How do you rate.... the woman's division?

At risk of overblowing the opinion of those two idiots on Sky Sports, seeing Michaela Tabb on breakfast TV talking about this situation got me thinking. Adrian Chiles introduced her as the leading female referee in snooker. And then, more as a throway comment said; "Now there's a male dominated sport if there ever was one."

At first, it struck me as an odd comment. Snooker doesn't strike me as being full of men trying to be macho aggressive. But he's right really. The only female player I can name is Reanne Evans. And though she was won plenty of female only tournaments, she hasn't had a great season in qualifiers. Obviously there's some form of discrepancy between the female game and the male game. I mean, didn't Reanne win a world title when heavily pregnant? That says more to me about the quality of the opponents, then it does her skill.

I'll admit to not watching any of the female games, but only due to lack of opportunities to do so. Is this itself the problem? If it's not going to be promoted, people aren't going to watch it. There won't be the money or the publicity in it. So those who do know that women play snooker professionally, can't afford to do so because they get paid pittance.

Is there a way out of this? The only reason that I can see that women would be less good at a game like snooker then men. It's a game of skill, not strength. So theoretically a top female player shouldn't be at a disadvantage against a top male player, and the games should be pretty even.

It's a chicken and egg problem. If the people that play aren't very good, people aren't going to be enthusiastic about publicising them. With publicity, they won't improve to be worth watching. Or am I being too harsh here? Without watching too much of it, or ever having watched it all am I giving them to little credit? I know Monique knows a lot about the female game, maybe she could chip in.

If given the opportunity, I'd certainly watch some. How do people think we can give women the opportunity to play this professionally, and get paid properly, and improve so the fact they are female isn't a hinderance?

Reanne Evans has only won 12 frames from 15 Matches Played on the Main Tour this season and not won a match and her Record against Indian players last week was poor for a Pro Player so there is a gulf there.

personally i think shes carrieng the expectations of the female population on her shoulders against the men and not Playing only for her. and Maybe Reanne does feel intimidated as the only Woman playing in a Mans Game.

She has the Talent she has the capability she just needs experience and Just play for her as a player not a woman.

it would help if more Women could play up to her Standard and Relieve the pressure similar to what Happened to ding when Wenbo Came along.

Wild wrote:Reanne Evans has only won 12 frames from 15 Matches Played on the Main Tour this season and not won a match and her Record against Indian players last week was poor for a Pro Player so there is a gulf there.

personally i think shes carrieng the expectations of the female population on her shoulders against the men and not Playing only for her. and Maybe Reanne does feel intimidated as the only Woman playing in a Mans Game.

She has the Talent she has the capability she just needs experience and Just play for her as a player not a woman.

it would help if more Women could play up to her Standard and Relieve the pressure similar to what Happened to ding when Wenbo Came along.

Slightly off topic. I don't rate Wenbo as highly as I rate Ding, but that just might be experience. I think Ding was a pot-the-lot merchant when he first came on the scene, albeit a very impressive one. (Watch any of his matches pre-final at the 2007 final, and you'll see what a shame what happened really was.) Now, however, he has modified his game so he knows how to play safety and tactically. And showed a lot more maturity in his second UK win then he did his first, and in his Masters win. I find the problem a lot of the Chinese players play the same way, all out attack. It might be because Ding came along before Liang, and all these others now emerging, but he has learned to play more then one way when his already impressive attacking game isn't working. Something Liang hasn't done yet.

Anyway, back to the subject....

Wild wrote:Reanne Evans has only won 12 frames from 15 Matches Played on the Main Tour this season and not won a match and her Record against Indian players last week was poor for a Pro Player so there is a gulf there.

personally i think shes carrieng the expectations of the female population on her shoulders against the men and not Playing only for her. and Maybe Reanne does feel intimidated as the only Woman playing in a Mans Game.

She has the Talent she has the capability she just needs experience and Just play for her as a player not a woman.

it would help if more Women could play up to her Standard and Relieve the pressure similar to what Happened to ding when Wenbo Came along.

I've never watched her play. Is this true? Or is she just not as good as her titles suggest? Or is it a bit of both?

My impression of Reanne is a very talented Player thats got in to bad habits by not having the competition to worry her in womans snooker.

She plays shots Left Handed as a Right hander aka Ronnieesque in the womans game she might get away with stuff like that but at Pro Level she is exposed Badly.

if only the Womans Game had Alison Fisher,Kelly Fisher and Reanne Evans playing in the same era they would have pushed one and other on to a higher Standard where you would have to put everything in to each shot.

im not criticizing other players but Reanne is on a different Playing field to the rest.

Titles out of the context of the opposition they were won against do mean little as I already said in other threads. Reanne has next to none oppsition on the Ladie's tour. She's won her 70+ last matches over there, she hasn't won one in the MT. There are only a couple of players who can possibly give her some serious opposition on the Ladies at this moment in time.
I'm hugely interested in neuroscience and I'm certainly not one who will claim there is no difference between the men's and women's brain and that it all comes to education. There is. On average men do have a better eye-hand coordination and spatial perception. That's plain to be seen in toddlers of both genders in play grounds. So that's certainly an advantage in snooker. However "on average" means nothing for any particular individual. It just means that in and "even" population (50% boys 50% girls) you will find more "naturally gifted" boys than girls. But if enough girls were taking the game, then statistically, we should have women good enough to compete with the men on the MT.
Why don't more girls take the game? Well I tried to reflect on that in another article already on Matt's blog.

Talking statistically, men can excel more often at one thing and women at another, you're right. Though, that is just down to completely statistical analysis, not a fast rule that applies to everybody. I remember doing a quiz online at work on lunchtime, that asked you a series of questions. Some were general knowledge, others were personality based. "Would you feel this, if this happened?" It then succesfully predicted I was female. Though, in the office, about 20-30 other people tried the quiz, and giving their honest answers it guessed 100% correctly their gender, I was the only one for which it was wrong. The questions weren't obvious at all. "Do you sports or shoes?" etc. They were just generally, "Which shape do you prefer a triange or a square?" stuff like that. And taking what males, and females had said over a study, it predicted whether you were male or female based on your questions. Apart from me, who could never get it to say 'Male', it was surprisingly accurate. Some people in the office were putting in the opposite to what they thought, to make it be incorrect on purpose.

So obviously, there is something behind those studies, but you may only ever be talking 95% accuracy. As always, I am the exception.

women v women - average

women v guys - nothing more than a publicity stunt and a box-ticking exercise

they are poor against poor pro players. why spend money on trying to promote them.

winning gets you promoted, not biological differences

PS just like to thank Richard Keys for answering my text on this matter earlier