My long time friend (over 20 years) and business manager Paul Truong rarely gives public interviews. It took nearly 18 years before he allowed me to interview him back in August 2003 for ChessCafe.com.
He just recently agreed to do an interview with Chessville.com. Paul is a very straight forward person and one of the hardest working people I know. Ask him a question and you will always get the most candid and direct answer.
His life story is an inspiring movie waiting to happen. His ethics, integrity and passion for chess is second to none. He is also a world-class photographer and arguably one of the most knowledgable people in Chess Marketing and PR.
He is also the mastermind behind many of the incredible projects for the Susan Polgar Foundation and he is my most trusted advisor. HERE is his interview on Chessville.com. Hold on to your seats 🙂
You can read my interview with Paul for ChessCafe.com in 2003 here.
It’s an outstanding interview. I’m glad someone actually has the courage to speak up.
It’s really an explosive interview.
Wow! I feel like my whole body just relaxed after reading…all my bad juju and feelings about USCF have been validated. Great job! Get those b-turds!
Susan,
In another blog entry I asked:
“One day, if you have the time, please explain what are the moving forces behind what you call the “the same old”? Who’s interest all that, how and why? You are talking about that quite often, we interpret bits and pieces, but I doubt that many of us would understand it in depth (at least I don’t).”
You responded:
“I will explain it in my chesscafe.com column which will come out on Tuesday night / Wednesday morning.”
In case your column is not done, please include explanation to the following question, which kind of belongs to this subject. I read the interview, indeed it is very interesting. One item caught my attention, along the same line:
He said:”On another note, the executive board should set sound policies and not micro-manage. Unfortunately, too many delegates and especially executive board members are too political. As we have seen in the last executive board election, a former President of the USCF actually endorsed this candidate with conviction records to get back at his political opponent. He was not the only one. Many other people have voted for candidates not to help this federation but to hurt their political opponents. It is a sick and twisted mentality but that is how things work.”
When I hear the word “political” or “this is all politics”, I can always trace back the thought to money and/or power which creates money. The simpler version of this that the person gets a salary for the given position, which he would not get otherwise, or with easy work. The more complex version is when the person has power of decision which results creating situations which results in money. For which certain people are willing to pay money to him (to the person in a political position). There are several variations of this, but ultimately the goal is always money (financial value). And now my question:
Where in chess there is enough money to go around, so these people “qualify” to be in a “political situation”? Or is it the simple version? Meaning, they have a well paid cushy job and they are protecting it? I really don’t understand.
Thanks for your attention,
Gabor
Gabor
Where the hell did he say anything about money??? YOU are projecting that in your OWN definition of politics NOT his. So why are you asking a question about a statement that has all to do with your own fantasy, and has nothing to do with what is mentioned by either Ms S or Paul or anyone here????
You must obviously have the answer, so why ask a rhetorical question unless its to stroke your own ego so you can feel good about hearing yourself talk! Get a life instead of a mirror. Yeah, Im pissed off becuase I had to read your 40,000 word post to find out its a load of junk. Garbor-ge!
Great interview. It is long past time to do some major housecleaning at the USCF board. We need to get the word out to the parents of the scholastic players at the upcoming Nationals and other major tournaments. They are an important and underrepresented constituency of the USCF.
Very honest and candid answers. I appreciate that very much. This is quite contrasting to all the hot air from the USCF politicians. Thank you Ms. Polgar for bring us this.
explosive.
hello dear susan,
i am deligted to hear that you would candidate for fide presidency
good luck
and thanks
a chess amateur from berlin
One of the best interviews I’ve read.
Forget FIDE, can we amend the US constitution so you can be Pres. of the US?
FIDE president? Do you really want to enter that den of vipers?
Paul’s talents and experiences have molded his character and incessant drive for success.
However, Paul needs to take more time now too for his health and well being.
I wish him more power and success. He should be running for office and run USCF!
Runner Joe
hmmm. First off, there is several things im not comfortable with here. I will start in order of the “biggest of my concerns” and work down. I am very concerned about these people logging in as “anonymous” raving and ranting about what “people with identities” are saying. I got a message for you “anonymous” folks…If you like to speak up and state your opinion why hide yourself? I state my opinion and am not afraid to hide my identity. I do not know Gabor, but he asks some very sound questions and for you to feel so passionate about his skepticism draws “interest” to me. Secondly, I have a lot of respect for Susan and Paul. Some decisions they have made have surprised me because I have expected the complete opposite reaction in their endeavours. This expectation though was just a negative expectation and what the decisions they have made have been “positive”. I would like to thank them both for that. I do questions some things after reading the interview. For one, I would questions anyone (not just Paul) total love for chess if they had not played for 20 years. But do not get me wrong, I took into consideration about his family back in Vietnam and all of the “very personal” motifs that have occured in his life that may have prevented him from playing chess. But im from a very small town, and most of the people here do not play in tournaments (myself being excluded from that list of course) but they love to play chess and in these people’s eyes I see the “real passion” for chess. I think some of these people “who love chess” are also captivated by a “love for politics” or a “love for other ambitions”. I have mixed feelings about the opinion that a company cannot exist as a democracy, but after all this is political. I am very sad that Susan is contemplating running for FIDE president, I thought she was more or less dedicated to helping promote chess in the world and not attending to just professional players needs. Because in my opinion most of what FIDE does is just center their attention around Professional chess (GOD KNOWS THEY NEED A SUSAN POLGAR to work out that mess) I would much rather see her as President of the USCF for example. Then, Im sure that Paul could cope with working for USCF also with a very sound and humble mind. However, I also have to respect what is best for….Susan…and Paul..and what she has to do to support herself and her family. The have already made more than a mark on promoting chess in our country, and for that fact I am very thankful. You will continue to have all of my support in all of your endeavours.
Sincerely
Jimmie Beatty
I don’t read interviews, sorry. Especially not ones 4 years old!!!
another anonymous comment of course 🙂 how can this interview be 4 years old ? when he talks about fairly recent activity? plz explain yourself.
>>. I am very concerned about these people logging in as “anonymous” raving and ranting about what “people with identities” are saying.
I share your concern, Jimmie. It looks that those anonymous are very few people who go through all the posts and try to impose their views on everybody and order Susan to restrict other posts, especially the ones that oppose their views. Under no-name they spring up and attack named people with different views here. I was attacked by 1 or 2 anonymous persons in many posts a month or so ago and do not answer to anything posted by an anonymous. I think the best solution is the comment section to be restricted only for the named people.
Lyudmil Antonov
>>Yeah, Im pissed off becuase I had to read your 40,000 word post to find out its a load of junk.
Who are you to be pissed off? You are nobody here. Anonymous.
exactly Lantonov (I’m) being the key word. 🙂 I wonder if these people posting this as anonymous really think they are being slick….because even though I do not know for sure that it is a certain person from the comments they make I can reason it to be a particular person who is actually a named identity on this site 🙂 but i will save that for myself and not make accusations. However i agree do away with anonymous postings. It creates conflict.
Amazing! Chess has a future thanx to the both of you and the many supporters you have.
Hmmm…once more we seem to have drifted away from the substance in the interview and attack one another–attack ad hominem–attack the person and not discuss or ignore the merit, or lack thereof, in their proposal.
I admire both Susan’s and Paul’s intent, efforts, and results. However, I think that instead of burying the sword deeper into the wound, so to speak, both would benefit via diplomacy and definite proposal, rather than confrontation. True, confrontation can be very effective, but I sense that many players, especially the adults (as well as parents of players) do not like the community devolving into playground finger-pointing, good guy-bad guy accusations, and win-lose management.
Key words: diplomacy, toleration, integrity, confrontation, finger-pointing, good guy-bad guy
P.S. I choose to post anonymously because I wish you to consider my words based ONLY upon their merit (or lack thereof), not upon my persona.
“P.S. I choose to post anonymously because I wish you to consider my words based ONLY upon their merit (or lack thereof), not upon my persona.”
exactly—and also to reduce spam. If i registered on every site I visit, my email box would be clogged.
To the point…what really is annoying with a lot of these posts is the sycophant, self absorbed, and self loving language and ideas toward Ms. S. It’s like everyone is kissing asss and trying to get into someones pants.
Should Susan run for FIDE president? God NO! FIDE is a disaster. We need a fresh organization – one that allows for more people of all ages…one that eliminates “rated” play and gives everyone a chance at a top seed…one that is affordable…one that is democratic.
Should Susan run for USCF? God NO! Same reasons.
You have a real naive view of diplomacy. This is not diplomacy. There is no room for diplomacy any more with either FIDE or USCF. This is now war.
Me thinks that the negative loser anon who is “p.o.’d is a well known opponent of Paul T.
I still do not know why he keeps reading Susan’s Blogs though 😉
Now if he identify himself and tell us what meaningful comment he has, then maybe he will show us indeed that he’s got balls.
Joe B.
>>Yeah, Im pissed off becuase I had to read your 40,000 word post to find out its a load of junk.
Mr. Truong is a true professional. He’s a breath of fresh air comparing to the people who are ruining the USCF in the past 30 years. I’ve met him several times and he’s always been very courteous.
I fully support Paul more than you will ever know. Its a relief to hear the brash and direct no holds opinion voiced.
Now hear mine: F U Joe B.
Oh wow…Joe B is that your REAL NAME?
My only advice if you decide to run for FIDE President is “please don’t eat the sushi”. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is no “diplomat”.
Surely, if you believe in free economics and market competition, you would vote for a new organization to compete with FIDE or USCF. Right now those organizations are monopolistic Oligarthies that cannot be changed from the inside. It’s a bit like trying to go through the ranks of a male sexist army fully voicing you want to overthrow it. To overthrow an army, you need to create another army.
Kasparov’s PTA organization FAILED because it was an organization strictly for professionals and did nothing for Scolastics or chess to the masses. We should look at other models…perhaps in other sports. For example, the USTA and USPTA are seperate but closely related entities – one for amateur; one for professionals. Your “seed” or level is determined by your final place in tourneys, not some stupid statistical BS. In an open tourney, everyone has a chance.
If a new organization is set up under the right balances of democracy, it would reduce the corruption.
ok, go back to your coocoo love fest
>>are seperate but closely related entities – one for amateur; one for professionals.
It’s not “seperate” but “separate”. Nit, nit. Pick, pick. Goo-goo-goo-cock-a-doodle-doo.:))
Yes one of those words I always seem to mispel.
wow……you know what. id like to know if some of these childish characters that blog here are part of our US chess scene. it wouldnt surprise me one bit though to be honest.
really jimmd….if that is your real name?
yes really yes im Jimmie from Maryland 🙂 nice to meet you
Sincerely, these vague generalities between rants and attacks really solves nothing.
Anonymous posting? Well, it’s really up to Susan, this is her blog. Everyone has a web address, so it’s really not anonymous anyway. Posters could even try posting something foolish or ridiculous anonymously so they appear sage or wise when they point out the solution….(yawn)
Truong? Fine, I see your point, let’s see your plan.