James McManus made light of this in his epic book "Positively Fifth Street," but years ago Amarillo "Slim" Preston allegedly opened his mouth and inserted his foot by declaring that a woman would "never" win the WSOP Main Event. (According to McManus, Slim supposedly declared that he would take a knife and slit his throat if a woman ever won the Main Event. There's even a photograph of Slim standing behind Kathy Liebert mockingly holding a large carving knife to his throat in "Fifth Street".) To the best of my knowledge, Barbara Enright is the closest lady poker player to (nearly) grab the brass ring - she made the final table and finished fifth in the 1995 WSOP Main Event. To this day, no lady poker player has come closer to the final table than Barbara did in 1995.

I have actually given this a great deal of thought as I'm convinced that the first female poker player to win the Main Event will not only achieve a great personal victory, but such a triumph will reignite interest in poker by the media as well as the general public. Once the media gets wind of Slim's boastful prediction that a woman will "never" win the Main Event - combined with the sudden realization that a woman has made the final table and is in actual contention - it will be the poker world's equivalent of Bobby Riggs versus Billie Jean King. (Just ask Vince Van Patten what that was like.)

There was the "Moneymaker Effect" back in 2003, but a woman making the final table (and actually winning!) the Main Event will be replayed on ESPN at least a million times. (OK, I exxagerate - maybe it will only be replayed a hundred thousand times ...) The bottom line is that the first woman to win the Main Event will take poker (and interest in our beloved game) to a whole new level. So the tantalizing question is: "Who do you believe will be the first female poker player to climb poker's Mount Everest and win the big one?" Which lady poker player will force Amarillo "Slim" Preston to eat his words?

I'm going on record with my prediction now. I can't put my finger on why I think this - call it male intuition if you like - but I believe Vanessa Selbst could be the lady to do it. She's already winning large field tournaments (while simultaneously working her way through law school!) so she definitely has the talent and ability. I also sense that she has an intangible that is vital to becoming a champion poker player: She makes other players cringe in fear. (To put it in very crass terms, Vanessa plays like a man ...)

It may be another ten years before a woman wins the Main Event, (who really knows?), but it will happen sooner or later. I just hope I'm still alive to see it when it does happen. If that day comes sooner rather than later, I have a feeling Vanessa Selbst will be (could be) the first lady poker player to hoist the winner's trophy. I'm curious as to what all you lady poker players think? Do you think Vanessa has the inside track - or maybe another top female poker player like Jennifer Harman or Vanessa Rousso - or even yourself perhaps!?

Former DJ

Winning the main event is almost more of a stamina contest than anything else. When a woman wins, she will most likely be in her twenties and have been playing on-line for years. She also probably be unknown to the general public before she makes her run. When Fossilman won, he was unknown to the general public, but a well respected poster on 2+2.

Segue- why did you put woman in quotes? Are you opening your quiz to mixed-gender winners? 15-year olds?

Let me worry about finding my way into the Main Event first, then I won't let you down.

+1 to Former DJ believing that Vanessa Selbst could be the first woman to win the WSOP ME. I'm a huge fan of her tournament game, and her results speak for themselves. In addition to her monster year last year, I believe she's the last woman to win a WSOP open event bracelet on U.S. soil.

However, to further venice10's point a bit, just look at the "last woman standing" over the last couple of years. They've all been relative unknowns prior to achieving that status: Breeze Zuckerman, Leo Margets, Tiffany Michelle, Maria Ho, Sabyl Cohen-Landrum, Tiffany Williamson

Brag: I know 2 of the women named in this post

I don't think a woman will win the main event in the next 50 years. I don't mean this in a sexist way, it's merely a numbers game.

If you can show me a mathematical projection to back up this theory, I might not warn or infract you for the post I deleted.

Although being bad @ math prob isn't infractible. So i'll prob just warn ya for the out of line comment in the morning when I'm not on the phone, or let Venice deal with you as he sees fit

post he made before was dumb. post you quoted is probably true.. he just threw a random number of years. its pretty obvious.. number of female entrants vs number of male entrants..

I def think it would be a relatively unknown female player if a girl were to win. There are just not that many females in the world who regularly play 10ks, which automatically reduces the number of shots we have of getting a girl to win.
However, look at how many women have been winning and final tabling huge, open events in the past 2 years...so a wsop main event win is def possible, I think.
Would prob be a young, hungry, up and comer...

Strictly from a numbers prospective I'm wrong again. Last year 216 out of the 7,391 entrants in the main event were female. They represented 2.92% of the total player pool. If we make two assumptions,

a) the proportion of female entrants will remain constant over 50 years

b) there is no difference between the average skill of a male or female entrant.

then the probability of a female winning the main event in the next 50 years can most easily be expressed as [1-X]

where X = the probability of males winning each of the next 50 years

X = .9708 ^ 50
= .227

[1-x] = 0.773, so there would be a 77.3% chance of a woman winning the main event in the next fifty years.

