This article (The “Ladies” Event at the World Series of Poker) is a bit old (last month) but it raises some questions that transcend poker that are no less relevant.

Basically, the author highlights the fact that men cannot be excluded from the women’s championship at the world series of poker. Casinos are no more able to keep men from plating than they would be from barring women from the main event. And indeed men do play.

This brings up a whole host of notions about gender and equality. Is it even worthwhile to have a women’s main event if it is not really exclusively for women? It seems that there are not many men who play, I suppose out of some notion of decorum, but a few go right ahead and disregard the spirit of the tournament and try to pick up an extra bracelet. But is this whole notion of needing a women’s division fro something like poker obsolete? Does its continued existence merely highlight an attitude of victim hood that is detrimental to the status of women in society? I can’t say I have a clear cut opinion on the matter at this point. But obviously this tournament shows just one example of how society does seem to be moving in a direction of equality is becoming more prominent than singling out individual groups for assistance. Which, in the end, is the aim of movements that instantiated them in the first place.

Here is a poker rumor:  Harrahs may delay the final table of the 2008 WSOP until November, and then broadcast it live on ESPN. 

This is Harrahs’ response to the rumor:

“We have heard those rumors as well but we don’t stoke rumors. If there was news to announce we would certainly share it publicly. We announced the schedule back in December and nothing has changed to it – 55 bracelet events over 47 days from May 30 to July 16.”

Is this a denial?  Definitely maybe.