Womens event #17
 

I know the history of the women's event as something for spouses, etc., but why does it continue?

Also, is Brandi playing in it?

Re: Womens event #17
 

Lol @ the 5 posts titled "Jennifer Leigh eliminated" in the live update log.

edit: awww they fixed it...I thought it was kinda funny too

Re: Womens event #17
 

my girlfriend is in it. 4k after first break. gogogogogo.

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: Womens event #17
 

[ QUOTE ]
I know the history of the women's event as something for spouses, etc., but why does it continue?

Also, is Brandi playing in it?

[/ QUOTE ]

That might of been it's reasons for it's origins, but today, WOE events are what is bringing first time women players to poker (Male players have learned from birth that agression is good, while most women have learned from birth to use intuition and talk things out and such).

A lot of women still don't like to play with the opposite gender, when they are first learning how to play.

I'm all for anything that brings a new group into poker. Think about it here, if the poker 'boom' is to continue, which group should it focas on attracting?

The young guns who for the most part are already into the game, or women, who currently only represent only at best, 5 percent of players?

Where logically do you think the most potential growth come from, that has not yet come into the poker world?

Harrah's is playing it smart (as do many other poker venues who have increased having WOE events), because they realize that women are who they need to attract/pull into poker, if they want for the growth to continue in huge numbers.

BTW, the WSOP WOE increases each year, and not only that, when I was there in 2005 it drew the most spectators as well (and I think that trend is continuing based on a comment over at Bluff magazine where they said that the crowd of spectators is huge there).

I'm waiting for the first woman to win the WSOP ME, as that should do the same thing in bringing in Women into poker, as Moneymaker did for the average Joe watching him on TV.

Lots of NEW fish ... yummy! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

P.S. There is also a Seniors event (I'm looking forward to when I can play in that one, a few years from now, as I'm guessing it will be more traditional poker styles), but I don't see anyone asking why that one is being held still.

Re: Womens event #17
 

[ QUOTE ]
From pokernews.com:

Vanessa Rousso is Crushing Her Table

A Pro is a Pro is a Pro.

Vanessa is running over her table (and we are not sure the ladies are all that happy about it) she has over 11,000.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. I heard she's pulling a Jamie Gold at the table. Except instead of blueberries, she's munching on a fetus.

and,

2. Duke sucks.

Re: Womens event #17
 

Why do you mention Annie Duke? Annie doesn't play WOEs (Woman Only Event's), so I very much doubt she's playing in this event.

Re: Womens event #17
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you mention Annie Duke? Annie doesn't play WOEs (Woman Only Event's), so I very much doubt she's playing in this event.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

Re: Womens event #17
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm waiting for the first woman to win the WSOP ME, as that should do the same thing in bringing in Women into poker, as Moneymaker did for the average Joe watching him on TV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering how low a % they make of the total number of players in the event, the odds of this happening any time soon are pretty darn slim.

Re: Womens event #17
 

I agree, but when it happens, IMO, it will open up the floodgates for the women to come rushing into the game.

Re: Womens event #17
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you mention Annie Duke? Annie doesn't play WOEs (Woman Only Event's), so I very much doubt she's playing in this event.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vanessa Rousso went to Duke University. And Duke does suck.