Women At The US Opem...maybe

Masayoshi

Fusenshou no Masa
Silver Member
Can you possibly take more than three seconds to read what I write before going off half cocked?
What exactly was half cocked about my post? I addressed your post and pointed out a whole bunch of logical flaws.

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).

I never disagreed with any of this. Women being physically able to compete with men is MORE of a reason not to have segregated tournaments, not less. Sexism/discrimination towards women is NOT a valid reason to have reverse sexism against men. If you really want to be equal then be truly equal. If the WPBA is not sexist, they are essentially a "B" tournament to allow the lower skilled women to win something, thus, any woman who displays skills equal to or above the "A" players (in a relative sense) should consequently not be allowed back into the "B" tournaments.


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.

Indeed, it is true that the governing bodies decide the rules. That doesn't make it right...


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.

Well, if they do well enough in the US Open, I think it is pretty clear that they can go far in the men's professional pool world. It's not like you can luck out in a playing field of that caliber.

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?

If, on the other hand, the clerk is not allowed to play in women's open events, YES IT IS FAIR.

Maybe not ideal, but the women segregate themselves.

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.

http://www.azbilliards.com/2000storya.php?storynum=7432

According to Barry Behrman it is the “Men’s” U.S. Open 9-Ball Championships. Or are you contending that men should be allowed to play in the women's open qualifying events?
 

JimS

Grandpa & his grand boys.
Silver Member
It is sexist to limit the field to male players. Period. Is it sexist for the WPBA to limit the womens open to women? Hell yes! But that's their business. Two wrongs don't make a right. If it's called the Open then it ought to be open.

This ain't rocket science. There is no defense for keeping women out. None. Zilch. Squat. :groucho:
 

driz86

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What about the break? I think that it might level the playing field to introduce some provisions. Personally, I like the alternate break with ball in hand thing I've read about lately.
 

CreeDo

Fargo Rating 597
Silver Member
Pretty neat thread. No idea which way to go on it.

It's true that if you open the gates one way, people will be arguing they should be opened the other. But you can always just ignore those people. I don't think anyone would boycott. If they DID open up women's events to men, it seems clear that men would just dominate both fields.

In the short run it would probably be good for ticket sales and make good TV. But in the long run? What if women enter the US open and never come closer than the top 16 for 10 years straight? Or what if they don't enter because they feel it's just donating? Like 16 women enter in a field of 240 men and they all get crushed? How depressing would that be?

Some seem to be taking the "it's a violation of the english language" route. Like if it's called the US open it HAS to be open to all. But I think the US Open gets its name from the golf tournament of the same name, and the intention never was to make a truly open tournament. And we don't limit it to just US players though I've heard grumbling on here that we should. In any case we're not gonna make major changes to a tournament just to accomodate the name that was chosen for it, and we're not gonna change a history-rich well-known name just to make it more accurate.

It looks like the golf US open technically allows women if they qualify, but I don't know if a woman has ever played in one, much less placed.

Basically... we COULD change this rule, but the net result might be completely invisible. There might be almost no women, and the few who are there don't make a splash.

Or maybe not? We're talking a game where the women can at least come within spitting distance (the physical differences aren't as big as in golf, or... say, the NBA) and it's a notoriously lucky game. If Yu Ram can beat shane at 10 ball in a race to 10 then a woman reaching the finals is not mission impossible.
 

GG11

Kill the Bunny
Silver Member
I posted a poll up on my site http://gailglazebrook.wordpress.com/ asking this very question and last night at league it was sort of a heated debate .... I understand where the boys are coming from ... why do the girls get a US Open where only women can play, but the boys have to share theirs? Hmm .. In a way, I felt they were right, a difficult acceptance given I think women and men playing together makes the sport stronger and more entertaining for the audience, but sexism in either direction is still wrong.

Then my teammate Borana brought up a really good point. She said, "Yeah, women have their own US Open, but it's invitational, thus it's not REALLY a US "OPEN." So now amateur girls are banned from playing in both!" So true!

Right now NEITHER of these "US Opens" are really "OPEN" tournaments at all. They both discriminate in one way or another.

