Guy pays the $10k to enter wsop ladies event - Page 5 - Poker News

Two Plus Two Forums Poker News & Discussion News, Views, and Gossip

Guy pays the $10k to enter wsop ladies event

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 5 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

Page 5 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

07-10-2016 , 01:03 PM

#101

MagikarpFTW

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 2,190

Wow. So much hate and all he did was taking on a +EV spot.

Quote

07-10-2016 , 02:12 PM

#102

namisgr11

old hand

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,504

Lol, calling that a +EV spot. He had to finish in the top 1% to not lose money.

Quote

07-10-2016 , 02:38 PM

#103

_Loki_

adept

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,036

Quote:

Originally Posted by namisgr11

Lol, calling that a +EV spot. He had to finish in the top 1% to not lose money.

Not true from what I half recall from reading - it was part of some silly prop bet & I think he claimed he would be ahead if he got ITM [even though ITM is a lot less then his entry costs]

Not that it matters now of course

Quote

07-10-2016 , 03:16 PM

#104

Uh*Oh

adept

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 761

Quote:

Originally Posted by dochol31

This is a pretty sexist event against women in itself, a game for the wife-ies, are you sure no feminists are complaining about this yet? Check twitter.

With only one woman ever making the main event final table (Barbara Enright, 1995), they're obviously being oppressed by the poker patriarchy somehow, and now they have to suffer the indignity of a wifie event . . . Oh, the humanity!

Quote

07-10-2016 , 06:35 PM

#105

MagikarpFTW

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 2,190

Quote:

Originally Posted by namisgr11

Lol, calling that a +EV spot. He had to finish in the top 1% to not lose money.

I was joking, obviously.

Quote

07-10-2016 , 07:02 PM

#106

Two

centurion

Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 167

come on can somebody please explain to me what this guy did wrong?? He paid 10k donated 9k tot he ladies, that is very generous.
You should complaining about the rio raking 1k.

and lol at the guy saying that if Jason would play this it would hurt his sponsorship

Quote

07-11-2016 , 02:42 AM

#107

p2ryan

adept

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 821

I'd like to have men's and women's events...
But can some give me one good argument for the 10x buy in.

Constitutionally. Not morally but constitutionally

Last edited by p2ryan; 07-11-2016 at 02:44 AM. Reason: So I'm clear I'd like a women's event. I'm more asking why it legal to charge more for men

Quote

07-11-2016 , 03:31 AM

#108

kerr

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 4,853

As has already been explained, but for my own sake I just want to show the math:

The structure sheet clearly states:
7% of total entry pool withheld for entry fees.
3% withheld for tournament dealers & staff.

((818 x 1000) + (1 x 10000)) x 0.9 = 828000 x 0.9 = $745,200 prize pool
10% Fee on $1000 = $100
10% Fee on $10000 = $1000

9th place paid $10,292. If you factor in 30% tax, a guy would have had to finish 7th to profit a mere $2500.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 07:01 AM

#109

BustoPro

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,668

Quote:

Originally Posted by p2ryan

I'd like to have men's and women's events...
But can some give me one good argument for the 10x buy in.

Constitutionally. Not morally but constitutionally

It's legal because there's a Nevada law that says it's legal.

I don't really see how the Constitution comes into play.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 07:09 AM

#110

hasu

grinder

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 484

Is it only other men who complain about this? Since for the women it's obviously great value that this guy has joined (assuming the full 10k get added to the prizepool).

Quote

07-11-2016 , 08:49 AM

#111

NickMPK

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 11,569

Quote:

Originally Posted by hasu

Is it only other men who complain about this? Since for the women it's obviously great value that this guy has joined (assuming the full 10k get added to the prizepool).

A man entering the tournament marginally increases the EV of all of the women in the field.

But most players in this tournament are not entering based on EV. They are entering to get the experience of playing poker with only other women. And for the women who happen to be at this jerk's table, he has ruined that. The women at the guys table are no longer getting the experience they paid for, and a 1% increase in EV wouldn't in my mind really make up for that.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 08:52 AM

#112

NickMPK

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 11,569

Quote:

Originally Posted by p2ryan

I'd like to have men's and women's events...
But can some give me one good argument for the 10x buy in.

Constitutionally. Not morally but constitutionally

There is nothing in the federal constitutional that prohibits any sort of discrimination by private individuals or businesses. The equal protection clause applies only to actions by the state.

There are federal laws (Civil Rights Act, Equal Pay Act) prohibiting gender discrimination in private employment, and racial discrimination in service to customers by private businesses, but not gender discrimination in customer service.

So it really does come down to state law.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 09:31 AM

#113

Bigoldnit

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,397

Quote:

Originally Posted by hasu

Is it only other men who complain about this? Since for the women it's obviously great value that this guy has joined (assuming the full 10k get added to the prizepool).

