What Tiffany Willaimson did right

[ QUOTE ]
You say that she made mistakes that are common for someone that has been playing for that short a time. Ok, that’s fair enough. Then you try to say that it’s unfair to point out those mistakes and folks are only doing that because she is a woman.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, I never said it's UNFAIR to point out mistakes made, as long as it's done in a, informative, nice and UNCONFRONTATIONAL way. NOT the the way it HAS been done, via personal attacks that have been leveled at Tiffany by calling her names and attacking her PERSONALLY.

[ QUOTE ]
As for your comments on Annie Duke, I have yet to hear why anyone feels that she was speaking for “all women.” Annie is clearly not afraid to “play with the boys,” and I’m not so sure that because she made some comment to that effect that she was implying that other women are – no one has ever been able to give me a direct quote to that effect. She made it quite clear in her book that she played the Omaha event because it paid more money, a reasonable decision considering poker is her main form of income.

[/ QUOTE ]

As for Annie, while most of us FIGURED it was because the money was better for the Omaha event, it's NOT what she said on camera.

This as what she said ... it's on Television, filmed for all the world to see what she said. Just watch ESPN Classic the next time they air the 2004 Ladies WSOP event, (it was on again this past weekend), and you'll see what I mean.

Not only that, but she distance herself, when asked why she didn't play in the 2004 Ladies Event, because after all wasn't she an ambassador for Women in POker?? She added (parphrased here) "Well, I also don't play in the ladies events, because what Ladies should aspire to, is the next level like what I play, and what Kathy Leibert and (she named a few other poker pro's) other Women poker players play at".

Well, I know Kathy and several of the other Lady players she mentioned (as they showed footage of them at the time as well), do indeed play in Ladies Only events.

They don't think of Ladies Only events as 'beneath them' as Anne seemed to of implied that she's better than the rest of us, period, and that Ladies Only events are beneath her.

In other words, I took offense, that she was looking down her nose at the rest of us women poker players.

Like I said, watch the episode ... you'll see what I'm talking about.

[ QUOTE ]
I don’t know why you keep saying that women’s events are “harder to win.” The style of play is different, but it’s certainly not the case that women’s events are filled with more skilled players than open events. I go to women’s events mostly to socialize; the adjustments that I have to make to my game playing in a ladies field are actually kind of a pain. I wouldn’t say that women’s events are harder or easier, but different enough that you have to adjust your play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your last sentence there, it is indeed different, and you have to adjust your play BECAUSE you lose the advantages you get from playing with men.

Thus some of the things you do when you play with guys, you just can't get away with, when you play in a Ladies Only event.

You come across as if you resent having to adjust your play to play in Ladies Only events. Well, I think of it as yet another marvolous learning experience.

One that teaches me, provides the ability to me, to learn HOW to adjust my play. This because after all, if you CAN'T adjust your play, then you'll never be a consistantly winning player at tournament poker.

Women only events are HARDER to play and win because the tricks you can use on guys to win, you can't use them there.

Say what you will, but there STILL are guys that treat women differently at the table than their fellow men.

When you sit down at a table in a Ladies Only event, you truly are treated as an equal among your fellow players ... ALL of them.

Hence part of the reason they are harder to play in and harder to win, and also why they are great teachers when it comes to making me a better player overall.

As for how Tiffany was treated as opposed to Marketable Female Pro's ... well, it's all about money after all isn't it?

If ESPN can make more money (gain more viewers) by portraying the pro's (most of them) in a good light, and the beginners in a bad light ... then they are going to do it.

This all said and done, I also think, male or female, the CHIEF problem here ... is amnisia.

I say this because in my almost 3 years of playing poker, I can remember my very first year of playing.

Why you ask? Because of how in many ways, how rudely I was treated by more experienced players, who seemed to of forgotten what it was like when THEY first were learning how to play poker.


The Gaff's the mistakes, both technical and in ediquite, are all part of the learning experience.

Yet MOST players, seem to of chosen selective amnisia in remembering what THEY went through, when they were first learning how to play.

It's like they think they have always been the perfect player from the very first day they picked up a deck of cards to play poker.

It's like they knew each and every time what moves to make, what was considered 'bad form' and thus not to do it, also from the very first day the started to play poker.

I clearly remember, after only playing a mere 5 weeks, and being only my 2nd time of playing in a live B&M game, one guy deciding it was 'pick on the newbie' game day.

He made me the butt of every joke, pointed out in a loud voice every single mistake I made, and made me feel very VERY small. In the end, I grabbed my chips from the table, crying very hard, cashed them in, and ran out of there in tears.

I almost gave up playing poker that day. The management heard what happened after I left, inquiring from others as to why I was so upset, and ejected that player from the establishment (this was before I knew you could call the floor on such things .. yet at the same time, no one ELSE called the floor either, as I suspect they were having too much fun at the newbies (ME) expense).

He then made it his personal business to look up my phone number and call me, assuring me poker wasn't always this way to newbies. After much coaxing on his part, I came back and tried again, and have not stop playing ever since then.

After that, I swore I'd NEVER forget what it was like to walk in those newbie players shoes, and also swore I'd never let another player berrate a newbie for something the newbie just didn't know any better about.

In other words, I've walked in those beginner player shoes, and I won't EVER forget what it felt like.

Thus, I tend to give a LOT more slack to someone who's been playing for a short time, opposed to someone who's been playing for several years, and should KNOW better, and I tend to stick up for newbies, especially when others don't seem to want to.

JMHO, FWIW ...

Greg, nice to see you posting here (in this thread).

I've met you before, and you truly are a nice man, and a true gentleman. I forget which venue it was in, but you spent 20 min talking to myself and my girlfriend, about stratagy and what it was like to play in the 2004 WSOP.

It truly was an honor to meet you in person.

I wish you would of won it a 2nd time, but to make it as far as you did against that large of a field ... bravo indeed! [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

I'm tad curious though, since everyone is sticking up for you about this part.

Were you, yourself, personally offended that Tiffany asked the dealer for an official chip count after you said how many chips you had, or did you simply discount it since you must of realized Tiffany was a very green player?

If it had been you in the situation with another player, even one who was famous in some way, would you of asked the dealer for an official count, or would you of taken the players word for it?

[ QUOTE ]
You take an intelligent, competitive person with no previous experience playing high-stakes, pressure cooker tourney poker against tough professional opponents and the new player is either going to get run over or she's going to make some gaffes. From what I saw, Tiffany was determined not to get pushed around and her lack of experience led to the long delay and other minor faux pas. She did not gloat or do anything obnoxious other than these -- unlike Mattias Anderssen from the 2004 WSOP who would pump his fist and scream, or Matusow, who regularly angleshoots, or a host of other very annyoing creeps.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly .. if she was an experianced player it would of been different (and we've seen some experianced players do some really 'out there' things too I might add, that get copied by newbies), but she had only been playing for 7 months when she entered the WSOP ME.

[grandgnu]

I don't think that Annie looks at Women's Only Events as "beneath" her. I think her issue is this: Marking an event as "Women Only" implies that women are unable to compete with men.

While that is obviously not the case, I think she feels that the event is a put-down to women. A slightly similar view would be if they held a "blacks only" or "asians only" event or something, I guess those groups might be offended as well.

I'm not a very politically correct person though, so I don't think of it as a bad thing. Getting more females into the events, instead of the usual fat-faced bowlers who haven't changed their stanky underclothes in 17 days, is a plus in my book.

Maybe they should hold a "showered people only" event in the future.

[spsurfin_Michael]

Dynasty,

Are you intentionally ignoring my question? Or would you prefer I start a new thread where these hypocrites can be discussed.

Michael



[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Every insult which comes after my post in this thread is going to be met with a suspension.


Edit: 1 quick suspension already. Feel free to test me more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Help me understand this:

Quoting this portion of the "Terms of Usage"

"Operating Policies"

The operating policies of 2+2 set forth the rules that govern your activity on the 2+2 website. While using 2+2 website, you may not post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, profane, or otherwise objectionable information of any kind; including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any local, state, national or international laws.

While you are free to post on the 2+2 website using an alias, you may not post pretending to be someone else.

2+2 and ConJelCo reserve the right to refuse to post or to remove any information or materials, in whole or in part, that, in its sole discretion, are unacceptable, undesirable, or in violation of this Agreement. Continued abuse will result in your being banned from posting on the 2+2 website."



Exactly how does criticizing a player’s play qualify as an offense that warrants a suspension? Certainly personal attacks would qualify, but strategic differences of opinion do not qualify.

Secondarily, is it the Moderator’s intention to only apply the “policy” to “Tiffany” related posts or will this policy be enforced for all members. I see player after player being referred to as “donks” and worse. Chris Moneymaker, Greg Reymer and Phil Hellmuth have taken their fare share of “abuse” so where are all those member suspensions? Pick any subject and you will consistently find violations of the “Terms of Usage.”

If you expect all the members to follow rules, then the Moderations must follow the rules too—not just when it is convenient for them. The Moderators must be impartial to all disputes and specifically not become emotionally involved.

I believe the Moderators owe the members of this board an explanation of this inconsistent enforcement of the rules. Obviously, the Moderators have made a serious error and a significant injustice followed—they have punished some members, but not others.

It is my opinion that the Moderators owe the membership an apology, and need to make restitution to the members they selectively and emotionally punished. The Moderators need to equally and fairly administer to rules and take responsibility when they make mistakes.

Respectfully,

Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

[j0ep0ker]

HOW CAN YOU SAY TIFFANY WILLIAMSON IS A BAD PLAYER?
LOOK AT THIS GREAT PLAY!

There is 80 players left. The average stack is 777,777. Tiffany has 1 million chips, Terry Burt has about 1.4 million is chips. The blinds are 6,000-12,000. I don't think this play was mentioned yet. I can't believe how lucky she must have been to get this far playing like this.

Title: Tiffany Williamson Doubles Up
Log: Terry Burt makes it $40,000 to go. (That is not a typo! 40K not 400K) Tiffany Williamson steaming a bit after another hand with Burt makes it $1,000,000 to go, all-in. Burt calls. Williamson shows A-Q, while Burt shows K-K. The board comes A-J-6-10-8. Rumor has it that two players also folded Aces, leaving Williamson to hit the case Ace. Williamson doubles up to $2,000,00, leaving Burt with only $400,000.

[grandgnu]

Perhaps this is really who Tiffany is (it would explain her psychic abilities to make such a large over-bet with another trap hand)

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps this is really who Tiffany is (it would explain her psychic abilities to make such a large over-bet with another trap hand)


[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh... but Whoppi isn't a real psychic. She just plays one on t.v. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Tiffany

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps this is really who Tiffany is (it would explain her psychic abilities to make such a large over-bet with another trap hand)


[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh... but Whoppi isn't a real psychic. She just plays one on t.v. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Tiffany

[/ QUOTE ]

Tiff....can I call ya Tiff? Anyway, glad to see you've kept a good sense of humor about all of this throughout the bashing.

I can't say I agree with all of the plays you made, but then again, I'm a long ways off from winning anything close to 400 grand, so what do I know?

It's easy for people online to just hurl insults and accusations at others, because it's anonymous (relatively). I've been dealing with it constantly lately on my poker blog, but like you, I don't let it upset me, I actually enjoy the attention. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[RowdyZ]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps this is really who Tiffany is (it would explain her psychic abilities to make such a large over-bet with another trap hand)


[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking more Ellix Powers myself.

OMG.. she called me with A7.. A7.. you believe that..


RZ