Thus IMHO, The WPBA should change the title of the "WPBA US OPEN" to something more accurate. The WPBA should continue having women's only tourneys b/c it's currently one of the few US produced pool outlets we have broadcasting our sport. No one should hate on the WPBA and the women players for working together and successfully having a legitimate tour. It takes everyone compromising something at one point or another for the benefit of the tour. The men just aren't that selfless.

CDLG is right. If the men want their own tour, they need to break out of their cement blocks and work together on it. Tony was in a meeting once with all the pro men at the time and they were trying to get the men a unified tour. One of the pro men stood up and said, "Yeah, but how much money is going in my pocket!" :(

There's a distinction between looking out for the whole to benefit yourself and just looking out for yourself - the women seem to understand this.

And Barry's US OPEN, if they want to truly be a US OPEN should allow both men and women. To deny the opportunity for anyone to play because of sex or skill level contradicts the title, "US OPEN."
 
Last edited:

Johnnyt

Burn all jump cues
Silver Member
I posted a poll up on my site http://gailglazebrook.wordpress.com/ asking this very question and last night at league it was sort of a heated debate .... I understand where the boys are coming from ... why do the girls get a US Open where only women can play, but the boys have to share theirs? Hmm .. In a way, I felt they were right, a difficult acceptance given I think women and men playing together makes the sport stronger and more entertaining for the audience, but sexism in either direction is still wrong.

Then my teammate Borana brought up a really good point. She said, "Yeah, women have their own US Open, but it's invitational, thus it's not REALLY a US "OPEN." So now amateur girls are banned from playing in both!" So true!

Right now NEITHER of these "US Opens" are really "OPEN" tournaments at all. They both discriminate in one way or another.

Thus IMHO, The WPBA should change the title of the "WPBA US OPEN" to something more accurate. The WPBA should continue having women's only tourneys b/c it's currently one of the few US produced pool outlets we have broadcasting our sport. No one should hate on the WPBA and the women players for working together and successfully having a legitimate tour. It takes everyone compromising something at one point or another for the benefit of the tour. The men just aren't that selfless.

CDLG is right. If the men want their own tour, they need to break out of their cement blocks and work together on it. Tony was in a meeting once with all the pro men at the time and they were trying to get the men a unified tour. One of the pro men stood up and said, "Yeah, but how much money is going in my pocket!" :(

There's a distinction between looking out for the whole to benefit yourself and just looking out for yourself - the women seem to understand this.

And Barry's US OPEN, if they want to truly be a US OPEN should allow both men and women. To deny the opportunity for anyone to play because of sex or skill level contradicts the title, "US OPEN."

Borana is right, it's not a true open. The WPBA Open is invite with a few qualifiers I believe. I said this a few years ago on here when I started a thread on "why not allow the women to play in the US Open". Of course I got blasted for it then. Now it looks like a BIG % is for it. Johnnyt
 
Last edited:

SUPERSTAR

I am Keyser Söze
Silver Member
Maybe Barry is worried about one of the girls bringing a cuter lap dog then he has, and stealing all the attention away from him.
 

swrooster

A HOTDOG ROAD PLAYER!!
Silver Member
Coming 'Round

Borana is right, it's not a true open. The WPBA Open is invite with a few qualifiers I believe. I said this a few years ago on here when I started a thread on "why not allow the women to play in the US Open". Of course I got blasted for it then. Now it looks like a BIG % is for it. Johnnyt

We're just starting to realize that you're close to correct most of the time...I caught myself prior to indicating that you were right as everyone knows it is impossible for a pool player to be "right"...
 

Mark Griffin

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Women and US Open

Just for everyone's info: I had this discussion with Barry about 18 months ago. I was trying to get a pro tour going (the result of the Desert Shootout not paying the players in April of 2008).

I was trying to work with several ongoing events and by adding additional money and direction, they could be used to form a 'Tour".

Barry and I talked several times and one of my conditions was that women be allowed to play. He was open to the discussion. I needed to get other events and venues to agree and Barry & I said we would talk after I saw how my other negotiations went.

Here is where it got REAL interesting!

