Changing My Mind: Feedback About My Ladies WSOP Event Opinion
By Jennifer Newell

In my last article, I discussed the reasons that I no longer feel that a ladies-only tournament should be a part of major events like the World Series of Poker. Hard to have predicted that I would receive feedback on that one!

I received e-mails from men and women that were positive and negative, and I was even confronted in person by Susie Isaacs, who I've known from past business endeavors and who was very unhappy with my article. Susie, in particular, has always been a supporter of and participant in ladies-only tournaments, and I understand that she vehemently disagreed with my point of view, but she also suggested that I may have written the article for the sake of publicity. I assure you all that publicity had nothing to do with it, as I surely don't need negative publicity. My strong feelings on the subject were what prompted me to write the article.

I also understand that there has been some talk on forums, specifically PokerChix, saying that my opinion is meaningless because they couldn't find my poker resume in the PokerPages database. True, and I've never claimed to be a tournament player; that's why I don't write strategy articles and why I wasn't asked to commentate on the final table play. C'mon now... Give me credit for simply arguing my point, even if you disagree with it.

Here is some of the feedback from readers, along with my responses:

Might I suggest that basing your opinion solely upon this year's final table might be somewhat short-sighted. If you look at the woman's event final tables of years past, especially last year's, you might have come away with a different opinion. Specifically, last year's table was so action packed and exciting that none other than Nolan Dalla himself (whom you quote in your article) announced to the entire tournament (on the following day) that the Ladies' Event final table was the most exciting and dramatic final table he had witnessed at any WSOP including the open events. The Ladies' Event has been a tradition since 1977 and while I agree that some of the players might be inexperienced, it's no different with many of the men in the open events. And while (to paraphrase Tom Hanks) "there's no crying in poker," it's certainly preferable to some of the language, insults, temper tantrums, and general childish behavior that the men exhibit all too frequently. Poker used to be called a "Gentlemen's Game"; it can hardly be called that now. If you look at tapes of the old WSOP events, most of the players dressed nicely and conducted themselves with some class. Instead of eliminating the Ladies' Event perhaps we should try more to emulate it.

Bob M.

Well said. I don't disagree that some ladies' tournaments are exciting, but I think it's even more exciting when the women are playing side-by-side with the men. When a woman makes a co-ed tournament final table, that's when I perk up. And while open emotions at a ladies event are preferable to the way some men behave at the tables, two wrongs don't make a right. Isn't there a happy medium between tears and insults?

I just read your article on the woman's only event at the WSOP and I couldn't agree more. Why would any pro put herself in a tournament that is only "for those of you not good enough to play anywhere else," almost like they're promoting that women cant play poker...lol...and we all know that is a bunch of crap. Anyone who spends any amount of time at the tables knows that women can and do play just as well as men...

John L.

While I wouldn't say that the ladies-only tournament is for those not good enough to play anywhere else, I believe that most of them absolutely should be playing in co-ed tournaments and showing that they can compete in any tournament.

I found your article about the 2007 WSOP Ladies event very enlightening. I have also started to have some mixed feelings about this particular tournament. I did play in the 2005 and 2006 WSOP Ladies event, but I was not able to play this year. I also did not know about the extra incentives (watch, makeover) that the winner was going to get. Personally, I would have been very uncomfortable with the makeover. I agree that women's tournaments are important to poker in regards to the aspect that they help promote women's interest in poker. I cannot believe some of the things you described in your article that went on during the tournament! It is ridiculous! However, I do not think that they should do away with this tournament. There has been some form of a women's event (7-card stud, limit hold 'em, no-limit hold 'em) at the WSOP since 1977. That is 30 years of history! To do away with it now, especially since more and more women are playing poker, would be disheartening. What needs to be fixed is that the Ladies event needs to be treated like every other tournament at the WSOP. If you win, you win a bracelet, that's it! Nothing else, except the money of course. They need to use the same technical terms, and so on. I am looking forward to reading your next article on this topic. I can't wait to find out how other women feel about this!

Jessica

Well, you're in that next article, Jessica! I do understand that the event has been a part of the WSOP for many years, and I very much respect the history in it. However, times have changed, as has the WSOP, and I believe that removing the Ladies Championship would be a step in the right direction of inclusion and togetherness. (No, I don't need a hug right now.) But if Harrah's decides to keep the tournament, I agree that the same rules and prize payouts should be applied to everyone. Either everyone gets demeaning makeovers, or no one does.

