Hello,
This article is biased even before you get to its contents. This website is devoted to anti-female everything. One can only expect that at some point an article would be written regarding females and poker.
None of the suggested studies mentioned in the article are valid.
None of the statistics cited confirm anything about gender, only confirms what is expected based on demographics. The author makes an assumption that if 4.5% of poker players are women then there should be 4.5% represented at all levels of winning. Something this author forgets is that no statistic in poker is linear. Everything has to be plotted on a line that approaches infinity. It should be a curved line not a straight one. If they were keeping track of how many people in tournaments made it to 100
hands, I imagine it would still be at 4.5%. Same at 200 hands. It probably gets off that number once the player pool drops to 100 people in MTTs. This is because of the non-linear line I was mentioning earlier. Those who work with calculus and equations for differentials and integrals will know what I am saying. The author here makes a gross assumption about how statistics actually work, when measuring one item against a large field.
Secondly the author makes much ado from stereotypical information. Sure we readers probably know some women who have the difficulties he cites, but this does not account for the wide range of female traits seen over a huge population. For example my mom would have a difficult time doing poker math, sure she fits one of the stereotypes, but not my wife on the other hand. My sis cannot control her actions when she has strong emotions, sure she fits anonther stereotype, but again not so for my wife. By the way my Brother is no different from eitther of them and he is male, so he has both issues and again he is not female. The point is everybody is different, I can find females that have positive traits for poker around my small circle. I would be willing to bet that some females have a better sense of when someone is lying to them than many of us males. This could be useful in calling bluffs. Just saying.... human abilities are various, and this article does not take any of the variety into consideration and simply bluffs its ideas based on some misrepresented statistics. It's an op ed., therefore not a definitive argument for anything.
I am foremost a scholar, and this article has nothing in it that constitutes academic writing.
This article is hilarious, quite frankly. You should ban us before we take all of your money!
I couldn't gauge quite how serious the post was, but I couldn't find any actual references to it being satirical. The statistics they point out are true (unfortunately), but I certainly look forward to increasing the female win rate!
It will go up as the female field widens. His stats although true are misrepresented and improper conclusions drawn. It will go up.
