Women Should Be Banned From Poker For Their Own Good

The WSOP (World Series of Poker) main event is the largest poker tournament in the world. Every year, thousands of players come from all over the world to compete for the large prize pool and every year, after thousands have busted out and millions of hands have been played, nine men and zero women sit down at the final table to play for the tournament bracelet and the first place prize money.

The WSOP started in 1970, and the main event has been played every year ever since. Out of the 417 players to make the final table, one has been a woman (she finished sixth in 1995). Women are bad at poker. The question is why this is and what steps should be taken to protect them from themselves in this ruthless game.

While I was doing my research for this article, I saw the following white knight excuses thrown out on women’s behalf:

  • Women don’t do as well as men at the WSOP because only four to five percent of players who compete are women, but they’re still just as good as men.
  • Society discourages women from playing poker and looks down on women that try to do it professionally, so that’s why way fewer women play than men.

The official figure for how many women competed in the WSOP in 2017 is 4.88 percent. This number is low for two reasons: first, women are less interested in playing poker than men because of natural differences between men and women regarding what they enjoy.

Second, women are bad at poker and those that attempt to play poker professionally cannot make enough money from it to compete in the WSOP; in fact, many of the women that do compete are bought into tournaments by their sugar daddies or beta male providers.

What The Data Tells Us

Since women make up five percent of players, they should be around five percent of winners in all categories, if they are indeed as good as men. Let’s have a look:

  • Out of the top 142 all-time tournament money winners, only one is a woman (she’s a man-shaped dyke and places 42nd on the list) = 0.70 percent.
  • One woman has made the final table of the main event out of 417 players = 0.24 percent.
  • Eight women made the WSOP player of the year leaderboard (top 100 players overall) from 2007 to 2017 = 0.73 percent.
  • One woman made the WSOP player of the year top ten from 2007 to 2017 = 0.90 percent.
  • Out of 1,261 bracelets (given to the winner of a tournament) awarded to date (excluding women’s events), 21 have been won by women = 1.67 percent.

Why It Is Impossible For Women To Compete Seriously With Men

Modern poker is a brutally competitive game. In order to become a pro, players must be adept in four key areas: math, game theory, psychology, and self-control. If they wish to be successful, players must have the discipline to study all of these elements and implement them during play.

They must have the discipline to adhere to strict bankrolling rules to ensure they don’t go broke. They must have the self-control to remain emotionally detached from the horrific luck they will experience periodically, and the frustration of being outplayed by superior players. They need to maintain a state of emotional calm at the table so they can effectively analyze play based upon the principles they have studied and learned.

Women are bad at poker because they are naturally inept in all four key areas required to be successful at it. Countless studies have shown they are consistently outperformed by men in math at an academic level. Women struggle to understand game theory because, as Dr. Wikipedia states, it is “the study of mathematical models of conflict and cooperation between intelligent rational decision-makers.” As we have established, women are bad at math.

For an indication of their level of rational intelligence, check some footage of this year’s annual feminist workout (also known as the Women’s March). With regard to psychology, women are too ruled by emotions such as jealousy, spitefulness, and a sense of vulnerability to make accurate assessments of their opponent’s state of mind or intentions.

Finally, women lack self-control, the ability to hold oneself back from the push and pull of emotion in order to make objective, rational, and careful assessments in a manner that reveals truth and suggests which actions are best taken.

All this is to say nothing of women’s vastly inferior physical stamina, a necessity if one is to make it far in long, grinding tournaments that are often played over a period of days, or the disadvantages of severe mood swings during menstruation, pregnancy, and long periods of time without access to social media (smartphones are banned at poker tables).

Women Cannot Rely On Artificial Advantages

The world of poker does not have an HR department to fire masculine men and replace them with miserable career hags. There are no diversity quotas. There are no government gargoyles prowling around to ensure that affirmative action laws are obeyed. Male players are not going to willingly lose money to women for the sake of “progress.”

Poker is a zero sum game and as such is immune to female privilege. It is the free market in its purest form; the strong rise to the top, while the weak are destroyed and left to wither by the wayside, as it should be.

The only way for women to have a fair shot at poker is for them to be banned from playing with men. This would be beneficial for men since they could concentrate on reading their opponents’ hands, trying to understand the psychology of the table, analyze playing patterns, or going through the often difficult math calculations without the distraction of women at the table prattling vacuous jibberish to one another that the beta male players and tournament staff are too emasculated to shut down.

Men would also benefit from the removal of hot women who distract their concentration by inciting involuntary carnal fantasies, and ugly women who are a depressing sight and thus make the experience of playing poker less enjoyable.

Of course, the overwhelming beneficiaries would be women themselves. The natural handicaps of the female brain ensure that any chance they have of making money against men is vanishingly small. Putting a woman at a poker table with men is like throwing a vixen into a melee with wolves. Allowing women to play poker only amongst themselves protects them from male predation.

I am all for allowing women to play poker between themselves while they jibber-jabber about whatever irrelevant topic happens to be floating through their capricious minds at any given moment, but putting them at a table with seasoned, disciplined male pros is simply wrong, and must stop.

Read more: 5 Reasons Women Should Be Banned From Working As Police Officers 

45 thoughts on “Women Should Be Banned From Poker For Their Own Good”

      1. My shithole country have more balls than you will even have faggot ! lol
        you just mad cause we have big dicks and we like to fuck your white women,,,,Hahaha

        1. Anyone man who has to resort to his penis size is to feel good about himself proves he is a barbarian from a low ability tribe, or a typical Third World Man.

  1. I don’t get why being bad at something is an argument for being banned. Maybe bad driving, flying a plane dangerously but I’m not sure what the rationale is here. There do appear to be some female players who make money. Victoria Hislop springs to mind

    1. Women SHOULD be banned from the military, police, fire department, and especially voting. Anything where lives are on the line and women’s much weaker strength and emotional fortitude creates a dangerous or ineffective environment, and because women vote for policies self – destructive to their nations. Unlimited refugees, welfare, you name it.

        1. Going to a website you hate.
          Posting comments on the website you hate.
          Reasons why your life is empty and full of hate. And yet you can’t figure out why…

        2. I’m very happy trashing your sorry ass !
          tell me something : is this site all abt how women are evil and you all are being discriminated ??
          Talking abt hate …..lol faggot.

      1. The objection to women in the military, police, fire service etc is typically that they lower standards in order to help such women gain entry or stay in the job. Banning people from doing anything simply because of who they are will always distract attention from how they actually perform in a competitive environment. The whole reason we have insane this insane feminism that believes there is a conspiracy against women without which there would be a level playing field in which women would do as well as men or better is because that deranged fantasy is fuelled by the fact that historically women often were banned from doing quite basic things.
        Any kind of ban of types of people will moreover create genuine inequities, which will have the main effect of generating moral capital for the aggrieved groups in question. Moreover, when we are dealing with groups there will always be some outliers who will be capable of bucking the trend. If you ban such people despite their above-average performance then you remove the rationale for merit based selection, which is the only real argument that men have to counter the watering down of standards, or other varities of engineering results. Talk of banning people or groups is simply to hand the moral high ground over to the other side

    2. Be smart Mobius and realize that they are making a point rather than a serious suggestion of policy. It a point excellently made. Womens brains are different. The more the left lies and lies about these truths, the more that logical men defect. Its tough to be a leftist with half a brain these days when you realize how much double-think and BS you must accept; and fight against being spoken against.
      We can make arguments, satirical points and indulge ourselves in thought experiments and take positions that we renege on a month later upon further consideration. The common leftist with petrifying fear of being ousted for a single quote ever in their lives which goes against the accepted strict narrative is fearful to even speak their minds ever once if they ever disagree with the lefts narratives.

      1. fair enough. Talk of ‘banning’ is for rhetorical effect; designed to make a point rather than promote a course of action. My main point in objecting to it isn’t moral, but that I’m not sure it achieves the desired effect: where you have genuine differences between the sexes in terms of ability then the thing to argue for is a genuinely competitive environment. Let women compete, but insist that they to do so without any unfair advantage, leg ups or thirsty males eager to help them along the way.

    1. Hence it’s fun to do it to them, because they would get so angry and yet wonder why WE are pissed when they call for banning male – only spaces or all – male offices etc.

      1. Indeed, I’m all for banning male only locker rooms. In these rooms men discuss the secrets of success that if were only shared with women would immediately level the gender pay gap.
        Therefore men and women should share the locker room.

        1. the modern feminism is a power-play rather than having relationship to equality. I saw this good post on feminism as a power play here:
          I have no links to the blog. Equality is just a buzz word. They only look at the areas they struggle with, and care less about and try to dismiss the areas men struggle with. These fools now run the MSM and block all dissent. This means there is a huge opportunity for alternative media to grow going forward.

    2. Non-SJWs also like to ban stuff too. The Republicans support the War on Drugs. Trump banned certain muslims from coming to the US. I’m not saying we should lift these bans, I’m saying that we NEED to ban things for our own good. We need to ban women from voting, women from driving, etc… Let’s not pretend we’re libertarians or anything.

  2. After reading this article, it’s just amazing how some of you guys wonder why people call you misogynistic and hateful towards women.

    1. For more evidence of utter lack of women in the top echelons of mathematical achievement take a look at the Fields Medal – the highest honor in mathematics that is more difficult to attain than winning the Nobel Prize:
      Since the prize was instituted in 1936 (it is awarded only once in 4 years) all 55 of the winners have been men until the last year of award – 2014, when a Persian woman (Maryam Mirzakhan, who looks totally like a lad) won it becoming the first woman ever to win the prize.

  3. Gambling is a sucker bet.
    Sure, a very small few seem to be OK at it.
    But for the other 99.999% of us, it is a sucker bet.
    Casinos would not stay in business if it wasn’t.
    I have plenty of better things to spend my money on.
    How about you guys?

      Casinos are built to feed Native Americans.
      There is nothing sadder than seeing the local hicks come shuffling out of the Soaring Eagle with long faces because they lost everything to a stacked house.

    2. I’ve known plenty of guys go and drop a days salary in the bookies only to end up with nothing. These idiots actually beleive that ‘it’s a game of chance’.
      I also know a former army officer who knows absolutely everything about the Belgian (football) premier league. He can count off every player’s injuries, club history, how many Euros they were signed for.
      He’s just bought a house by a lake purely on profits.

  4. For more evidence of utter lack of women in the top echelons of Mathematical achievement is take a look at the Fields Medal – the highest honor in mathematics that is more difficult to attain than winning the Nobel Prize:
    Since the prize was instituted in 1936 and is awarded only once in 4 years, all 55 of the winners were men until the last year of award – 2014, when a Persian woman (Maryam Mirzakhan, who looks totally like a lad) won it becoming the first woman ever to win the prize.

    1. Good Job Nick!
      Maryam Mirzakhan was a non-passable MTF.
      As a MAN the whole hype of “women cracks Fields Medal tradition of male Winners” was revealed as trannie-hype so they “retired” the Maryam character at age 40 due to “breast cancer” (inside joke 😉
      Born in Iran and unable to speak English properly “she” graduated from Harvard University by taking note in Persian!!!, yeah. right
      get this;
      at Harvard she worked under the supervision of the Fields Medalist Curtis T. McMullen !!!
      In other words “she” worked for the people who gave “her” a medal even though though could not communicate with “her”!!!
      The whole thing is BULLSHIT!

      1. Yes, I suspect she got a bit of affirmative action there, precisely to hide the glaring embarrassment of gender disparity in mathematical achievement as evidenced by the Field’s Medal winners. The same story repeats in most of the “hard” sciences and abstract thought – the stuff that modern technologically advanced civilization is built on. No men or no masculinity means no civilization. period.

  5. Can anyone name anything women are truly good at? The only thing I see that they are marginally good at is pressing their fleshy parts on men. That’s good for maybe 10 yrs. The only thing they can do a man can’t is bear children. They should stick to the 2 good things they are decent at.

  6. Gambling IS a scam.
    Completely staged from start to finish.
    Automatic and Richard are correct.
    Notice the main WSOP “contenders” (((Barbara Enright, Jackie Glazier and Kelly Minkin))) are washed-up MTFs.
    Worse the Casinos often “pre-sign” girls like Annette Obrestad to trick women into gambling more.. hey, “its girl power” to lose your life savings at a gaming table.
    Annie Duke was a fraud as she and her brother were arrested for cheating.
    NOTHING in Hollywood, Washington DC or Las Vegas is real.
    Stay away from ALL of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *