Annie Duke Interview Controversy regarding Ladies WSOP event.

[StevieG]

[ QUOTE ]
So why should poker be segregated again? Poker is poker, it is not a gender specific activity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The entire Series is promotional. If the hosts want to have an event only for Screen Actors Guild members, they can.

[[Phill]]

Her being against the WOE at the WSOP and running a women only poker school is not contradictory in the slightest.

Last i heard, when talking academic studies - where women and men are taught seperately they tend to do better overall - this is due to several reasons, but a different teaching style is a big reason (women learn better by observing, and men learn better by doing).

Further, poker DEFINATELY needs more women players - and if her poker school does that, then great.

How many groups of housewifes/sororities etc wouldnt learn the game if they had men there (in their mind 'judging' them).

I dunno if the concept works, but if it does then great.

But being against WOEs is NOT the polar opposite - one teaches women to play the game on the same level, the other teaches women that they arent good enough to play the game on the same level.

Also, she is right that the senior and women events are stupid

Didnt read link, but it appears from what someone else said she didnt say Doyle could only win such an event - and either way he won a non senior event last year - the 6 handed NL if memory serves.

[eurythmech]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So why should poker be segregated again? Poker is poker, it is not a gender specific activity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The entire Series is promotional. If the hosts want to have an event only for Screen Actors Guild members, they can.

[/ QUOTE ]

What they can and will do is irrelevant to the fact what one might feel they should do.

[CincyLady]

Phil, fyi, the link at the beginning in my Original post, is to access the Video interview that Annie gave to Cardplayer Magazine.

As for the Ladies WSOP event, let the ladies vote with their feet. If they don't want it, find it degrading, then they simply won't play it, period. Same with the seniors.

My point about the poker school was, that if she feels that having a women's only event was wrong at the world series, and that's why she boycotts it, then having a women's only poker school should be wrong, and she should be boycotting (teaching) it as well as speaking out against having a womens only poker school.

To do otherwise, is IMO, hypocritical to say the least.

[Dilznoofus]

Haven't read the article yet, but to OP: What you've described is not hypocrisy. A class for women makes plenty of sense in that female players may benefit from receiving instruction and advice about how to succeed in a male-dominated game. It does not imply that women are inferior to have separate instruction geared toward them, as their male opponents often change their play and make certain assumptions about them because they're female.

A women's poker tournament, on the other hand, suggests that women need to be given the opportunity to play only against each other because they can't compete with the men.

FWIW I really don't like Annie Duke, but she doesn't appear to be a hypocrite based on CincyLady's description.

[GeniusToad]

segregated competition = bad

segregated instruction = not so bad

this is pretty easy to follow.

[Jooka]

wow, has she put a few pounds on her cheeks or is it just me?

[holyfield5]

[ QUOTE ]
So why should poker be segregated again? Poker is poker, it is not a gender specific activity. Not to stand up for ms Duke (because i am not exactly fond of her) but I can see the difference between having a ladies only class and event. The ladies only class can focus on topics related to being a female in the Poker world, and how to maximise certain male tendenacies etc etc. Ladies only circuits such a LIPS etc, are fine because they are not the major league anyways, but when we get to a "major" event like the WSOP(dont even get me started) there is no need for segregation. I can understand the need for a WNBA, but in the poker world, im not really seeing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

women arent as smart as men, they need a seperate event to be fair

[AJackson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So why should poker be segregated again? Poker is poker, it is not a gender specific activity. Not to stand up for ms Duke (because i am not exactly fond of her) but I can see the difference between having a ladies only class and event. The ladies only class can focus on topics related to being a female in the Poker world, and how to maximise certain male tendenacies etc etc. Ladies only circuits such a LIPS etc, are fine because they are not the major league anyways, but when we get to a "major" event like the WSOP(dont even get me started) there is no need for segregation. I can understand the need for a WNBA, but in the poker world, im not really seeing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

women arent as smart as men, they need a seperate event to be fair

[/ QUOTE ]

While I didn't hold this opinion before reading the op, I do now.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
So why should poker be segregated again?

[/ QUOTE ]
Women can play in any event they choose. Men can play in every event except one. It's not a big deal at all.