Where are the Ladies in professional Snooker?

[nrage]

sorry m8 but you are completely wrong, it's all about hand and eye co-ordination and women simply don't have it, it's biological.

Sorry vmax, but I think you're considering the wrong things here. (I'm not going to say you're 'wrong' because, to me, that would be arrogant/rude).

Your analogy to tennis is incorrect because tennis is not snooker (obviously) but more importantly different skills and abilities are required. Tennis is an example where 'gross' motor skills are involved, those involving strength and speed, both of which I agree, men are (on average) better than women. But, snooker is not about gross motor skills, but instead about 'fine' motor co-ordination and there is evidence that women are in fact better at fine motor skills than men.

Doing a google search just now finds some interesting and possibly contradictory results. Both articles linked below are from 1992~ish and well referenced, so should be considered fairly solid pieces of evidence. I would like to see a more recent study however.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=441174
"On average, men are better at gross motor skills requiring speed and force, from running and jumping to throwing objects (Fisher, 1992)"
-- (Silverman & Eals, 1992)

"Women on the other hand, average better "fine" motor coordination, manipulating tiny objects with ease (Fisher, 1992). They are also usually superior at spatial locations..."
-- (Fisher, 1992)

http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/brainsx.html
"Boys also have the superior hand-eye co-ordination necessary for ball sports. Those same skills mean that they can more easily imagine, alter, and rotate an object in their mind's eye."
-- by Anne Moir, Ph.D. and David Jessel. Dell Publishing (paperback), New York, 1992


So, I would argue that snooker is fine motor co-ordination, which would give women a slight advantage (on average).

But, to put that in context, this is just one factor and I would say it is not the most significant reason why there are less women playing snooker. I think the fact that women just aren't interested in it has a far greater effect. Likewise, the fact that women who may have an interest are not encouraged, or given the necessary support to develop the skills necessary .. again, of far more importance, and effect IMO.

[nrage]

That might be a very important issue. The successful male players take it up when they are about five.

Believe it or not, I know several (adult) women that watch snooker on the telly. It's not unpopular spectator sport. But parents tend to buy dolls and stuff like that for girls. And different things for boys. Then when children are old enough to be at school, they tend to follow what other kids are doing. And the majority of these kids have the same experiences of their parents buying what they believe to be gender specific toys. A boy that played with dolls, or a girl that plays more sports orientated games will probably be made fun of. Or at the very least, feel they don't fit in. At a young age, you tend to do what's popular around you as you are still forming your own personality.

If more girls were encouraged to play at a young age, and practice for years like men do, maybe there'd be a difference. Picking it up as a young teenager, sometimes you're giving away ten years worth of playing to the men.

Definitely, this is probably one of the biggest factors IMO to why there are less women playing to a high standard. It is a well known fact that our brains learn faster/better when we are young, so it makes sense that to get a women player of a high standard they would have to start young.

[wildJONESEYE]

Definitely, this is probably one of the biggest factors IMO to why there are less women playing to a high standard. It is a well known fact that our brains learn faster/better when we are young, so it makes sense that to get a women player of a high standard they would have to start young.

Stephen Hendry first played Snooker at 12 ....5 years later he was Grand Prix champion.

[nrage]

Stephen Hendry first played Snooker at 12 ....5 years later he was Grand Prix champion.

Yep. 12 is probably a good age to start. I have a cousin who is 11, and a little short for his age, he cannot actually cue up on a snooker table yet, it's too high. He can manage pool though, so I'm starting him off there.

[wildJONESEYE]

Yep. 12 is probably a good age to start. I have a cousin who is 11, and a little short for his age, he cannot actually cue up on a snooker table yet, it's too high. He can manage pool though, so I'm starting him off there.

lets not forget Alison Fisher did beat Neal Foulds WN 3 at the time and Mike Hallett Top 16 in her time but she just gave it 4 years before she defected to pool .....after 7 years Shaun Murphy was WN 48 if he gave up after 4 years he wouldn't have made it. Neal Robertson is another.

Had she stuck with it who knows ??

[JanieWatkins]

"Women on the other hand, average better "fine" motor coordination, manipulating tiny objects with ease (Fisher, 1992). They are also usually superior at spatial locations..."
-- (Fisher, 1992)

manipulating tiny objects - ROFL - that would be about right!!

The greatest era overall for Ladies Snooker, with so many very good players were around 1985-1992 when we had Allison Fisher, Stacey Hillyard, Karen Corr, Mandy Fisher, Ann Marie Farren, Kim Shaw, Sharon Dickson, Georgina Aplin, Tessa Davidson, June Banks, Lynette Horsburgh, Angela Jones, Agnes Davies, Sian Newbury, Caroline Walch, Maria Tart, Julie Gillespie and many more. Plus the international players like Sue Lemaich, Grace Nakamura, Natalie Stelmach, Diane Dale, Sue Martin, Megan Fullerton, Maryann McConnell, Linda Lucas, Anita Rizutti and others.

that coincided with the boom time in the men's game and the opening of many new snooker centres, which were much more welcoming environments than many of the old "above Burtons" clubs.

