It’s Saturday Open Forum. First of all, I would like to apologize to all the non-USCF members who follow this forum. I had no choice but to discuss many issues about the current situation with the USCF and the upcoming USCF Executive Board election. The election process will start in less than a week when the USCF members will receive their ballots in the June 2007 Chess Life issue and the counting process will begin on July 25.
Secondly, I would like to tell you my position in this matter. This is one of the most important elections in US chess history. This election will come down to 5 professionals who are non-chess politicians with an incredible track of success versus 5 candidates who will fight hard and do whatever it takes to keep the status quo.
Let’s talk about the real issues:
– What positive things have each candidate do for US chess and the USCF in the past 3-5 years?
– What are their qualifications, experience and record of success or failure?
– What can each candidate bring to the USCF?
As I mentioned before, anyone can make promises now. It is easy to make promises, especially during an election season. But what do we know about them? What have they done?
Would doctors, lawyers, artists, entertainers, chess teachers, tournament directors or even professional players make good board members? Not necessarily. People can say you should vote for me because I am a ….. and I do …. for a living. So what? If you are sick, would you go see your local florist or nuclear physicist? Of course not. It is nice when we have successful people wanting to help. But it does not mean they can.
To run a complicated organization like the USCF, you need to understand and know many things. You have to be familiar with adult, scholastic, college, internet, military, correspondence chess, etc. You need to understand the dynamics of the chess world and not only within the US. You may not be an expert but you need to understand finances and have other important skills such being able to work with people and have their respect. There are too many things to list but most important of all, you have to have a good vision and be able to formulate proper plans to reach the goals.
I asked the same questions to all of the candidates and only 5 can successfully answer them. These are my take on the 5 most qualified candidates:
– Susan Polgar: You already know about me and the countless successes I have in changing the culture of chess in this country.
– Mikhail Korenman: He is one of the key components for a successful USCF as an organization. Very few people in the USCF can successfully work with scholastic, college, adult, professional and internet chess. Mikhail not only can work and bridge all these membership groups; he has one of the most impressive records of success. Many chess membership groups do not understand each other and cannot work together. Mikhail can change this. This is why I ask you to please vote for him.
– Paul Truong: As you all know, Paul is by far the most successful person in chess marketing, promotion and PR in US chess history. He has a unique combination that few possess. He was a chess prodigy and competed at a very high level. But he gave up chess to pursue an incredibly successful professional career. So he understands the mentality of chess players and he understands how businesses operate. This is why he is able to combine them and make some of the most spectacular deals for chess while no one else can even come close to this. Without his guidance and lead in this area, the USCF will go nowhere. Anyone who spends 5 minutes talking to him will understand that he is in a different league than the rest of the field in these areas.
– Randy Bauer: How often do you have a person with Randy’s experience? He was the budget director of the state of Iowa, dealing with multi-billion dollar budgets. Randy is also a chess master and supporter. He served on the USCF EB one year and helped this federation achieve a remarkable turn around. He is a finance guy. His skills and experience in finance is crucial for this federation.
– Jim Berry: Jim and his brother Frank are two of the biggest chess lovers in America. They love chess and they would do just about anything to help our game. Jim has a long history of helping chess in Oklahoma. He and his brother saved the 2007 US Championship after members of this board caused the AF4C to pull out. Just as Randy, Jim’s background is also in finance. He is a banker. He is on the board of SNB, a $2 billion bank. Like Randy, he can also help with the financial issues.
Unfortunately, you can only vote for 4 of the 5 choices above. You have a hard decision to make but any of these 5 people can help this federation. All 5 of the candidates above have spectacular history of success with US chess. They are not people who came out of nowhere with wild campaign promises. But most important of all, all 5 of these candidates have strong visions for the USCF and they will put the best interest of this federation first.
The records are clear. The choice is yours. Please vote. You can help set the course of the USCF for decades to come.
You can discuss about the election or any other topic you wish. The candidates’ matches are about to begin. The US Championship just finished. SPICE was announced and the first major international chess event for SPICE will be held at Texas Tech University and it will be sponsored by Dr. Eric Moskow. It is Saturday Open Forum. The forum is yours.
Hi Susan,
The candidates’ matches are about to begin tomorrow.
Chess & Strategy supports french champion Etienne Bacrot against american champ Gata Kamsky.
Phil, webmaster of Chess & Strategy
http://phildornbusch.blogspot.com/
Susan, We know barring something unusual, that Nadal and Henin win win the upcoming French Open, but who are some of the people you think could surprise a few people in the next 2 weeks at Roland Garros?
A passion for chess is a necessary ingredient for a board member one might think.
I suspect you are passionate about chess in many ways. It is life for many of us. My dad taught me chess when I was 5 years old, and it has been with me all these years, although he is gone. I think of learning from him every time I read or play chess because of this.
The status quo is not a bad thing all the time. If the board composition were to become favorable to you, then you would be the status quo. This is why I think you have been specific what frustrations you have with current operations.
The main thing is that we honor whomever is appointed, unless they are destructive or suicidal to the chess mission, causing permanent damage.
As for the oppression for gender reasons you experienced, it is not necessarily an entire gender. There may be a way to honor tradition and at the same time, transform the USCF into the most formidable chess force on the planet.
To me, that is the goal worth fighting for.
Susan,
On yesterday’s topic: “A No brainer chess poll”, You had an excellent post by an anonymous poster. I think it is worth to repost here as a cut and paste. I suspect the poster is an employee of the USCF. I have heard the same message from within USCF personnel.
At any rate, here is the great post:
Anonymous said…
MY understanding is that the kids play 2 tournaments at the same time. the Denker in the morning and the US Open in the afternoon. That is a difficult schedule for them. They are not able to concentrate on either tournament and get to tired to win.
The object of the Denker is to get the best kid to win. To accomplish the task the students should play only the Denker with full concentration on the tournament.
Then on another weekend or week they can play the US Open and concentrate on that.
The real problem is that the US Open is a dinosaur and a losing tournament because it is structured wrong. It is one game a day for a long period. Thus hotel expenses are double a normal tournament. In this case even more because the hotel is very expensive.
So what the USCF did was to get a captive audience of 50 players to help fund the US Open. These 50 players are the State Champions. This adds 50 players of whom maybe 30 play in the US Open.
The data is all confused. The uscf claims they need these 30 players and that they do a favor for the kids. But in reality the huge expenses to the parents are now shining forth. The errors in the logic of the US Open are coming out. The entire mess at the USCF is focused here. The adults are against scholastics. The adults hold the power and are screeming against the scholastic players. They would like to get rid of the scholastic players but they covet the income from them. The USCF makes a big profit off the scholastics. 60% of the membership but they rate all the games and right now scholastics are playing all the games. I would not be surprised if 90% of the rated games are scholastic.
Scholastics are a big cash cow and the scholastics have almost no representation at USCF. There is a big movement to break away from the USCF.
Now we see how the selfishness of the USCF interfers with doing the right thing for scholastics.
My opinion is that Susan and her team will treat scholastics fair and square. The other candidates fear scholastics. They even fight not to spend the money on scholastics that is paid for by the scholastics.
For example the entry fees at some big tournaments were raised by $10 so that the $10 would be put aside for the scholastic needs. The USCF agreed to do that. Then candidates like Sam Sloan get on and try to talk everyone into keeping all the money and stiffing the scholastics.
If you are not a member of USCF then you can join on line for immediate membership. If you do this before the end of May, you are eligible to vote. Many are joining now to get the vote. Make sure you vote for Susan and her team.
Susan wants to unite the USCF and provide fair service to all aspects of chess. Scholastic and Adults will be treated fairly if Susan and her team is elected. This is an important election. We do not want to split up chess players into a Scholastic Federation and an Adult Federation.
What someone above said is true. The other candidates are taking a strong stand against Scholastics to get the adult votes since the scholastics basically have no vote. This can not last very long.
I am strongly in favor of supporting those sponsors who want to support chess in America. I would not give a permanent right to the Denker but a 5 or 10 year agreement is ok. Maybe in 5 or 10 years another company will want to bid on the Denker and the USCF can allow them to auction it off to the highest bidder. This is the way the USCF should be handling its assets.
My prediction is this.
If Susan’s team is elected then everything will go smooth on the proposal from the sponsor. All scholastic chess parents will benefit and adult members will benefit.
If Susan and her team is defeated then the USCF will refuse the sponsor and another opportunity to infuse money into chess will have been lost.
You do not have to be a chess player to vote. You simply have to pay the cost of adult membership to vote. The cost of membership and your vote might just save scholastic parents a lot more money in the long run then the cost of membership. Get represented join up and vote.
Susan, Paul, Randy, Mikhail are the team.
Friday, May 25, 2007 7:18:00 PM
Who are you picks for tomorrow’s rounds?
Who are your picks for the matches starting tomorrow?
Thanks 🙂
Victor:
You said “So what the USCF did was to get a captive audience of 50 players to help fund the US Open. These 50 players are the State Champions. This adds 50 players of whom maybe 30 play in the US Open”.
I’m confused here. Can you give me a link where I can read more about this? Or elaborate?
Thanks!
–Duncan
Susan, please post this cool picture of Jutka!! 🙂
http://www.fide.com/photos/candidates/polgarsheep.jpg
It’s from this page: http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1353
Victor
A very interesting post.
I am going to join up today and vote. I love chess and the cost of membership is something I should pay at this important time.
I am going to be a voting member in just a few minutes. 4 more votes for Susan and her team.
http://beta.uschess.org/frontend/section_203.php
In the essay that Victor Flores reposted are the following two statements:
1. The Denker should be played with full concentration, without those evening US Open games.
2. The US Open is a dinosaur because it has only one game per day.
Would someone care to comment on this contradiction?
Dunkan,
I just reposted what someone stated in another topic. I’m not an expert on the Denker tournament, but from I gather each state sends in their top high school player, usually it’s the high school champion in their respective state tournament. These Denker representatives then compete against each other in their exclusive chess tournament (the Denker). The U.S. Open is a seperate tournament which takes place on the same days (different times) as the Denker at the same site. There was some discussion on this matter at the U.S. Forums. Hope this helps.
Have a great weekend everyone.