He wasn't at my table, so I don't know what the vibe was like there, but we did discuss the situation at my table and the general consensus was pretty negative towards the idea of guys playing the event.

As Nick said above, a lot of the women playing, seem to look at this event a little differently from a standard event, and don't evaluate it from a purely ev perspective. While having a guy play makes it more profitable, it still takes away part of what makes the tournament unique and, personally, I wouldn't give that up in exchange for a little overlay.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 10:15 AM

#114

Videopro

Making TV

Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 19,242

As posted in 2011, NV law.

Quote:

651.070 All persons are entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, national origin, disability , or sexual orientation, sex, gender identity or expression.

[*5] Sec. 5. Chapter 233 of NRS is hereby amended by adding thereto a new section to read as follows:
Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter, it is not an unlawful discriminatory practice in public accommodations for any place of public accommodation to offer differential pricing, discounted pricing or special offers based on sex to promote or market the place of public accommodation.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 02:08 PM

#115

ESW

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 235

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickMPK

Yeah, apparently people have challenged the federal Constitutionality of differential pricing laws based on gender in the courts, and the courts have said it was up to the states.

And some states don't allow for differential pricing based on gender, but some state laws have been challenged and it's been permitted. Not sure if anybody's challenged the law in Nevada, but right now it's considered legal under both the US and the NV State Constitutions.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 02:21 PM

#116

Adebisi_34

grinder

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 587

im f..ing confused!1k for the women 10k for the men??ps:i havent read the whole thread!

Quote

07-11-2016 , 02:36 PM

#117

Edgelooker1

grinder

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 650

Couldn't they just make it a ridiculous amount to ensure men don't enter- like $100,000 or even $1 Million for the men, but only $1k for the women?

Quote

07-11-2016 , 03:29 PM

#118

Uh*Oh

adept

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 761

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edgelooker1

Couldn't they just make it a ridiculous amount to ensure men don't enter- like $100,000 or even $1 Million for the men, but only $1k for the women?

The only way to be fair is to measure testosterone levels and charge accordingly. What people actually pee with is a poor indicator of feminine or masculine nature.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 03:37 PM

#119

xyzabc

newbie

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 24

Maybe he is just lonely, and wants to make some new friends?

Quote

07-11-2016 , 08:30 PM

#120

BustoPro

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,668

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edgelooker1

Couldn't they just make it a ridiculous amount to ensure men don't enter- like $100,000 or even $1 Million for the men, but only $1k for the women?

Then people could reasonably argue that the differential was equivalent to a ban. From a legal perspective, you WANT a few men entering every year.

Quote

07-11-2016 , 08:45 PM

#121

OMC

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 232

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucidDream

Being a white knight never works, life chews you up and spits you out in the long run and the women you're so desperately trying to win over don't actually respect you

True, but they will let you clean their house.

Quote

07-12-2016 , 03:12 AM

#122

Two

centurion

Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 167

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickMPK

I totally disagree with you that woman are playing this tournament to get exposure playing with other woman,
If they had a tourney where men paid 10k and woman paid 1k, trust me, a lot of woman would play,
Also , i dont know this guy at all, but stating that he is a jerk for playing is so ******ed. He might be ******ed for playing, but a jerk he is not, his paying 10k fffs..
If he only had to pay 1k, everything you said would be correct but his not, his paying 10 times more, so no reason to bad mouth the guy.

Quote

07-12-2016 , 05:07 AM

#123

bribhoy

stranger

Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 13

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZMountainHiker

He also invented the internet, or was that Al Gore?

Of course it was Al Gore. That's why all the internet math is based on Al Gore Rhythms.

Quote

07-12-2016 , 07:46 AM

#124

Scarmaker

adept

Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 708

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uh*Oh

The only way to be fair is to measure testosterone levels and charge accordingly. What people actually pee with is a poor indicator of feminine or masculine nature.

Not that I am any kind of an active guy in LGBTI stuff, but I would just like to say that it somehow feels really nice to see this kind of an argument in the conversation, especially in NVG.

Quote

07-12-2016 , 08:11 AM

#125

DC2LV

veteran

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 3,185

Quote:

Originally Posted by Two

Also , i dont know this guy at all, but stating that he is a jerk for playing is so ******ed. He might be ******ed for playing, but a jerk he is not, his paying 10k fffs..
If he only had to pay 1k, everything you said would be correct but his not, his paying 10 times more, so no reason to bad mouth the guy.

No, what's ******ed is you not understanding why the buy-in is $10k for men and why he is a jerk for paying it and playing in the Ladies Championship.

Quote

Page 5 of 6

First

1 2 3 4 5 6

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 5 of 6

First

1 2 3 4 5 6

Last