Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Necessary Sexism at the WSOP this year

  1. #1
    Is this sexism necessary? At this year's WSOP the ladies get a 90% discount in the $10,000 buy-in for the Ladies Championship. Men pay full price. Obviously to deter men from entering because some will.

    I wrote about it. http://alanbestbuys.com/id145.html

  2. #2
    They've done this for a while now.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    They've done this for a while now.
    I guess that makes it legal and right? Started three years ago.

  4. #4
    All it took was one guy to say it was discrimination. They let him in and he won. Todd should know the story. Since then it's been $1000 for women, $10,000 for men.

  5. #5
    If that is sexism, then yes sexism is necessary to assure a ladies-only tournament.

    How else could it happen?...the honor system didn't work.

  6. #6
    Then there should just be a men's only tournament... and a blue-eyed only tournament... and a red hair only tournament.

    Hold it!!! When will we see a TRANSGENDER only tournament?

  7. #7
    That's why they had to let men in it. They just have to pay ten times the amount to play. And yes, that's legal.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    That's why they had to let men in it. They just have to pay ten times the amount to play. And yes, that's legal.
    Is it really a $1,000 tournament or a $10,000 tournament?

    Another point of legality:

    when you go to a gas station and you see a price posted for cash and a price posted for credit, is that legal? Well, it's legal if the actual posted price is the credit price. It is legal to offer a cash discount; it is not legal to charge higher for using a credit card.

    So, again, is it a $1,000 tournament or a $10,000 tournament? If the tournament was originally a $1,000 tournament then charging men $10,000 now is illegal.

  9. #9
    If that's true, then every single bar that has a "ladies night" where they get in free and men pay a cover charge is illegal too. And I've never heard of that being illegal.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Then there should just be a men's only tournament... and a blue-eyed only tournament... and a red hair only tournament.
    Balance would be fair, a men's only tournament would be appropriate.

    They have age restricted events...Senior & Super Senior. They could offer Junior events as well, for players under a certain age.

    Maybe they don't offer men's only, or juniors only, or eye-color restricted events,
    is because there's no market for that...not enough interested players to make it work.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    If that's true, then every single bar that has a "ladies night" where they get in free and men pay a cover charge is illegal too. And I've never heard of that being illegal.
    Technically they are illegal but I don't know of anyone who ever sued. The point is it's ridiculous men crashed the ladies tournament and that the WSOP had to respond like this. I'd never play in a ladies event just like I'd never order off a kids menu.

  12. #12
    I think Alan's point is valid -- is it a 10K or a 1K tournament?

    I don't know what to make of it, except somebody better buckle up for the transgender tournaments. I wonder if Jenner knows how to play poker?

  13. #13
    Historically, it was a $1,000 tournament.

    If this were taken to court the plaintiff would show the price increase coupled with the discount for women which makes it discriminatory against men.

    I hope that wouldn't happen, but if it did, the WSOP would lose.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Historically, it was a $1,000 tournament.

    If this were taken to court the plaintiff would show the price increase coupled with the discount for women which makes it discriminatory against men.

    I hope that wouldn't happen, but if it did, the WSOP would lose.
    Well, there aren't any men playing in the WNBA or on the US Women's Olympic Soccer team...

    There's also a "Casino Dealer Employee" event and a "Senior's" event. There's criteria for those as well. Are they discriminatory?

    I don't remember why they had to allow those few men to enter... Perhaps Dan can shed some light on it.
    Last edited by a2a3dseddie; 05-14-2016 at 02:29 PM.

  15. #15
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Then there should just be a men's only tournament... and a blue-eyed only tournament... and a red hair only tournament.

    Hold it!!! When will we see a TRANSGENDER only tournament?
    This makes me wonder what the WSOP Ladies event coordinators would charge someone in Caitlyn Jenner's situation. Would the entry fee be $5,500 in Jenner's case since it's $1K for women and $10K for men?

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie View Post

    There's also a "Casino Dealer Employee" event and a "Senior's" event. There's criteria for those as well. Are they discriminatory?
    Of course they aren't. And I don't think the women's event is discriminatory either. I think it should just be for women. The WSOP just should have said "no" to the men just like a movie theater wouldn't let you in for a kid's ticket price.

  17. #17
    It's a $1000 event.

    The $10,000 was added as a backdoor way to force men out of it. It is illegal in the state of Nevada to bar anyone from entering a tournament based upon race, gender, or old age (though it IS legal to bar people too young from entering, such as with the WSOP Seniors Tournament).

    Oddly enough, while it IS legal for them to bar anyone from the WSOP for pretty much any reason, the one reason they could NOT bar someone was for entering the Ladies event, or a major discrimination lawsuit could be brought.

    Somehow they found that it is permissible to give a discount based upon gender, so that's what they did. They multiplied the entry fee by 10, and then give a 90% discount to all women. I agree that sounds like gender discrimination, but it must be legal or Caesars wouldn't do this.

    This change came about after several consecutive years of men entering the Ladies event at the WSOP.

    One of the best known players to have done this was Shaun Deeb (in drag), who has since grown up a bit and distanced himself from the situation. Shaun was not a crossdresser or transsexual, but just did this as a joke.




    Regarding transsexuals entering the event, I believe that you get the discount if your ID says you're female. Not sure what Caitlyn Jenner's ID says at this point.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    it must be legal or Caesars wouldn't do this.
    It's legal until it's beaten in court.

    I don't blame Caesars and the WSOP for trying to do this, but by turning a $1,000 event into a $10,000 and then offering a discount to women it opens a new door to a discrimination lawsuit. I hope no one sues because I think Caesars will lose in Federal court where the rules about discounts are judged -- it's not a state issue. But I do think the women are entitled to their own tournament. And, why not?

    By the way, the rules about discounts come from the Federal Reserve. That's federal, not state.

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    It's legal until it's beaten in court.

    I don't blame Caesars and the WSOP for trying to do this, but by turning a $1,000 event into a $10,000 and then offering a discount to women it opens a new door to a discrimination lawsuit. I hope no one sues because I think Caesars will lose in Federal court where the rules about discounts are judged -- it's not a state issue. But I do think the women are entitled to their own tournament. And, why not?

    By the way, the rules about discounts come from the Federal Reserve. That's federal, not state.
    Maybe that's it.

    They couldn't knowingly violate gender discrimination laws regarding entry (as those are clearly laid out), but perhaps the discount thing is a grey area where they knew 25-year-old punks looking to cause trouble aren't likely to legally challenge in federal court.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  20. #20
    The "discount thing" definitely is a grey area. Discounts for seniors, kids, ladies nights, wear a costume for free entry, you name it. There are plenty of discount schemes and NO ONE has challenged them in courts to the best of my knowledge.

    The only challenge I recall involving kids involved car pool lanes. The state of California was sued by a family when their infant wasn't counted as a second person for a car pool. The family won.

    Also there is a big $$$ difference between suing in state court vs federal court. Regnis can address this. It costs a lot more money to sue in federal court. I have stopped suing people in federal court over my Internet businesses because the cost wasn't worth the reward or the damage.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. WSOP TV Ratings
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-28-2016, 11:44 PM
  2. Jerry Yang back at WSOP
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 07-15-2015, 07:58 PM
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-23-2015, 05:09 AM
  4. Did the WSOP lower the cost of the tournaments this year?
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-04-2013, 11:32 AM
  5. Bicycle Casino Starts WSOP satellites on Wednesday 12/28
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-01-2012, 04:52 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •