This year no less than three of the 10 nominees -- or “finalists” -- are women: Annie Duke, Jennifer Harman-Traniello, and Linda Johnson. In 2010, there were two women among the 10 individuals listed on the final ballot (Harman-Traniello and Johnson). And in 2009, the year the nomination process was first introduced, there were no women among the final 10.

Joining those three women on the 2011 ballot are Barry Greenstein, John Juanda, Marcel Luske, Jack McClelland, Tom McEvoy, Scotty Nguyen, and Huck Seed.

It is impossible to know what role the Poker Hall of Fame Governing Council might have played in their vetting of the online polling. However, one assumes all of those appearing on the final ballot were at least nominated, with most probably receiving a considerable number of votes.

Now it is up to the living Hall of Famers (there are 18 of them) and a group of poker media (a 17-member panel) to decide who of these final 10 will be getting in this year. I happen to have been given the privilege to participate in the process as one of the media who gets to vote, and so I’m fairly up on the process as a whole -- not to mention how difficult a task deciding how to vote will be.

Each voter is given 10 points to distribute among the candidates, although we cannot vote for more than three. For example, I could give 5 points to one, 3 to another, and 2 to a third. I could also vote for no one at all, if I wished, but I can assure you I won’t be doing that.

We should note the criteria voters are to consider when evaluating candidates, too.

For players, they are supposed to have “played poker against acknowledged top competition,” “played for high stakes,” “played consistently well, gaining the respect of peers,” and “stood the test of time.” Meanwhile, for non-players, they are to have “contributed to the overall growth and success of the game of poker, with indelible positive and lasting results.”

Also worth noting is a new requirement added this year, the so-called “Chip Reese Rule” that states an individual must be at least 40 years old in order to be elected. (Reese was 40 at the time he became a Poker Hall of Famer in 1991.) The introduction of this rule meant players like Daniel Negreanu and Phil Ivey who had appeared on ballots before weren't eligible this time around.

One question of particular interest here at Woman Poker Player is whether or not having three women on the final ballot increases the chances for a woman to be elected. Currently of the 40 members of the Poker Hall of Fame there is but one woman, Barbara Enright (elected in 2007).

Of the three women on the ballot, Jennifer Harman-Traniello is the one whose résumé is most exclusively built upon her exploits at the tables.

Besides being an accomplished cash game player, having regularly participated in the “Big Game” in Bobby’s Room where she demonstrated her skills in a variety of poker variants, Harman-Traniello has performed at a high level for a long time in tournaments, too. Among her $2.5 million-plus in tourney winnings, Harman-Traniello has two WSOP bracelets in “open” events -- the 2000 $5,000 No-Limit Deuce-to-Seven Draw event and the 2002 $5,000 Limit Hold’em event.

Harman-Traniello is also known for having used her poker celebrity in order to further her charity efforts, organizing tournaments to raise considerable funds to support organizations such as the Nevada Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Meanwhile, her status as a member of Team Full Tilt might have earned her some credit previously as having contributed to the growth of the game via online poker. However, given the events of this year and the website’s currently questionable status (to put it mildly), such an association is no longer to be highlighted in support of Harman-Traniello’s candidacy.

Annie Duke has also enjoyed a lengthy, successful career, although she’s better known for her achievements in tournaments than in cash games. With over $4 million in tourney winnings -- including a WSOP bracelet in an open event (2004 $2,000 Omaha/8) -- Duke ranks among the top women earners ever.

Duke’s role as Commissioner of the new Epic Poker League has brought her added notice as well, as has her new strategy book Decide to Play Great Poker (co-authored with John Vorhaus). Her speaking for the U.S. Congress on behalf of online poker and her appearance on “Celebrity Apprentice” have also been regarded by many as having furthered the cause for poker in a constructive way.

Of course, Duke has her critics, too, with her long-time role as spokesperson for UltimateBet the primary cause for a lot of censure. The fact that Duke remained with UB through December 2010 -- well after the site’s much-publicized cheating scandal -- is cause for some to remove her from consideration here.

Finally, Linda Johnson’s contributions to poker mostly fall under the “non-player” heading of contributing to poker’s growth and success, although she, too, has won a WSOP bracelet in an open event (1997 $1,500 Razz).

Known as “The First Lady of Poker,” Johnson has been long regarded as a kind of pioneer for women in poker, a person who as much or more than anyone helped paved the way for women such as Harman-Traniello and Duke to join the game.

Additionally, Johnson served as the publisher for Card Player for an eight-year stretch during the 1990s as well as helped with the formation of the Tournament Directors Association -- both significant contributions to the game’s growth and development. Johnson has worked also with the World Poker Tour and PokerGives.org, the latter a site that helps poker players find ways to donate to charity.

Incidentally, of the three both Harman-Traniello and Johnson are already members of the Women in Poker Hall of Fame (founded in 2007), where Duke’s non-support of ladies-only tournaments apparently prevents her election there. (How odd would it seem for Duke to be elected to the Poker Hall of Fame without having been elected to the WiPHoF?)

I’d also note that when it comes to women deserving a place on the ballot, Kathy Liebert springs to mind as someone whose accomplishments as a player not only compare favorably to other women, but to most of the men named as finalists, too.

My sense is that of the three women on the 2011 ballot there seems to be a bit more momentum behind Johnson’s candidacy at present than for either Harman-Traniello or Duke. And I do think that if a woman isn’t elected this year, the chances will remain high one will in the near future.

However the vote turns out this time around, the increase in the number of women on the ballot -- and the increased likelihood of another women getting elected to the Poker Hall of Fame -- could reasonably be said to signify an advance of sorts for women in poker, generally speaking.

See also: She Said: Substantial Female Recognition by WSOP Hall of Fame