I had talked to the WPBA at the BCA Expo held in Charlotte around June of 2008. After agreeing in principle, I went to Michigan City to have a meeting with Dawn Hopkins, Melissa Herndon, and a couple of others.

It was at this meeting that I was informed that the WPBA would NOT LET their members play in the proposed tour. I was told this was because of the APA sponsorship and my ownership of the BCAPL.

Even though this tour was not affiliated with the BCAPL. (How short sighted is the APA?????)

So there are other factors as to why the women have not played in some events. And they were told that I thought this tour would allow women to play in the US Open - and they did not care.

Since their new election, I am hopeful that the vision of the WPBA might be more open.

If there are any questions or comments, please feel free to contact Mark Griffin (markg@playcsipool.com) or 702-719-7665 (work).

Mark Griffin, CEO
CSI
BCAPL - USAPL - NCS
 

Mark Griffin

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
US OPEN 10-BALL is WPBA recognized

The women WILL be playing at the US OPEN 10-BALL. (played in May at the Riviera).



We have invited the top 10 - and are awaiting some of their responses. So far we have committments from some of the top players - and a lot of interest from overseas and WPBA player's ranked outside of the top 10.

I feel that women should be allowed in all events - unless they have an identical women only event. Which often times does not exist. This will raise the level of play for everyone.


I will state the I have heard that Jeanette Lee will NOT be there - I believe the APA will not allow her to compete in any venue where there is BCAPL presence. (Even though this is a CSI event).

Only the APA can think this small. (I keep bringing this up to show people that the APA is NOT for pool - they are only for themselves!) This is in response to them 'blackmailing' the vote for the new WPBA board.

If you have any questions or comments, contact markg@playcsipool.com or 702-719-7665.

Mark Griffin, CEO
CSI
BCAPL - USAPL- NCS
 

Russ Chewning

Short Bus Russ - C player
Silver Member
Barry said no women this year, maybe next year so this year a zillion to 1 and im still not betting. Next year 10,000-1 minimum depending on the entries.

And I can guarantee you that a woman will win it if that bet is actually gotten down with someone capable of paying it off.

Come on. We're talking POOL players here.

Can you say ummmm.. Mike Lebron vs. Buddy Hall, Challenge of Champions - 1991?

If a pool player gets enough odds, and the bet is big enough, they are always gonna win, no matter who (or how many people) they have to beat.

Russ
 

Majic

With The Lights ON !!
Silver Member

Attachments

  • Hillarystache.jpg
    Hillarystache.jpg
    14.5 KB · Views: 194

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Well, if they do well enough in the US Open, I think it is pretty clear that they can go far in the men's professional pool world. It's not like you can luck out in a playing field of that caliber.

Not to pick on Tommy Kennedy and Reed Pierce and others but there have been many US Open winners who didn't do much of anything else in the pool world.

Winning one event that is filled mostly with players who have NO SHOT is not a good predictor of how well a person will do in a consistent tour.

The best woman in the WPBA is the BEST of the B-league. That doesn't make her as good as the best in the A-league.

So if she or the best wheelchair player manages to go deep in the OPEN - say top 16 then you think that they should be BRANDED as top professional players and therefore banned from participating in their own leagues? Even though the "men" have no tour for them to play on and even though they would likely be middle of the pack on a pro tour if there even was one?

This would be the equivalent of pool purgatory.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Can you possibly take more than three seconds to read what I write before going off half cocked?
What exactly was half cocked about my post? I addressed your post and pointed out a whole bunch of logical flaws.

Because you fail to acknowledge that women are still discriminated against and still handled in a sexist way. Thus in order to bring more women into the game it's still neccesary to have women's events. Why do we have JUNIOR tournaments?

I never disagreed with any of this. Women being physically able to compete with men is MORE of a reason not to have segregated tournaments, not less. Sexism/discrimination towards women is NOT a valid reason to have reverse sexism against men. If you really want to be equal then be truly equal.

So you contend that a woman and a man starting out in the poolroom as beginners will be treated equally? It's not a matter of the women treating the men equally, it's the other way around.

If the WPBA is not sexist, they are essentially a "B" tournament to allow the lower skilled women to win something, thus, any woman who displays skills equal to or above the "A" players (in a relative sense) should consequently not be allowed back into the "B" tournaments.

