Where are the girls?

In the poker rooms that I play in ( Louisiana & Mississippi) I rarely see women in the 21 to 35 age group. The few that I do see are not serious poker players. They are usually there for some other reason such waiting for their husband or group of friends to finish playing slots. The average age of the women I see there appears to be 55 or older. I have been wondering, is this typical? Why do women wait so long to become poker players? Is there any reason for this? Any comments would be welcome.

I don't have the answer but the problem is even more pronounced in chess where men outnumber women by more than 25:1.


Could it be that the confrontation nature of strategy games appeals more to men?

Try playing in Kansas City at the Ameristar casino. Usually always at least one and often two twenty-something lookers in the 10/20 game. The few I have played with are friendly and loose (card wise that is) /images/smile.gif.


Jimbo

Hey, tell me how the Ameristar room there is run or put it on the new cardroom forum. Ameristar is doing its level best to ruin a poker room near me. I'm wondering if they do it elsewhere.

As Dynasty notes, poker is a very aggressive and confrontational game. I recall reading that women prefer "isolation" games such as slot machines because there is no "feedback" from other people involved. There is also no criticism of strategy involved in slot play (unless the machines now talk back to players). My interpretation is that many women who "gamble" prefer to do so in their own private sphere, away from the harsh eye of "serious players". Thus, slots are the drug of choice for those people who prefer to avoid rather than confront a challenge. It is certainly true that male poker pros outnumber females by a huge margin. I guess some Babes are just more "macho" than others /images/smile.gif As for the "age" of female players, I suspect that might be partially a function of lifestyle and finances....many "younger" women don't have the time or resources to devote "serious" time to becoming a pro poker player. And...by the way, I would like to mention that the same situation applies with regard to men. Most of the guys I play poker with are over 40, and the few good pros I know are over 50. Babe

PokerBabe says "the few good pros I know are over 50."


Since Dynasty is only 31, that means that Babe doesn't think he is a good pro?!


Ouch!

It doesn't really matter what they do to the poker room at the Ameristar KC. It is the only place to play.

That seems to be Ameristar's philosophy. Perhaps that's why they had to sell to Station when they competed w/ Station with the Reserve v. Sunset Station. I really liked the plane crash theme at the Reserve. See my post on the new cardroom forum for more. Ameristar does OK without competition. ;-)

im 23.

they might be lookers on a Kansas City scale. but are they *really*?

I have lived in 6 foreign countries, traveled to twenty more, lived in 6 US States and visited all but a handfull. Yes they unequivocally qualify as lookers in my limited experience. Plus I am a VIP mamber of over a dozen strip clubs!!! How is that for qualifications!!! /images/smile.gif


Jimbo

NO-mdlm - I never meant to imply that Dynasty is not a good "pro". The players I was referring to are beating the 30-60 game for equal to or greater than 1bb/hr. AND...they are few and far between. Beating 30-60 for a bb is making a "good living" at poker in my opinion and is also what I would consider a "professional" level of poker playing. I'm sure Dynasty does well overall and I think highly of his play. Babe

Hayano's "Poker Faces" was the most serious study of poker professionals. Unfortunately, it was written about two decades ago and is based entirely on southern California.


Hayano found NO full time professionals over the age of 43 or so. He concluded that it was a young man's game. Why? As they age and take on family responsibilities and become more security conscious, pros get sick of the life, the lack of security, the lack of social status, and get out of full time play. They may continue to do very well at the tables, but they also work at something else.

You certainly know pros to whom this principle applies. Mason and David have pointed out that people who do not have to play every day can have a much higher win rate because they can be more selective in their games. The pro who needs to win every week to pay his rent can't be remotely as selective as the ones who will play only when conditions are favorable.

Of course, in LV we also know some full time pros over 50, but there are not too many of them. It's a rough life.


Al