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.

[eurythmech]

[ QUOTE ]
I mean don't get me wrong here, she has every right to her views, but who died and made her Queen of the world (and gave her the right to use her position on the WSOP advisory committee to try to force taking away the Ladies event from the WSOP list of events)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you [censored] serious? People on the board should only be allowed to voice majority opinions?

[ QUOTE ]
While I tend to play WOEs myself just for fun, I do think there is a place for the WOE events for the women just coming into poker. If the majority of women thought (as she does) that it was an insult to women to play in the event, why then please, has it doubled and doubled again in the last few years. If a majority of women felt as she did, then the event numbers would be going down instead of up, and the event would no longer be held due to lack of interest. Last I checked, I and several other women (the majority I am thinking) did not give her OUR voice to speak for us, that's for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's extremely obvious that all events will grow bigger given the huge growth of the poker market as a whole. Does she even say that a majority of women feel the way she does? Also, your logic on majority of women and the growth of WOEs is fallacious.
Who cares what a bunch of other women thinks? She voices her opinion, and I'm glad she does, because she does sound like a sound person.


[ QUOTE ]
If as she says that (the reason why the numbers are going up instead of down is because) it's an 'Easy Bracelet' then heck, why doesn't she (and several other Women Pro players who sing the same tune as she does about WOEs) jump in with both feet and win this 'easy bracelet event'? If her logic is correct (that's an easy bracelet), then we should always see an all pro final table at the Ladies Only WSOP, with out a single amature female present there.

[/ QUOTE ]

She won't play it because she feels it's degrading. This has been established. Also, your understanding of poker is at best 10 strokes above par.

[ QUOTE ]
So, given her stance about Women only events, where did we see that she spent 3 days of the World Series timeframe? Yep, you guessed it, as there she was, teaching the women's only poker school, and Annie who says its insulting for women to be segregated, yet she's teaching a 'segregated' poker school session for Women only? Yeah right.

[/ QUOTE ]

To me, it seemed from the interview that her stance was that it's degrading to host a WOE as it is like saying "so that the women will win the something" or something to that effect. Annie says outright that she does NOT feel the idea of WOEs is degrading, just the whole idea with the awarding the winner a bracelet seems to bother her. I don't share her view here, I think that WOEs or senior events or any other events are always degrading.
Her stance is perfectly in line with helping out to increase female interest in the game of poker, I think this is very simple to understand.

[ QUOTE ]
Like I said she's entitled to her opinions, but let's get real. Wave a little money under Annie's nose to teach the women's ONLY poker school classes, and boom she's there.

[/ QUOTE ]

What she said about being paid little to do this doesn't sound too unlikely, you know. Some people actually have ideals.

[[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.

[Cactus Jack]

The Ledermans should have stopped with Howard.

[Jazzy3113]

[ QUOTE ]
Annie Duke - who cares?

[/ QUOTE ]

[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.

[Daddy Warbucks]

[ QUOTE ]
The Ledermans should have stopped with Howard.

[/ QUOTE ]

?
http://www.22oldbuildings.co.uk/Defa...D=36&lID=0

[eurythmech]

Cindy, try thinking for a change.

She apparently wants to do as much as possible to ensure that more women play the wonderful game of poker, the poker school sounds like a fantastic way to do this.
Do you think she considers the women who attend to be school to be debasing themselves for attending?
Of course not!

Will it make it easier to understand if I put this in caps?

THE ONLY THING SHE SEEMED TO THINK WAS DEGRADING WAS THE FACT THAT HARRAH'S/THE WSOP AWARDS BRACELETS TO WOMEN IN AN EVENT THAT ONLY WOMEN CAN COMPETE IN.

And how on earth can you have the views you have on the to be or not to be of this event?
To let everyone decide for themselves is exactly what we have now! Some people, me included, feel it's time to stop treating women as lesser poker players just based on gender.

[benhoug]

[ QUOTE ]
she also takes the time with this interview, to run Doyle Brunson down as well, saying in effect the only way he can win now is in the Seniors event). However,
Comments, opinions?

[/ QUOTE ]
If I watched the same vid you did she obv. was kidding, or being facetious when she said that about Doyle.