I know you're going to get a lot of grief for the article you wrote about the WSOP Ladies Only Event, but I'm not one of those. I post at a site at Pokerchix.com and I know that most of them disagree with you. They can't see the forest for the trees. I couldn't agree with you more. I am 51 years old, and I started playing poker in 1974 in a small town in MT not far from Binny Binion's ranch. There were only 2 of us gals who played in the whole county. I learned fast how to play against men and I love it. (Ahhh, the smell of testosterone in the afternoon, lol.) Just know that for every letter you get opposing your article there are many of us who agree with you.

Donna L.

I'd be interested in talking to you about the 70's, Donna! I'll be in touch.

As a fellow St Louisan, I read your article about the Ladies WSOP event with great interest. I played in the ladies' event and went out in the '80s. I know that it is quite fashionable to bash the ladies' event but I have to say I enjoy playing in that particular event more than any other of the ones that I participated in. Decidedly lacking (at least on the tables where I played) were rude, chair throwing, whooping when someone lost, unkempt people. Although, I understand that the final table was tight but I can assure you, the hours leading up to that table were filled with aggressive poker playing. Nobody wins a poker tournament by sitting back and waiting for a monster hand to magically appear. As far as the makeover and related prizes went, did the players ask to be treated any differently in this particular event as opposed to the other events? Do you think that I played because I needed a makeover? I didn't even know there was such a prize! Who asked the dealers to call the women eliminated "winners"? Perhaps what we have here are condescending management and dealers! I play in the Ladies' event because it's a pleasant change of pace - I didn't have to endure one conversation about basketball or baseball the whole tournament. Also, I didn't hear the word "donkey" or the phrase "that's what I'm talking about" once. I was there to play poker, I did. I had fun, played the best that I could and accepted my eventual defeat without comment. Now when the mixed events offer me all of that, let me know. They haven't so far... perhaps we should re-evaluate those events instead.

Joan

I'm glad that you had a good time playing in the event, and I know that many other women share your feelings. I do strongly agree that the management is responsible for establishing a set of prizes that set it apart from the other tournaments. To offer the women a makeover is like offering the winner of the Seniors event a custom-made walker or discount hospice care - very demeaning, stereotypical, and just plain wrong. This is something that I will be addressing with Harrah's, as I am quite sure they will be keeping the Ladies event in the 2008 WSOP lineup. And if I ever meet you, please forgive me in advance for using the word "donkey," though I'll probably be talking about my own play, not anyone else's.

I was very disappointed in your article concerning the Ladies event at the 2007 WSOP. I can assure you that I did not cry and/or hug my way to the final table - or in any other part of my life for that matter. I resent your comments concerning the final table play. As you said, you have never been there. Perhaps, you should leave those comments for others to make. I would not choose you to act on my behalf as a female, poker player or otherwise. I am sure that most of the participants of this event would disagree with your statements. Sadly, you shroud yourself in some feminist garb to make your statements more credible. Before you try to eliminate the Ladies event, you should take a look at many of the other events. Who cares about "Razz" anyway? I didn't even know anyone who played it till I got to the WSOP. There are many people who consider many of the other events to be unnecessary in one way or another. If you ask me, the WSOP missed an excellent marketing opportunity by minimizing the Ladies event. There is a large untapped population of women who could be brought into the mainstream of poker tournaments with some encouragement. Most of the women that I know started tournament play in women only events. All of them have transitioned to the mixed tournaments. Give the ladies a break. This event should be given more attention - not less. The poker community would benefit greatly by the increased rank and revenue.

Kathleen Gliva

First, Kathleen, congratulations on your fourth place finish. Second, you are entitled to your opinion, just as I am to mine. I appreciate that I may not be the most qualified person to comment on the actual play at the final table, but I do know a thing or two about the game, and most of my statements merely piggy-backed those of professional players Lacey Jones and Liz Lieu. Third, I take offense to your accusation that I shroud myself in some feminist garb to gain credibility. My opinions on many other feminist issues might surprise you, and my feminist nature is what has pushed me in the direction of this opinion. Integration, not separation, is what women have fought for over the years.

I appreciate the time that all of the readers took to send messages on this topic, and I respect all of the opinions posed. Fellow writers Change100 and Gary Wise have also written very eloquently about the WSOP Ladies event this year.

Please feel free to contact me with further comments at jen3351@msn.com.

Until our next rendezvous...

Jen

Related Content:

Changing My Mind
by Jennifer Newell

Holiday Ramblings and Women in Poker
by Justin West

Sometimes Women Do Have an Advantage
by Gary Carson

Jennifer Newell is a freelance writer, originally from St. Louis but now living in Los Angeles. She fell in love with poker while working at WPT and began writing about it in 2005. Please feel free to e-mail her with your comments, experiences, and feedback at jen3351@msn.com. She looks forward to your thoughts.