That being said I would be still be surprised if it happened. Even if female participation holds steady or increases I think they are out skilled by their male counterparts. Jennifer Harman, Annette Obrestrad, Vanessa Selbst, Vanessa Rousso, Kathy Liebert and Jennifer Tilly are without question some of the most talented poker players on the planet but for each and every woman entering the main event there is one or two world class male players playing. Annette herself has gone on the record saying that she's "always thought girls suck at poker. I say that because they do".

Anyway, first comment was in poor taste...flame away.

How are women more out-skilled by males? Be specific, please.

Also, you state that you feel that for every woman playing (216) there are 1-2 world class male players (216-432)? And so what about the remaining ~6800 male players? Shouldn't they be included in your ratio? Or are they all automatically good enough to win, just because they are male and inherently have more skills?

Don't get me wrong I'm not arguing that males are inherently any more capable intellectually than females. If anything it's the other way around. I'm arguing that the male players that enter the main event as a whole are better than the female players. Aside from a handful of elite females it's a pretty soft group [that enter]. And I think if you asked most people playing they would welcome a random female at their table. Perhaps I'm projecting.

Last year bodog had two lines for series props pertaining to women. The first one was whether a woman would win a bracelet in any open event:

yes: even money
no: -140

The second was for whether a woman would final table the main

yes: +400
no: -800

As you're aware neither one happened and granted a sample size of one doesn't say much but it's still a testament to how much more difficult it is for women to go the distance. It's one thing when you're hot and you can have someone grind for you online but anything accomplished live has to be earned on your own.

Are you saying that when Vanessa Rousso beat Doyle Brunson, Phil Ivey, Paul Wasicka, Daniel Negreanu and Bertrand Grospellier in the HU challenge, it was really Chad Brown giving her instructions through a secret ear bud?

The thing is that you're failing to understand is the difference between assertions and debate. Even when you try back up your assertions with some math (and then find that it really doesn't support you), you just say, "never mind the numbers, I know."

There's little point in discussing it with you further since even when you prove yourself wrong, you decide you're right anyway. I'll note that such tendencies don't bode well for your development as a poker player.

Dave:

I suppose you could be right, but 50 years is a long time and "mathematically improbable" events - like magnitude 9.0 earthquakes - happen with surprising regularity. Rather than "math" and the numbers, I'm basing my prediction on intuition and emotion - a "feeling" if you like. More and more women are playing poker. More and more women are discovering the joys (and the challenges) of our wonderful game. Some of these lady players are good. (I certainly hope I never find myself sitting at a poker table across from Vanessa Selbst or Jennifer Harman!) These women are setting a good example for other young women (who may now be in their teens) that it is possible to "play against the boys" and earn their respect.

You cite the numbers and make a strong statistical argument for why it is not likely to happen - or not likely anytime soon. I sense that there are women out there (right now) who are thinking: "I can do this! I can win the Main Event!" (I suspect Vanessa Selbst definitely has that degree of confidence in herself.) All it really takes - besides talent, skill, stamina, and the ability to run an occasional bluff - is a little bit of luck. These are not traits that are the exclsuive domain of men. There are surely women players who are dreaming the impossible dream. One of those dreamers is going to succeed. Each year a woman gets closer and closer. (So what if she's an unknown player from out of nowhere. Darvin Moon was an "unknown logger" from Maryland a few years ago and look how close he got. Does anybody really believe there isn't a female "Darvin Moon" lurking in the shadows ready to pounce?)

It's not "scientific" (and certainly not based on any mathematical calculation), but I have this overwhelming sense that a lady player is going to break through. It may not happen this year or next year, but it will surely happen before another 50 years. In fact, I'm (almost) willing to bet that it will happen in the next five to ten years - maybe sooner. I just hope I'm still alive to see it when it does happen.

Former DJ

Dear CBK:

Here's the real reason why I would like to see a woman win the Main Event at the WSOP. Within days after such a victory, you drop in at your local card room and what do you see? Instead of the usual ratio of six or seven men for every woman, the ratio is suddenly a lot closer to 50:50. That can only be good for poker. The media (including the mainstream media) will be in a tizzy. If Vanessa were to win the final heads up confrontation against a really good male player, especially after a prolonged up-and-down struggle, both she - and her heads up male opponent - would be interviewed on the "Today Show" (and all the late night shows) for days following. She might even find some time to be interviewed by Mike and Adam on the PokerCast!

This would be really BIG - arguably the most momentous event in the history of poker. James McManus would have to add a new chapter to his "Cowboys Full" book. Think what a WSOP Main Event victory for a lady player could do for efforts to legalize internet poker here in the United States? At least half of the politicians in Washington D.C. would want to have their smiling pictures taken standing next to the very first female "World Champion" of poker. (Just keep in mind that every politician knows that women vote too.)

All things considered, a woman winning the Main Event has a lot of positives. As Martha Stewart would say, "A woman winning the Main Event would be a good thing." Indeed it would be ...

Former DJ

Exactly my thoughts when I was reading his posts (5 minutes of life I'll never get back).

I would not be surprised if Dave is that delusional guy who always makes bad calls and then says, "I knew you had that."

Not sure if you were just kidding around, but takes a whole lot more than just a little bit of luck, even for the best players in the world. You start with 300 BBs. The starting stack would have ~ 43 ante-adjusted BBs at the end of day one.

I agree with OP, that there will be a female poker boom when a woman wins the ME. (Let's hope it is one of the wonderful women who post here that takes it down.) Perhaps the incentive for a female poker boom could make it lucrative for sites to offer more ladies-only sattys to the main to up the % of women in the field, and therefore the chances that a woman takes home the top prize.

Dear hj314:

I have a copy of your man's Sit-and-Go book - although I've never quite figured out how the ICM model works. (Math is not my strong suit.) I take your point about more than a "little luck" being required to win the Main Event. I suppose I should have said "more than a little luck" instead.

More "ladies-only" satellite qualifiers is an interesting idea. The major sites might take this idea a step further and offer a real incentive to lady players. To wit, if you have an account on our site, enter the Main Event and make the November Nine final table, you automatically receive a $1,000,000.00 "Final Table Bonus Award" for being female, a player on our site, and making the final table. (If a site really wanted to spice it up, they might offer a real incentive: "Congratulations for making the final table. Here's your million dollar bonus. Now, if you go all the way and actually win this tournament, we'll add another $5,000,000.00 to your winnings!") The enticement of such an incentive would certainly increase interest (and participation) among lady players - not to mention creating an influx of new lady players opening real money accounts. However, after thinking about this a bit, it occurs to me that some male players, (like maybe Shaun Deeb who fervently believes in equality), might protest "Foul" and "Not Fair!" and vehemently object to the unequal treatment. Since somebody will surely object, I suppose we'll have to shelve that idea.

Maybe some creative thinkers can figure out a way to encourage more female participation in the Main Event. I certainly hope we don't have to wait 50 years to see the first woman win the Big One. Barbara Enright demonstrated that it's possible for a good woman player to make the final table way back in 1995. That achievement by Barbara showed that this is an attainable goal. I would think the major sites would recognize the immense marketing value of having one of "their" lady players make the November Nine final table and (possibly) go on to make history.

Former DJ

Why is "woman" in quotes in the title of this thread?

Of the women in poker who I think has the greatest shot at takin' it down would most certainly be Kathy Liebert, after her I'd have ot go mit Harman

Probably because it was a "mistake" on my part - of which I'm prone to do from time to time. I'm getting older, so call it a "senior moment" if you like. (Perhaps a mod can do me a favor and remove the quotation marks from around the word "woman" in the title?)

My thought, when I was composing the original post, was that I wanted to emphasize this thread was about a woman (not a "man") winning the Main Event and the significance of that achievement, but I failed to recognize that some might find such an emphasis objectionable. Since you're the second poster in this thread to point out (and question) my grievous error, hopefully one of the mods will fix this - and beat me with a wet noodle for being politically incorrect. When I was a lot younger many years ago, me and my buddies might refer to a really spectacular lady as a "fabulous gal" or a "fabulous babe" - and we meant that as a term of awe and endearment. Things seem to be different nowadays, so call me an old coot. Big deal.

Former DJ

"Yes"

But no worries-- obviously you didn't mean anything against women.

Your post above brought up good ideas for poker sites. Hopefully they see investing in more women as very +EV long term.

Hate to be a naysayer, as I in no way mean to diminish Barbara Enright's final table accomplishment, but in 1995 there were 273 entrants. Compare this with over 7,00 last year. (Woah poker has come such a long way in popularity.)

However, I still think we are overdue for a woman to at least make the final table this year, so I will go ahead and say that one will FT the ME in 2011. All the ladies in the forum play the main to prove me right!

Never imo.

Sats into ME for ladies is a fantastic idea! Any woman who is close to having the bankroll to play in this, or who can find a backer, should seriously consider it just based on all the overlay of extra sponsorship/patches if she does well.

As for the question on whether the few hundred women who play the Main Event statistically even money or slightly +EV or slightly -EV? There are some GREAT female tourney pros, no argument there. So the real Q is how do the amateur females stack up against the amateur males? My guess is it's pretty close--women tend to be more conservative with their bankrolls (esp if w. a family) so a woman playing the ME may be more likely to have the actual skills to make it a good investment. On the other hand, an inexperienced female player veers toward the passive side, while an inexperienced male player veers toward the over-aggro side (guessing this is mostly for cultural reason.) I think a passive bad player is MUCH less likely to go deep or win in such a huge field than a bad-aggro player. Then there are the models/playmates who get backed into the ME more for advertising purposes than their poker skills, which could reduce the avg equity of the female players.

On balance I'd guess it's about even money, but it would be great to see a woman in the Nov.9. Will take a closer look at the lines and probably place $$ on the pro-woman side.

Sexism itt. Also, that enticement may actually lead to sex change operations.