Again, some tours make that determination. I contend that it's not necessary to have that be a requirement for participation in the US OPEN.


Indeed, it is true that the governing bodies decide the rules. That doesn't make it right...

No doubt but you are throwing up barriers to women being allowed in the US Open which don't need to be there. Let the OTHER tours figure out what they want to do regarding who they allow and who they don't.

Well, if they do well enough in the US Open, I think it is pretty clear that they can go far in the men's professional pool world. It's not like you can luck out in a playing field of that caliber.

It's not clear at all. There have been many situations where the "local" hotshot goes deep in the open and then you never hear from them again.

If, on the other hand, the clerk is not allowed to play in women's open events, YES IT IS FAIR.

There are no open women's events. The title alone describes the most basic requirement for participation.

Maybe not ideal, but the women segregate themselves.

For good reason. In 2010 they are still not treated as equals. The numbers of women playing vs. men is dramatically lower. They need a place to nurture their skill where they are not treated differently. That place doesn't exist in America yet at the top pro level. It exists at the regional tour level but from there the women who aspire to the BEST POOL PLAYERS have no where to go since they aren't allowed into the "mens" events.

http://www.azbilliards.com/2000storya.php?storynum=7432

According to Barry Behrman it is the “Men’s” U.S. Open 9-Ball Championships. Or are you contending that men should be allowed to play in the women's open qualifying events?

That's not the title now is it? It's the US Open - no "men's" in the title. Change the title.
 

Masayoshi

Fusenshou no Masa
Silver Member
Because you fail to acknowledge that women are still discriminated against and still handled in a sexist way. Thus in order to bring more women into the game it's still neccesary to have women's events. Why do we have JUNIOR tournaments?

That completely failed to answer the question, but I will address this part anyways. I DID acknowledge that women are discriminated against. YOU failed at reading and keep asserting that reverse discrimination is a valid answer to discrimination. IT IS NOT.


So you contend that a woman and a man starting out in the poolroom as beginners will be treated equally? It's not a matter of the women treating the men equally, it's the other way around.

I never said they are treated equally, you assumed that I did. I contend that in order for women to become truly equal, they have to give up some of the priveleges that they gain from being treated unequally. People like you on the other hand would like them to be treated BETTER than men. That is not right.


Again, some tours make that determination. I contend that it's not necessary to have that be a requirement for participation in the US OPEN.

Okay, you contend that...Now back it up with an argument not filled with double standards or logical fallacies.

No doubt but you are throwing up barriers to women being allowed in the US Open which don't need to be there. Let the OTHER tours figure out what they want to do regarding who they allow and who they don't.

It's not a barrier. The men don't have an opportunity to join the WPBA, so a woman giving up the right to play in the WPBA is not a barrier. It might hurt their income, but if they had a penis, or were treated equally, they wouldn't have had that income in the first place.


It's not clear at all. There have been many situations where the "local" hotshot goes deep in the open and then you never hear from them again.

Like I said before, but you probably failed to read, in the extremely rare event that they do not do well in mens pool after the open, they should be able to return after a certain amount of time. I don't think anybody would complain about that.


There are no open women's events. The title alone describes the most basic requirement for participation.

There was a WPBA US Open last year. I don't know about this year because it seems to be a spartan scheduel for the WPBA, but they do usually have opens.

For good reason. In 2010 they are still not treated as equals. The numbers of women playing vs. men is dramatically lower. They need a place to nurture their skill where they are not treated differently. That place doesn't exist in America yet at the top pro level. It exists at the regional tour level but from there the women who aspire to the BEST POOL PLAYERS have no where to go since they aren't allowed into the "mens" events.

They are sometimes allowed into men's events when there is no equivalent women's event. US Open 10 ball for example. For men's invitational events, I think it would be more fair to invite players based on skill. The women are not currently at a level where they would have enough skill to be a good candidate for say the Mosconi Cup.


That's not the title now is it? It's the US Open - no "men's" in the title. Change the title.

Why should a 30+ year old event change its name for something petty like that?
 
Last edited:
Top