[wildJONESEYE]

"Women on the other hand, average better "fine" motor coordination, manipulating tiny objects with ease (Fisher, 1992). They are also usually superior at spatial locations..."
-- (Fisher, 1992)

manipulating tiny objects - ROFL - that would be about right!!

The greatest era overall for Ladies Snooker, with so many very good players were around 1985-1992 when we had Allison Fisher, Stacey Hillyard, Karen Corr, Mandy Fisher, Ann Marie Farren, Kim Shaw, Sharon Dickson, Georgina Aplin, Tessa Davidson, June Banks, Lynette Horsburgh, Angela Jones, Agnes Davies, Sian Newbury, Caroline Walch, Maria Tart, Julie Gillespie and many more. Plus the international players like Sue Lemaich, Grace Nakamura, Natalie Stelmach, Diane Dale, Sue Martin, Megan Fullerton, Maryann McConnell, Linda Lucas, Anita Rizutti and others.

that coincided with the boom time in the men's game and the opening of many new snooker centres, which were much more welcoming environments than many of the old "above Burtons" clubs.

stacy hilliard just fell off the radar out of sight..

she played Alex Higgins on his return after a ban in 1991 or 1992 god that must have been daunting lol.

what is she up to now anyone know ?

[1blonde]

Personally I think there is no reason why women cannot play to a simular standard as most men and I hope one day that a player like Hanna Jones might prove me right if she keeps on progressing. I do also think it has something to do with men having more of a competitive nature.

[ace man]

I agree than women should be able to play as well as men, but they simply don't.
Allison, despite her near perfect cue action joined the women circuit in America, not men. This tells me everything. Of course she did occasionally beat top guys in men tournaments there, but I don't think she won any title amongst them.

What could be the difference? I think the difference is in knowing the right shots better, better knowledge of angles and better feel for the cue ball speed...i.e. overall better positional play and tactical game. I don't know why it is so, but it is. Take example from chess, a 100% mental game, no physical strength or good hand/eye coordination required at all. Guys win by great margin.
Don't be fooled by lower number of girls playing the game. The best ones are extremely motivated to succeed in mens game such as billiards, make no mistake about it.

[SnookerFan]

Stephen Hendry first played Snooker at 12 ....5 years later he was Grand Prix champion.

Yeah, but you're not just talking about any old player there, you're talking about the greatest player of all time. Besides, I didn't say it was impossible for a person to pick up a cue at 12 or 13 and go on to be good enough to win titles. In the same way, playing a lot as a child doesn't guarantee you'll win ranking events.

But it's got to be a factor that women aren't brought into it young as often as men are that you don't see many decent women coming into the game. This then has a knock on effect that with less women in the game, it statistically means there are less good ones, so the ones that could be good aren't improving as much due to the standard of opposition being low.

[wildJONESEYE]

Yeah, but you're not just talking about any old player there, you're talking about the greatest player of all time. Besides, I didn't say it was impossible for a person to pick up a cue at 12 or 13 and go on to be good enough to win titles. In the same way, playing a lot as a child doesn't guarantee you'll win ranking events.

But it's got to be a factor that women aren't brought into it young as often as men are that you don't see many decent women coming into the game. This then has a knock on effect that with less women in the game, it statistically means there are less good ones, so the ones that could be good aren't improving as much due to the standard of opposition being low.

point is one day there might be a woman player of that ilk that can progress at that rate...

i cant think of one reason apart from the obvious cuing across a chest why women cant be of a top 32 standard at the very least.

[nrage]

What could be the difference? I think the difference is in knowing the right shots better, better knowledge of angles and better feel for the cue ball speed...i.e. overall better positional play and tactical game. I don't know why it is so, but it is. Take example from chess, a 100% mental game, no physical strength or good hand/eye coordination required at all. Guys win by great margin.
Don't be fooled by lower number of girls playing the game. The best ones are extremely motivated to succeed in mens game such as billiards, make no mistake about it.

Ah good point, there (apparently) is some evidence that men are better at certain aspects of strategy. That link I posted mentions chess, and strategy:

http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/brainsx.html

"This male advantage in seeing patterns and abstract relationships - what could be called general strategic rather than detailed tactical thinking - perhaps explains the male dominance of chess, even in a country like the U.S.S.R, where the game is a national sport played by both sexes. An alternative explanation, more acceptable to those who would deny the biological basis of sex differences, is that women have become so conditioned to the fact of male chess playing superiority that they subconsciously assign themselves lower expectations; but this is a rather wilful rejection of scientific evidence for the sake of maintaining a prejudice."

So, perhaps men have a slight tactical advantage in some cases. However, chess is pure tactics/strategy, whereas snooker has a much larger physical component - it's no use knowing what to do if you cannot do it. So, I reckon it might make a very slight difference in the number of women at the very top of the game, but it should not stop women reaching a high standard (top 256 say) - something which we don't see currently.

The other link I posted mentioned spatial relations as something men are better at:

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=441174

"en excel at certain types of mathematical problems, are generally
better at reading maps, solving mazes, and completing other
visual-spatial-quantitative tasks such as mental rotations and space
relations"
-- (Silverman & Eals, 1992)

So perhaps they are a tiny bit better at judging angles.

But, let me stress what I said before, these differences are likely less than 1% of the complete package for a professional level player. 99% is desire to play and available practice time/coaching. So, anything which means women don't want to play, or cannot play/practice will have far more effect on the number of women professionals in the game than any inherent difference between men/women.

[vmax4steve]

Sorry vmax, but I think you're considering the wrong things here. (I'm not going to say you're 'wrong' because, to me, that would be arrogant/rude).

Rather than paraphrasing others and searching the internet why don't you attend some female sports and games and see for yourself. I played darts when I was a teenager, no strength or speed or power required for that, and I worked with the female singles darts champion in my town. I wasn't a great player by any means, my team played in division 6 of our league, but this foolish woman, who was a lesbian BTW, challenged me to a game for money and was soundly thrashed.
There used to be a womens team in our local pool league when I was playing, all regular players, but they were crap and when I came up against any of them I treated them with utter contempt, not because they were women but because they were crap. Good on them for having a go but getting beat every single week took its toll and they quit after one season even though they were in the lowest division and by god the blokes in that division were bloody awful too.

You have a point about women not being interested in sports and games as much as men are but that is entirely down to most women being naturally submissive and having no need to physically dominate others.
Then there is the nature v nurture argument which is a whole different kettle of fish and can't really be used as a difference between the genders as it depends entirely upon how a child was raised. Fathers who raised only child heterosexual daughters to be more like boys only succeeded in damaging their daughters pyschologically and vice versa with parents raising gay children as the heterosexual norm.
No such thing as gay children you might say, well actor and all round entertainer John Barrowman has been quoted as saying he knew when he was a toddler that he was gay and would rather play with dolls than with the toy cars he was given by his parents. I have a nephew that went with his mother to all her line dancing events rather than go to football with his dad, and when he came out as a sixteen year old his mother was surprised but his dad wasn't.
A persons sexuality has a lot to do with it. Effeminate gay men don't do sports and games whereas dominant gay men and heterosexual men do. Ultra feminine women don't do sports and games whereas masculine lesbian, bisexual and some heterosexual women do. It's clear to me that women who are more masculine have their brains wired more like a man and therefore have better hand and eye co-ordination than non masculine women and effeminate gay men
Human sexuality is varied and complex and is as much about dominance as it is about attraction and love. Some sexperts believe all people to be bisexual at certain different levels depending on how submissive or dominant they are. Ultra submissives will submit to anyone sexually while ultra dominants will dominate anyone sexually with the rest of us either somewhere in between or neutral. I myself am neutral, I have no wish to dominate and no wish to submit, which probably explains to me why I am such a good loser and treat snooker as just a game, never vote for I do not need a leader, and treat women as equals, but also I was raised by a single mother for my most informative years and had a terrible relationship with my stepfather and that has a lot to do with me refusing to be dominated by anyone.
Experience m8 not arrogance or rudeness, it's biological in the major, pyschological in the minor.

Women like Alison Fisher are the exceptions that prove the rule.

[nrage]

Rather than paraphrasing others and searching the internet why don't you attend some female sports and games and see for yourself.

The point of searching the internet is to find some actual 'fact's on the subject. I am not an expert, I have not done any research into the matter at hand. The articles I found were from experts in the field of mental science who had done actual research on the topic. No matter how you slice it, that is far more valuable than my personal opinion - so going to see women play will be of no benefit to anyone .. beside which, what makes you think I haven't?

...

I don't agree with your point of view, but I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree here.

[ace man]

Couple of years ago European Pool Championships were held close to where I live. I don't know if you've heard of Jasmin Ouschan, a cute Austrian blonde who plays pool to an extremely high level. She plays to about Allison's level, but breaks the balls as hard as top men, no joke. This has to be seen to be believed. Like Allison and most good woman billiard players, she prefers women. In one of the finals disciplines she played against her former girlfriend, while in other discipline she played finals against another cute Austrian girl who was in a relationship with Allison Fisher some years ago... Imagine a testosterone filled crowd watching those two girls play...you cannot help having dirty thoughts...
They also had the men and wheelchair category finals. All were playing on three tables at the same time. One could compare how girls play compared to guys. Ralf Souquet played his final.
I saw this live in person. It pays to see men and women play one beside the other. I would never say that top women could top beat men in any form of billiard game, provided that the match is long enough.