[Walddk]

Jlall, on Aug 26 2005, 04:04 PM, said:

I really don't agree with 1. Look at Sabine Auken and Jill Myers. Both are respected as top bridge players, not top women players. I have nothing but respect for them, and their results. That is what it all comes down to, results.

Indeed Justin, and I respect those two for being as good as the best men. How many more would (perhaps) make it to any of the Top 10 "Open" teams in the world? A rhetorical question, since it's a fact that no woman is on any "Open" team at the very top.

May I remind you that even Sabine Auken-Daniela von Arnim, arguably the best woman pair in the world, have not yet been able to qualify for the German "Open" team although they have tried on several occasions. Germany are not even among the world's Top 15.

They achieved their results in the women's championships (as did virtually all other women), so the real problem is that there is a huge gap between "Open" and "Women". That's a fact nobody can deny, and whether that will change or not remains to be seen. I doubt it, although I can't see any logical explanation as to why one shouldn't try to accomplish this - if the women want it, that is.

By the way. You pick your best 10 women's teams, and I pick the 10 best men's. Feel free to pick more teams from the same nation, and I select one from 10 different countries. We seed them and let 1 play against 1, 2 against 2 and so on over say 96 boards. How many of those matches will be won by the women?

My answer is hidden.

Spoiler

None

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

Walddk, on Aug 26 2005, 09:45 AM, said:

May I remind you that even Sabine Auken-Daniela von Arnim, arguably the best woman pair in the world, have not yet been able to qualify for the German "Open" team although they have tried on several occasions. Germany are not even among the world's Top 15.

They achieved their results in the women's championships (as did virtually all other women), so the real problem is that there is a huge gap between "Open" and "Women". That's a fact nobody can deny, and whether that will change or not remains to be seen.

I don't deny it. But I would guess (note the word guess) that Auken/von Arnim would do better in Open bridge if they stopped playing women's bridge.

As my husband puts it "women's bridge is a different game". I can only talk about English players with any depth of knowledge, but in general when women do well in Open events it's playing in a well-established Open partnership. Michelle Brunner recently won both the Pairs & the Teams at a big Australian event (Gold Coast congress?) playing with John Holland. John is a certainly good player, but I don't think he's in a different class to Michelle. I think it's more that they haven't been afflicted by the absurdities of women's bridge.

[Al_U_Card]

Stereotypes are like preconceived notions and inferences at the table, you make, have or take them at your own risk. Always remember that PEOPLE play bridge, their orientations, dispositions and gender are secondary issues.

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Aug 26 2005, 05:45 PM, said:

May I remind you that even Sabine Auken-Daniela von Arnim, arguably the best woman pair in the world, have not yet been able to qualify for the German "Open" team although they have tried on several occasions. Germany are not even among the world's Top 15.

What are the selection criteria for the German Open team?

[Walddk]

hrothgar, on Aug 26 2005, 05:08 PM, said:

Walddk, on Aug 26 2005, 05:45 PM, said:

May I remind you that even Sabine Auken-Daniela von Arnim, arguably the best woman pair in the world, have not yet been able to qualify for the German "Open" team although they have tried on several occasions. Germany are not even among the world's Top 15.

What are the selection criteria for the German Open team?

They team up with any pair(s) they like and compete in trials. On those occasions Sabine and Daniela have had strong team-mates (men), but they have failed to qualify although they were close last year.

Sabine and Daniela play in the "Open" German Premier League (as the only woman pair as far as I recall), but then again: there is no woman league in Germany. They exist in many other European countries.

Roland

[keylime]

This is maddening.

First, the website is frankly a '70's styled attempt at cheesy marketing. Yellow as the background color? I didn't order eggs with my breakfast this morning! And they are paying enough money to misspell rediscover? Someone hand me some Aleve please.

That leads to even more of a problem. Elianna's comments are so factual it's sickening. When I entered the junior program (albeit late at age 23) the slant of the ACBL was to not grow up new talent but to coddle the at the time current juniors' whims and wishes. At the Las Vegas National in 2001 they had a pizza party - I was looking forward to it, until I saw the group. Only 2 girls, and the guys for the most part were there to be there and not to contribute or inspire the lesser known/newer players. It was a total sham.

Furthermore, anytime a youngish woman who is attractive sits down at the table, frankly the stirring begins. I've seen it happen in Tampa and in Vancouver, and it bothers me GREATLY that we are solely concerned (we being men) with gaining favor with the said lady instead of drawing others like her into the game. Some of the things I've seen revolving this topic, has caused needless grief. Guys, we really need to do better. I'd say stronger language but this is a public forum and gotta keep it G-rated. Just know that I'm not real happy about how we address the ladies.

Lastly, women's bridge is a different game. It's different tho for reasons that aren't exactly "kosher".

Speaking of which, I'm going to go play bridge today (Friday) with an attractive woman. She'll only get the highest quality bridge I can offer and NOT a staredown.

[Walddk]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 26 2005, 05:03 PM, said:

I don't deny it. But I would guess (note the word guess) that Auken/von Arnim would do better in Open bridge if they stopped playing women's bridge.

I agree, but they need to qualify for the Open team first. They haven't been able to yet.

They won't have to qualify for the women's team. They are exempts, so they always have two chances to play internationally if they wish.

Roland

[awm]

It strikes me that relatively few juniors have "won something" especially outside the realm of junior bridge. But let me give an example for those familiar with the US junior players of how women are regarded differently.

A few years ago, a team of juniors including three women qualified to be USA1. This was admittedly in part because a number of the "top" US juniors were having issues at the time (I have on good authority that one was extremely sick and another was drunk) but it was still quite an accomplishment. The team included: Meredith Beck, Lisa Burton, Lindsay Pearlman, Xing Yuan, Robert Glickman, and Joon Pahk.

This team didn't do well in international competition. Of course, some of this may be that they were never taken seriously from day one, and it's hard to do well when even your own coaches think you are bad. But I'll accept that these folks are not as good as the victorious USA1 from Australia. Also, none of these players have particular records in other events (whereas many of the members of USA1 have done things in open events, most particulary John Hurd and Joel Wooldridge).

The point I find more interesting, is that the vast majority of juniors would not consider the three women on this team to be comparable players to, say, Tim Crank, Andy Hurd, Noble Shore, Charlie Garrod, or the Rice brothers -- USA2. A team which didn't honestly do much better in international competition. In addition, Joon Pahk and Rob Glickman were seriously considered for USA2 the last time around, whereas the three women were not.

One thing that most of the best bridge players have in common is starting young. If the young girls who want to play are not treated as though they have potential, and given the same opportunities as the young boys... is it any surprise that there are more men at the top levels of the game than women?

[Al_U_Card]

Jlall, on Aug 26 2005, 10:25 AM, said:

but I will confess my first thoughts upon meeting them were not so innocent. IMO, that is life today. Flame away.

Honesty is a prerequisite for being a good person.
If you hadn't had those feeling you would not have been "normal" or healthy. Intelligence supercedes all other domains in the human realm and the time it takes to produce the correct action is a direct indicator of its level.

[Elianna]

Jlall, on Aug 26 2005, 07:04 AM, said:

Elianna, on Aug 26 2005, 01:54 AM, said:

Some of my experience:

1) Many comments about how junior girls are no good at bridge.  They were not necessarily made AT me to discourage, but when people talk amongst each other freely and openly to each other when I'm right there, made me realize that no matter how good I am (and it's not like I'm top class, but who doesn't hope that they can be) I would never be able to get them to realize that I'm good.  And that seemed to be based solely on the fact that I was a girl.  I saw a lot of male juniors that I was better than, that were MUCH more respected as bridge players than I was, solely because they fit in better with others.

2) Conversations with adults (40+ years) involved in the junior program that involved said adult (male) conversing with my chest.  Or so it seemed from where his line of sight was aimed.

3) "Lessons" (no, not structured ones conducted at camp, but ad hoc ones) about what kind of games (imps vs. mps) the junior boys need to have sex before, and how we (junior girls) need to know about this and accomodate it.

some comments:

I really don't agree with 1. Look at Sabine Auken and Jill Myers. Both are respected as top bridge players, not top women players. I have nothing but respect for them, and their results. That is what it all comes down to, results. If anyone, male or female, starts winning a bunch of things they will get respect. It may be harder or slower for women (as bridge society is today) but it will come. People cannot judge relative skill (if it isnt obvious) without playing hundreds of boards personally against the other people. This is usually not the case, so all people have to go on is results. Perhaps these male juniors that are more respected than you have just got better results? I am a male junior, and personally I do not know of anything that you have won. I'm not saying you are not a good player, I'm just giving you the perception of an outsider.

As for number 2, I doubt you find this exclusive of bridge players. As I'm sure you know, there will be some men in all areas of life like this.

As for 3, that's awful and illegal (sexual harassment). Not sure what kinda people say stuff like that.

I don't really know how you can disagree with 1) (and I'm not sure that you actually do).

I wasn't saying that there aren't women respected as bridge players. I was saying that people involved in the junior bridge program (and this was more the juniors than the "adults", I will admit) talked like this amongst themselves a lot around me when I first started participating in the junior program (a year or so ago, I've been playing bridge for much longer than that).

As for the respect for me part: I realize that some of it is based on results, and I completely understand that. See Adam's message. I wasn't talking about the very best juniors (you, Joel, etc), I'm talking about lower levels of juniordom.

Quote

As for number 2, I doubt you find this exclusive of bridge players. As I'm sure you know, there will be some men in all areas of life like this.

Yes, but not as instructors, etc. of young women.

Quote

As for 3, that's awful and illegal (sexual harassment). Not sure what kinda people say stuff like that.

I didn't know that sexual harassment out of the work place was illegal. Nice to know that.

I'm also sorry that my post started a women vs. men debate, because I really don't think that is relavent to what came before me: How to get more young people to play bridge, and what the ACBL is doing about that.

My main point is that unless female juniors are treated better than I was (encouraged, told by people in the program that they can get better, and not treated as if they are there for the males, etc) then I don't really think that a junior program will be extremely successful at getting girls to play bridge.

[Elianna]

Jlall, on Aug 26 2005, 08:25 AM, said:

keylime, on Aug 26 2005, 10:17 AM, said:

Furthermore, anytime a youngish woman who is attractive sits down at the table, frankly the stirring begins.

Is this not a societal issue rather than a "junior program" issue? Attractive young women get this at SCHOOl as well. To be blunt, young men when they see a new attractive young face automatically get sexual thoughts initially. Most act appropriately and keep this to them selves, some make it more evident. However, once you do get to know the person you get to see them as just that, a person, rather than a sexual being. This is how society works. I am friends with several good looking female junior players who I now know and respect, but I will confess my first thoughts upon meeting them were not so innocent. IMO, that is life today. Flame away.

Justin, the difference is that a high school teacher that looks down his students shirts when he talks to them will be removed, because his school would not tolerate that.

It is quite different being hit on by someone in your class in high school or college, then by the professor.

I think that it says something about an institution that it believes that smoking pot (a reason I was told that someone was not allowed to be an instructor at camp) disqualifies someone for being around young people, and that hitting on teenage girls does not disqualify you for that position.

[FrancesHinden]

Elianna, on Aug 26 2005, 10:37 AM, said:

My main point is that unless female juniors are treated better than I was (encouraged, told by people in the program that they can get better, and not treated as if they are there for the males, etc) then I don't really think that a junior program will be extremely successful at getting girls to play bridge.

I do think that's a pity.

When I first started playing bridge seriously I was invited to join the Junior squad rather than the ladies as it would be "better for my bridge". I'm pretty certain they were right.

I was never treated badly by other juniors, although it may have helped that many of the squad were already friends/teammates. It's the more senior people (such as the one who made a pass at me) who were not best behaved.

[han]

Jlall, on Aug 26 2005, 10:25 AM, said:

To be blunt, young men when they see a new attractive young face automatically get sexual thoughts initially. Most act appropriately and keep this to them selves, some make it more evident. However, once you do get to know the person you get to see them as just that, a person, rather than a sexual being. This is how society works. I am friends with several good looking female junior players who I now know and respect, but I will confess my first thoughts upon meeting them were not so innocent. IMO, that is life today. Flame away.

My experiences are somewhat different than yours. I have often played with a quite attractive young (~mid 20's) woman on my team. I have never noticed any inappropriate behavior from younger men towards her. However, she get's a LOT of attention from men of 50 years and older. Sometimes this is just "innocent" flattering, sometimes it is quite annoying.

One of the nicer aspects of the attention she receives is that a well known bridge player has asked her to play bridge with him sometime, and they have. I believe that the pro made no inappropriate comments while playing bridge.

[pclayton]

Well......

Going back to some of the earlier comments:

I don't think Women's events denigrate Women's bridge. This is strictly a matter of choice for the members of any sponsoring organization. As long as "Men's" vs "Women's" events are abolished and "Open" vs "everyone else that wants to have a restricted event: Seniors, Women, Juniors, MP under "x", Teams from Saskachewan, etc.." I'm OK with that.

I spoke to a highly ranked woman player a few years at Las Vegas. She spoke of her National Women's wins like they were no big deal. To me thats a shame - winning any type of National Event to me is a big deal, especially when you've done it multiple times, or in her case, had done it three or four years running.

If a gal wants to step out of the Women's events like Jill Meyers or Kay Schulle and compete in Open pair and team events, then "you go girl"! If they want to play in the Wagar or the WLMP, then thats fine too.

[mike777]

Hannie, on Aug 26 2005, 11:38 AM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 26 2005, 10:25 AM, said:

To be blunt, young men when they see a new attractive young face automatically get sexual thoughts initially. Most act appropriately and keep this to them selves, some make it more evident. However, once you do get to know the person you get to see them as just that, a person, rather than a sexual being. This is how society works. I am friends with several good looking female junior players who I now know and respect, but I will confess my first thoughts upon meeting them were not so innocent. IMO, that is life today. Flame away.

My experiences are somewhat different than yours. I have often played with a quite attractive young (~mid 20's) woman on my team. I have never noticed any inappropriate behavior from younger men towards her. However, she get's a LOT of attention from men of 50 years and older. Sometimes this is just "innocent" flattering, sometimes it is quite annoying.

One of the nicer aspects of the attention she receives is that a well known bridge player has asked her to play bridge with him sometime, and they have. I believe that the pro made no inappropriate comments while playing bridge.

Does this mean you do not often play with unattractive young Women?

I think you made some point here .

[arrows]

I guess bridge is one of the sports with least sex discrimination.
Because the formats are categoried by "OPEN" and "WOMAN". Not "Man's" and
"Woman's", as almost every other sports do.

[Walddk]

arrows, on Aug 26 2005, 09:57 PM, said:

I guess bridge is one of the sports with least sex discrimination.
Because the formats are categoried by "OPEN" and "WOMAN". Not "Man's" and
"Woman's", as almost every other sports do.

Which in fact is a discrimination, is it not? Againt men, that is. Women can play in the Open, whereas men can't play in the women's.

Roland