Women At The US Opem...maybe

I am all for the women playing in the US Open.


Competition at this level would be a great for the Fans of pool.
 
Leanne A said:
All I am saying is what WUTANG was saying is that the men don't have much to call their own and the US Open is one of those things that they should have. The women have the US Open thru the WPBA and if you want to play as a woman you can qualify to do that. Also you don't have to play on the full calendar year to play in the woman's US Open. They still hold qualifiers for that.

What is with this constant contest between the women and the men when it comes to pool, major champoinships shouldn't be altered, there are plenty of other tournaments where if you want to play with these men you can. All other sports there is a men's and woman's division and they play. Ex. NBA the woman cannot play so then forms the WNBA and they don't constantly cry to the men that they should be allowed to play for the World Championship in the NBA. Yes I know there has been in the past a small number of women who crossed over for a "brief" moment, but in the end if they could be competitive and stay competitive on a regular basis then things would have merged alot sooner than now. In sports there is levels and divisions, we may not always agree but in the end these divisions are there for a reason.:confused:
Click to expand...

In physical sports it's simply because the men on average are much bigger and stronger. But that's not to say that a woman won't every show up that is in every way a better player than Michael Jordan is/was. But if such a woman showed up then she would be denied the opportunity to become the best basketball player in the world. She would be relegated to being the best "woman" player in the world.

In the NBA any male player can go to team tryouts and try to get on a team. The NBA themselves run all sorts of basketball camps that double as scouting venues to try and find potential players. I feel that any woman ought to be allowed to try out for any major league sports team.

In pool there is no physical reason not to allow women to compete.

And this is not a charity. The women have had a tour simply because they worked their asses off as a group to make it work. The men won't do that.

But again, it's not about tours and it's not about double dipping. It's about the fact that I can drive across the street from the Chesapeake convention center to the Holiday Inn, go to the desk and pick the male clerk who never in his life played pool before and take him over to the tournament and put down $600 and HE is allowed to "play" while Kelly Fisher is not.

That is the definition of OPEN. Anything less is not truly open.
 
All fot it

In my opinion it would make it a more interesting event and draw more publicity to your tournament, causing an increase in participants, publicity, viewership interest, goodwill and lncreasing the payouts. It sure couldn't hurt anything. I think it's a good move in the right direction.
 
Masayoshi said:
I think women should be allowed to play in the US Open under the condition that they "retire" from the WPBA for say a minimum of 3 years or so if they cash for a significant amount. Maybe a better word would be 'graduate' I think the worst thing that can happen is that they are allowed to double dip and take prize money from both the men's and women's events.

The whole (logical) argument for a women's only tour is based on skill level, correct? Well, if a B player does well at an open event, he tends to get kicked out of B tournaments. The same should go for women competing in men's events.
Click to expand...

Seriously? What's a significant amount? I once saw Tommy Kennedy pissed off because he finished 17th out of 200+ players and got $1700.

The US Open is a one off event where anyone with a penis can play. Many players use it as an excuse to take a pool vacation. EVERYONE knows that the majority of players who enter are simply there to donate to the prize fund. And the fact is that most of the women would be donating as well.

I find it ludicrous that people don't care if a quadrapeligic who never played pool before is allowed to play in the US Open as long as he is male but the idea of women playing causes so much debate - what is this 1950?
 
wutang said:
I love my pool playing women. Dont get it twisted. But if there's a gender barrier one way, out of fairness, we should 'hold to the law' the other way. It's a no-brainer. The wpba is not going to take the 'w' out of its title and allow us to play. The jpnewt is not going to take the 'w' out of its title for us as well. And so forth for all other tournaments that have 'women only' addressed in their titles. You have u.s. Open men's and women's tournaments in other major sports like: Tennis, golf, bowling, basketball (nba and wnba), etc. They are on prime time television. And believe you me, there are not going to 'merge the sexes' just because. Im for having 'open' tourneys for everyone (all sexes) to play in. But the men dont have much to go around and call 'our own'. Over the past 5-7 years (ballpark figure), all i see advertised are 'open or women's' slapped on a tournament title. The women can play in either or, but the men are restrcited to just the 'open'. Where are the men's only tournaments?? What do we have to call 'our own'? The U.S. Open has been around for like 'ever. Barry said, 'no women allowed' for whatever his reasons are. I dont see any reason to 'break traditon' cause a small handful wants to particpate. If 'tradition' is broken on one side, it must be broken for the other side as well. Once again this has nothing to do with 'not wanting' women to play with the men. I love my ladies. Im at most thier local events watching them get down like us with the same passion. I just dont like it when there's 'inconsistancy in principle'.



PEACE

WUTANG


P.S IN LIKE '99-'00, I SENT AN EMAIL TO P AND B MAGAZINE ABOUT 'THE MEN'S TOUR'. APARENTLY, IT CAUGHT SOMEONE'S EYE. IT GOT SOME PRINT IN THE MAG. CHECK IT OUT. ITS UNDER THE NAME: EPYH
Click to expand...

I guess you missed the thread where it was announced that a woman just won the bowling national championships against a full field of men?

Why would you want to compete on a tour where most of the players are easy to beat? I mean even the WPBA players themselves know that the majority of their players are low shortstop level at best.

If you are an A player do you complain when you are not allowed to play in the B-player tournaments?

Do you complain when the B-players donate to the Open and A-player class events when they have little to no chance to cash?

What is this with "tradition" - seriously. First of all the tradition you speak of is nothing more than one promoter's decision as to how he wants to run his event.

And many people in this debate are unaware of the ACTUAL history here.

From what I have heard the decision not to even have a Women's division at the US Open was because the WPBA wanted to have a US Open and Barry owned the rights to that name. So he gave it to the WPBA and from that time on didn't hold a Women's division.

Be that as it may, it's not 1995 - it's 15 years later and I would have hoped we would be more enlightened.

Well anyway it's not our decision. Barry Behrman is the one who decides who can play in his event and judging by the crowds who flocked to see Jasmin and Kelly and other women go head to head with the top male players in the World Ten Ball championships he should be looking at the potential revenue increase and doing what it takes to bring more money in the door. Allowing women pads the prize fund and potentially increases the gate.

And Barry gets to go down in history as a true pioneer who embraced the word OPEN in it's true meaning.
 
JB Cases said:
Seriously? What's a significant amount? I once saw Tommy Kennedy pissed off because he finished 17th out of 200+ players and got $1700.

The US Open is a one off event where anyone with a penis can play. Many players use it as an excuse to take a pool vacation. EVERYONE knows that the majority of players who enter are simply there to donate to the prize fund. And the fact is that most of the women would be donating as well.

I find it ludicrous that people don't care if a quadrapeligic who never played pool before is allowed to play in the US Open as long as he is male but the idea of women playing causes so much debate - what is this 1950?
Click to expand...

"I find it ludicrous that people don't care if a quadrapeligic who never played pool before is allowed to play in women's open tournaments as long as she is female but the idea of men playing causes so much debate - what is this 1950?"

Double standard much?

A 'significant amout' is an amount that would have to be determined by the people making the rules. Just making your entry back would probably not be significant enough to warrant 'graduation', but winning the open would. The line would have to be drawn somewhere in the middle.

Again, I contend that the ONLY logical (meaning un-biased, and un-prejudiced) basis for having a women's only tour is because they can't compete on the same level as the top men. It's exactly the same as a B tournament.

You keep saying that "blah-blah women can compete physically with the men in pool blah-blah etc. etc." Well, if they indeed can then what is the basis for a women's only tour other than sexism? Are you claiming to be a (reverse) sexist?

Once a woman shows that she is on the same level as the male pros and wants to compete in male events, she should not be allowed in the the female only events (to make it fair, she should be allowed to return if her venture into the male pool world proves unsuccessful).

It would be the same as not allowing an A player into a B tournament because the B-only restriction is put in place to keep the A players from winning everything. If a player was winning B tournaments and open tournaments simultaneously, you can bet your ass people would be calling 'foul!'
 
pocono said:
It was also the women who made the decision to go thier own way. I think the solution is rather simple, One Pro tour with men and women. You can have open qualify tournaments for the up and coming players.
,
Click to expand...

That's right but it is unfair to punish ALL women because of the decision of the WPBA.

There are hundreds of women who play shortstop to world class speed in the world who aren't now and have little desire to be part of the WPBA.

Why should these women be denied the opportunity to compete in OPEN events just because of their sex?
 
JB Cases said:
That's right but it is unfair to punish ALL women because of the decision of the WPBA.

There are hundreds of women who play shortstop to world class speed in the world who aren't now and have little desire to be part of the WPBA.

Why should these women be denied the opportunity to compete in OPEN events just because of their sex?
Click to expand...

Which short-stop and world class women are you talking about exactly?:rolleyes:
 
To not allow the women to play at the US Open is doing Barry's tournament a big disservice. Right now the women players are stuffed with quality players who can lay down 3/4/5/6rack at any given moment. Liu Shasha of China put a six pack on Karen Corr in the Finals of the WPA Championship and that girl is only 16 years old! Not only will the level of play increase, but there will be a number of additional marketing avenues that could be explored via the men vs the women angle. Alot of non pool playing citizens tuning into ESPN would stop dead in there tracks at the sight of Jasmine firing a jump shot to beat a maniacal Earl double hill.There might even be some serious converts to the sport of pool if it was shown that so many healhy, attractive females participate at the highest level.
 
Eric. said:
Just to play devils advocate, does anyone feel that it's reverse discrimination to have a wimmin only tour? After all, the WPBA is just that.

For the record, I have no problem with women playing in the Berhman US Open.


Eric
Click to expand...

I 100% agree. For us people to truely be equal, we need to treat other as well as ourselves as equals. No more, no less. I'm 100% against special treatment (for better or worse) no matter thier race, sex, or age.

I think women players would play even better if they only played in mixed tounaments.

I would love to see the us open, open to all. And I would love to see Jasmin snap it off.
 
cleary said:
I 100% agree. For us people to truely be equal, we need to treat other as well as ourselves as equals. No more, no less. I'm 100% against special treatment (for better or worse) no matter thier race, sex, or age.

I think women players would play even better if they only played in mixed tounaments.

I would love to see the us open, open to all. And I would love to see Jasmin snap it off.
Click to expand...

she wins the us open ill buy you a watch.
 
Masayoshi said:
"I find it ludicrous that people don't care if a quadrapeligic who never played pool before is allowed to play in women's open tournaments as long as she is female but the idea of men playing causes so much debate - what is this 1950?"

Double standard much?

A 'significant amout' is an amount that would have to be determined by the people making the rules. Just making your entry back would probably not be significant enough to warrant 'graduation', but winning the open would. The line would have to be drawn somewhere in the middle.

Again, I contend that the ONLY logical (meaning un-biased, and un-prejudiced) basis for having a women's only tour is because they can't compete on the same level as the top men. It's exactly the same as a B tournament.

You keep saying that "blah-blah women can compete physically with the men in pool blah-blah etc. etc." Well, if they indeed can then what is the basis for a women's only tour other than sexism? Are you claiming to be a (reverse) sexist?

Once a woman shows that she is on the same level as the male pros and wants to compete in male events, she should not be allowed in the the female only events (to make it fair, she should be allowed to return if her venture into the male pool world proves unsuccessful).

It would be the same as not allowing an A player into a B tournament because the B-only restriction is put in place to keep the A players from winning everything. If a player was winning B tournaments and open tournaments simultaneously, you can bet your ass people would be calling 'foul!'
Click to expand...

Can you possibly take more than three seconds to read what I write before going off half cocked?

I have said that there is no physical reason WHY women cannot compete equally with men. Do you disagree with that?

I have also said that the AVERAGE skill level of women is much lower than the AVERAGE of the men. Do you disagree with this?

Now why would this be? Two reasons, number of women playing vs. numbers of men AND sexism/discrimination (or how women are treated, as evidenced by this thread).

Whether a player is allowed to play in ANY tour or tournament is at the discretion of the tour or tournament. Thus it's unlikely that the WPBA is going to make a rule that any female who wins Barry Behrman's US Open is now barred from the WPBA. Most regional tours however have rules about who can play and who can't and at least on the Viking Tour top 16 WPBA players are barred from anything BUT the OPEN divisions.

I think tying participation to the US Open with ANY sort of reciprocal restriction on participation in other events is nuts. It's ONE EVENT.

Do you think it's fair that I can go get the clerk from the Holiday Inn and waste $600 putting him in the US Open yet Allison Fisher is not allowed to play?

The difference between the WOMEN'S Professional Billiard Association is that it's not billed as an OPEN event. It's billed as a tour for PROFESSIONAL - meaning one has to EARN the title - women pool players. The UPA is not open to women either. Nor is the Wheelchair Billiards tour open to non-handicapped players.

But the US OPEN should welcome ANY player who wants to try. Or change the title of the event.
 
Last edited:
CrisDeLaGarza said:
" I am debating the positives as well as the negatives of this decision "

This tournament should have been open a long time ago. I've had a few very frustrating conversations with Barry about this in the past. If he does open it up, I think many of the female players that play in it will experience the condescending nature he's expressed to me in our conversations.

I'm glad you used Turning Stone as an example. The tournament director there is awesome and (from my experience) was very respectful towards all the players, men and women.

Maybe I'm short-sighted but can someone explain what the negatives are?
Click to expand...


There are no negatives, only short sighted people with bruised egos. IMO it would be a better tournment, if the girls played in it!!!!

I feel that a open tournment should be "Open", come one come all! Wheelchairs, chruches, fat, skinny, old, young etc etc etc its open. At least thats what its called. So it should be open.

As far as tours go if the girls want a girls only tour, I hope they do great.

If the boys want a tour then it should be a boys tour.

If a promoter decided he wants a open tour then it should be open.

You cant call something "Open" and have gender restrictions. Period!!!!


Hope your well Ms.CDLG,

Stay intouch,

yours,

eric :)
 
Let the girls play, goddamnit.

I've always wanted to go to the US Open, and I will definitely go in 2011 if women can compete there too.
 
I was also just reminded that any male child can also play in the US Open but a female child cannot.

Sad that a 12 year old boy is allowed to play but Hall of Famer Allison Fisher is not. Or 16 year old World Women's Champion can't see who she would fare against the best players in the world because she had the bad luck to be born without a penis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top