole table loooooves his ribald jokes and foul language after he has knocked back a few. If ALL tables were read a few simple rules, and they were enforced, then the silent 80% majority will be much happier. Nothing worse than a loudmouth spoiling what should be fun.

ii) a couple of free drinks. You could have one for the guys, and two for the ladies. Give the guys a coupon, the ladies two. One coupon gets you either a house beer, or two soft drinks. By giving everyone a choice, you can actually encourage people NOT to drink alcohol

iii) make sure the coffee shop has some food that isnt just meat pies and chips drowned in gravy

I have sat down in a free poker game at the local pub, where a guy recently out of prison, third hand in, tries to blow a calling station off with huge bets. Being a station, she calls down, then is subjected to a tirade of f and c bombs. How does that make the table feel? Even after a couple of us spoke up, well, lets just say it does leave a downer on the evening

The problem i have is that once one goes above basic promotion and either has an

allocation of seats for females
extra prize money for the ladies
discounts on entrance fees for ladies,

then, imho you have gone well past promotion to the ladies, and far, far, far into the discrimination based on sex. Which should be wrong, and not to be encouraged.

I know that virtually all of the women reading this have suffered the indignity of men, probably on multiple levels throughout their lives.

Simple fact is that the majority of gamblers are men. Thus, the vast majority of winning gamblers THIS YEAR will be men, and in 50 years time, the vast majority of winning gamblers will still be men

But, the vast majority of gamblers who lose their jobs, their lives, and their self respect, before they embezzle their employer and get sent to jail, will be men. And in 50 years time, the vast majority of white collar crime related to gambling will still be perpertrated by men

Didnt any ladies consider that effectively, what we do, is, at the very least, on the fringes of society? You sit down with a bunch of others, often, but not always, the degens, with money that a lot of the time, people cant afford to lose, and then, (after you all donate a large proportion of it to the government, and the worldwide conglomerate of casinos), and basically try to take it off everyone else, before they take it off you. Dress it up however you like, but its really a confrontational, dog eat dog game, which most men, and a huge proportion of women find totally lacking in any tact and grace.

Thats a real reason why you really shouldnt be trying to encourage women (or anyone else really) into poker. Many people can have it as a fling, lose a few dollars, just like a hobby. Many more will lose their shirt, then their car, house, marriage, freedom. And you ladies want to ENCOURAGE more women into poker?

Still, i stand by my comment that the vaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaast majority of women on the face of the planet would be far too smart to throw 10k cash away on a poker seat, now wouldnt they?

Mr. Omaha:

You went around the moon to get to Pittsburgh, (Wow! Who am I to make a charge like that?), but I see your point(s).

I stand by an observation Katie made earlier. Like it or not, the WSOP Main Event is poker's premier event - the Super Bowl, the World Series, the Indy 500, and the Kentucky Derby [of poker] all rolled into one. No other poker event gets the attention (or the limelight) that is afforded the Main Event. While most of the other televised poker events have been cancelled or dropped from American television, the Main Event remains. Paul Harris's plaintive question still rings true: Why is there only three to four percent female participation in such a prestigious [televised] competition?

My contention is that poker risks suffering the same fate as chess - becoming a lower-tier "sport" that is mostly ignored by the mainstream media because the premier event is noted for final tables that are consistently occupied by twenty-year-old males wearing hoodies. (A top television producer like Steve Lipscomb might use the word "dull" to describe this phenomenon.) If poker, (especially televised poker), doesn't start resembling more of mainstream society, it will gradually sink back to what it was like prior to the Moneymaker boom. In some ways, it seems as if that is already happening. Getting more women involved in poker would hopefully reverse - or at least halt - this backward decline.

Former DJ

bah, I can't answer omaha's post in good conscience, because even though I had a reply all typed up, it just made me realize how different I am than other women and how out of touch I am with what women want. To me, omaha's post is pretty words hiding inherent sexism. I guess most women out there love shopping and spas and roses and blush at any language stronger than the word "darn", and they need protecting and coddling.

I am not that woman. So my comments wouldn't be representative, I guess. And I'm not who we're trying to attract...I wear a hoodie, too, but it's because i get cold and don't feel the need to show off my cleavage (not that I really have any)

If you wanna give me free stuff, give me free money, give me free poker coaching, give me a way to win free buyins to other tourneys, gift certificates for poker books, etc.

I still like the women's only satellite idea the best, tbh.

You are, unfortunately, correct. When poker marketers talk about "bringing more women into the game", they are not trying to attract female players that look and act like barely effete men, they want hot chicks, "traditionally feminine" women, belles and dames, etc. The type that would appreciate being pandered to in the way omaha is proposing. That's why they manufacture this problem that isn't a problem, just to manufacture a solution that would enable poker marketers to bust out (no pun intended) the "NEW AND IMPROVED! NOW WITH 33% BIGGER BOOBS!" billboards.

I don't think omaha is being sexist, I think he is describing a strategy in which tournament directors (who are sexist) could effectively pander to women. But that's just my opinion.

-------

Because for every 1 woman that has the drive and dedication to play the game at the highest levels, there are 24 to 33 men? When women have greater access to the game than men due to semi-segregation, can compete with no biological disadvantage, and if anything, a slight social advantage (as many women have testified to elsewhere in this forum), then what other answer makes sense?

Chess is completely byzantine to the average person. A non-trivial amount of the time, if a chess game is going on in a mainstream movie or TV show, the board will be set up in a completely illogical position, or the board will be sideways (each player's bottom right square is white), or there will be two bishops on the same color square, etc... and it's never given a second thought.

The fate of chess has absolutely nothing to do with its demographic makeup and everything to do with it being inscrutable to the casual viewer.

Interesting post moose.

Your comments about chess are so true. Boards can be set up almost randomly. Its truly stupid that someone could bankroll a film for a few million and yet not research even a single game of chess with six positions throughout that occured in an actual game. Lol at the double bishop scenario.

Very interesting and true comments about what the marketers want. I truly believe your comment that they really want what sells, and we all know what that is, good looking young ladies with a nice rack who can smile seductively for the cameras. If, in the next world series, there was the female equivalent of myself, a below average in attractiveness 40 year old who doesnt like to smile a lot and hides from mobile phone cameras, stutters and would die on film was to win, would the marketers like it? Ummm, no, but thats probably why Elle Macpherson and Tyra Banks are multimillionairs and i am not.

If there are 30 men who play poker at the highest levels for every female (not my stat, but sounds about right so lets run with it!), the question I would be interested in is what is the female male distribution at different skill levels

At the lowest levels, lets look at the free poker friday nights at the pub, or the 10 or 20 dollar pub tourneys. I would estimate (though i havent played them for 5 years or so), that the ratio may be 15 or 20 to one. One lady every three or four tables seemed about average.

Maybe the relative stats for females playing are the same within all skill levels, from hopeless to average to reg grinder to superstar?

If we looked at stats for say boxers or cage fighters, contract killers fighter pilots are all predominantly male.

I think that there are careers where caring, kindness sharing and compassion are needed (teaching, nursing, elderly carers, etc), and others where brute force, aggression, and the very real possibility of significant damage (be it physical or in pokers case, financial).

Just a mars and venus thing imho.

The thing is, we have to define what we really want.

Just "more women in the ME"? OK, go with the flowers and bunnies style of approach.

A woman who can WIN the ME? That's gonna take something different. That's going to take marketing and appealing to the women who are on this forum, or who are already playing poker. People like me, who would MUCH prefer more ways to enter, or something poker related to entice us. Spa days are nice, but I can get those anywhere. A couple hours coaching would be MUCH more appealing to someone like me, and much more unique.

how is a promotion available to only one sex different than discrimination?

sigh. Men (I am 99% certain you are a man... but in the case of that one percent, my apologies) who have absolutely no idea about what constitutes discrimination are very, very tiresome.

enldess bs like this comes up every time the subject of women's events or women's promotions arise. so sick of it. Guys have virtually every advantage in poker. Ideas to promote increased involvement by women in the field of poker are not discriminatory, they are efforts to right a historical and institutional shortcomings that in effect DISCRIMINATES AGAINST WOMEN.

I'm not sure what the protocols of this forum are, but I personally believe that if guys want to bitch and moan about how bad they have it and how much they are discriminated against, they can do it in any other forum on this site. But they should not be allowed to do it here.

there is nothing overtly systematic in poker that discriminates against women. there are no policies, no requirements, no disadvantages that you and other women have in the structure that makes up a poker tournament or cash game. the discrimination that you face (as do gay men/transexuals/etc.) is purely social. if you want to get more women into poker, you need to fix the societal notions about things like poker (chess, competitive sports, and the like) not being "feminine" enough for most women to partake in. you have to fix the same kinds of notions that make 15 year old girls say things like "ew, only nerdy boys play poker" and 15 year old boys say "haha, girls can't play sports; they're too weak."

Men are welcome to participate in the discussions we have.
Most of the time the discussion is polite and productive. They are kept on shorter leashes in this forum though

I think it's important to have both sides of the issues represented, as long as it is done in a constructive, respectful and non-trollish manner. I'm really happy to say that we have kind of developed a 'spirit of TWSS' which pretty much embodies the description I just gave and we have had some extremely productive threads with participation from well known 2+2 users outside of TWSS. I think they pretty much know that when they step in here, they need to be on their best behavior. Let's try to make sure this continues

i'm still having a hard time grasping the difference. could you elaborate? how do you define discrimination? what constitutes discrimination? you seem very well informed and it'd be nice to continue this conversation. i think everyone will get more out of it if we can clarify the semantics by defining a few terms like discrimination and equality.

i'm not sure what bitching and moaning you're referring to. was it a previous poster? i didn't read the entire thread. anyway, i agree! it would be nice if there wasn't so much bitching and moaning.

IMO running a women's only satellite is no different than running a ladies' event. It can be run alongside other events and it's all the women's money going into the prize pool, so it's really no different than any other satellite and not preferential in any way. Certainly there are plenty of other satellites available for men to play in if they want to try and win a seat as well, so it doesn't have to come at the expense of a male player, but you still guarantee higher participation by women by offering them. As I see it, you can offer one without taking anything away from the others and actually both benefit as a result if increased opportunities for women to participate lead to higher overall participation.

However, men are perfectly entitled to enter ladies only events.

I'm not entirely sure I have an opinion on this one way or another and I'm in a bit of a mood, so, maybe I'll sleep on it.

True, and I suppose it's possible that a man could end up winning the seats as well, but really I'm just speculating on the best way to answer the OP's question, not debating whether it should be done. However, I think we can all agree that growth of the game is a good thing (except for omaha, who apparently thinks that poker should be discouraged as much as possible instead of promoted for fear we all become broke and homeless) and ignoring such a large potential player pool isn't probably smart.

Ah, I agree, wasn't meaning to sound argumentative, was just ponderousing aloud I think.

OK Doctor, I'll give you an example - in order to clarify your semantics. When a "commentator" at the Partouche Poker Tour, after calling a bet/raise by Vanessa Selbst a "gay raise" (which is supposedly a commonly used British "expression") follows this up by referring to Vanessa as an <expletive deleted> lesbian, that might be discrimination. (This is being discussed in detail in a heated thread over in NVG.)

In a very backhanded way it may also be a sign of fear and respect for Vanessa's tough, fearless and intimidating style of play at the poker table. When men (or anybody else for that matter) lash out at her like that, what it really shows is that her style of play is unnerving other players - especially a certain type of male player. One only resorts to that kind of taunting when one is being beaten by a better opponent. It's a crude sign of frustration.

I still think Vanessa Selbst could be the first woman to win the Main Event. But it's clear that she will have to overcome a lot more than just dealing with the fall of the cards. It's not the first time this kind of thing has happened in sports. Billie Jean King faced similar obstacles in tennis.

Former DJ

so, without the addition of the "****ing lesbian" part, which i don't think many people would disagree is disrespectful, wouldn't you suggest that a better way to combat the use of a well-established, non-intentionally offensive term would be to confront the person with a reserved, but forceful statement that you'd like the term to be discontinued? i seriously doubt that his use of "gay raise/bet" had any other intent than to describe a play made than to actually deride her or any other homosexual player. wouldn't acting like a reasonable human being be a better strategy than flying off the handle?

selbst's game is well respected and taken very seriously by the majority of the poker world. there aren't many people that don't respect her game and would be more than happy to admire her as not only a female or lesbian player, but as a damn good poker player, period, if she just stopped acting like an ******* so often.

That is really rich airwave16.

For the last 22 years, ever since he won the WSOP Main Event in 1989, Phil Hellmuth Jr., (the self proclaimed "poker brat"), has routinely belittled opponents at the poker table calling them "idiots," "morons," "clueless idiots," and even classic putdowns like: "You don't even know how to spell poker!" About the only thing positive Phil manages to utter is constantly reminding everybody of how many bracelets he has - eleven in case anyone hasn't heard - and that he is the greatest tournament hold 'em player in the world. (He has somehow managed to overlook one of his most endearing qualities: Reminding everyone of his limitless humility.)

Mr. Hellmuth is notorious for his verbal diarrhea yet nobody that I'm aware of has called on Phil Hellmuth Jr. to "just stop acting like an ******* so often." Looks like those kind of rebukes are reserved only for Vanessa Selbst. You make an excellent point sir.

Former DJ