Hacker News Reader

Comment by 3np | Hacker News Reader

> Sarah Longson, a former British ladies’ champion

Athletic sports aside, does anyone know the motivation between gender-segregated leagues in games like chess?

There is no male-only chess, women can also compete. Female-only chess clubs and tournaments are a way to encourage women to get into chess in a less hostile, more welcoming environment. Ultimately it's an attempt to bring more diversity to the male-dominated game. In 2019 for example, women made up a higher percentage of chess players then ever before, but still only accounted for 14.6% [0] of registered players.

[0] https://www.chess.com/news/view/team-battles-femme-batale-no...

Are they trying to hit 50% female participation?

> between gender-segregated leagues in games like chess?

Because with few exceptions (the Polgar sisters) they didn't manage to compete on the same level as men. Judit Polgar was the highest-ranking women ever (no. 8, in 2005), but 15 years have passed already and there's no woman-challenger in sight.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judit_Polg%C3%A1r

It isn't fair (in the statistical sense) to make a comparison on the basis of rank between an over- and under-represented group. Interesting read here https://en.chessbase.com/post/what-gender-gap-in-chess

15 years have passed already and there's no woman-challenger in sight.

I was about to comment that Yifan Hou might be close, but turns out she's only ranked in the mid 80s. And she is by all accounts the most dominant currently active woman.

The classes are open (people can enter regardless of gender), and female-only. The latter exist primarily as a means for recriuting more women to the sport, as far as I know.

In addition to the other points people have brought up there is a video from a high profile chess streamer on sexual harassment/predatory behavior in the chess community: https://old.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/he50l7/alexandra_sha...

I vaguely remember some studies about women underperforming when they perceive their opponent as a man (even playing online). A quick google search might get you some articles on the matter, or the papers themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat

In situations where you are expected to perform worse due to a stereotype one tends to perform worse.

Is this enough to explain not a single woman in the top 100?

Basically to get more women into chess.

They still play in non-segregated tournaments, get regular titles and such. Women's chess titles, tournaments and such an extra.

Think of it like having a local league with its own rating system and titles. Countries have this, and it exists alongside international, fide titles and ratings.

There are so many more men playing that the chances of finding a woman strong enough to win a top tournament are slim. We would have men-only tournaments with a reverse gender ratio.

Then there are commercial and opportunity reasons. The winner of a women-only tournament is always a women and sponsors can show a winning woman to their customers. Furthermore it could help to recruit new female players. I'd like to hear from a woman about that because maybe knowing that they'll win only in a protected area, or the very existence of protected areas, could actually discourage them to play.

BTW, the same principles apply to the game of Go (only one woman ever won a major open tournament), and even the anti cheating measures.

Alexandra Botez and others have talked about it at considerable length. Suffice it to say, none of them feel discouraged to play by the existence of women's titles. And they all have pretty horrible stories of harassment or even assault growing up as young women in the chess world. Women's titles are not some sort of value reducing participation trophies, and the chess world is far more hostile as a status quo than you're assuming.

They say it’s to encourage female participation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com