Yesterday, I asked what are the top 3 things you would like to see the USCF improve as soon as possible?
Today, what are the next 3 things you would like to see the USCF improve as soon as possible?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
- About Us
- Chess Improvement
- Chess Puzzles
- Chess Research
- College Chess
- General News
- Home
- Major Tournaments
- News
- Polgar Events
- Privacy Policy
- Scholastic Chess
- SPICE / Webster
- Susan’s Personal Blog
- Track your order
- USA Chess
- Videos
- Women’s Chess
- Contact Us
- Daily News
- My Account
- Terms & Conditions
- Privacy Policy
As Susan has said before, there is a tremendous number of people playing chess online, and most of them play chess exclusively online.
Instead of seeing online chess as the enemy or as competition, I’d like to see it used as a marketing medium. Why not do a little sponsorship at, say Yahoo! Chess — encourage people to play OTB now and then, even announce upcoming local tournaments (Yahoo! knows where you live…). Let the online guys do what they do best, let us do what we do best, and let’s do something mutually beneficial.
After the more fundamental improvements discussed in the previous query:
Online publication of rules
Coach training and support, perhaps also certification
Website improvement — both functionality and ability to find the info already there
Make a fundamental decision as to which master the Institution will serve: The Scholastic Chess Cash-Cow-Money-Machine, or serving the Chess playing public.
BEST would be for the USCF to distance and ultimately DIVORCE itself from all the Emperor’s New Clothes of Scholastic chess. Take away that soft and flabby teat and make the USCF earn moeny the old fashioned way, with actual work by delivering a product that has some value.
drkodos, are children no longer part of the public? Do you really believe scholastic chess is a product with no value? Get real.
4. US National Chess Championship be corporate sponsored and regular.
5. Help financially top US GM’s compete in tournaments abroad so they get better also.
6. Have a system to nurture young chess talent into tomorrow’s GM’s and international chess stars.
Dan:
Scholastic Chess should be headed by an entire organization that focuses exclusively on scholastic chess, , not by a multi-headed hydra that cannot keep track of its many heads.
ALSO: MOST scholastic players are not keeping up with the prusuit as adults. Look at the numbers. Adult membership is much lower than it was at the start of all this scholastic chess many years ago. With the passage of time, and the maturation of these youngsters, you would think the adult ranks would be swwlling.
They are not.
In my previous postings, I never made any statements about scholastic chess other than that it is a cash cow…. because it is. I did not say it had no value, but now that you mention it, I believe the value is MUCH lower than what people claim.
And yes I have children, and yes they play chess.
Deal.
1. Establish a Vision of what and where chess in the USA and the USCF should be in 10 years.
2. Create a Strategic Plan and set 5 major measurable goals with yearly action plans for each goal.
3. Hold the EB responsible for meeting the goals.
Certainly 2 things the USCF should do in the next ten years is:
a: Establish wide media coverage (newspaper, TV) of chess events and make it popular with the general public.
b. Increase the OTB adult (21 to 50 yr. old) USA chess players tenfold.
drkodos, in an effort to keep things positive around here, I will just chuckle and move on.
dan:
Why does the idea that scholastic chess does not hold the value that people claim it has considered negative? It is not a negative perspective, it is a pragmatic one.
And that is one of the major issues facing the USCF and ANY people that think they want to help run it: Lack of pragmatic thinking and planning.
Scholastic chess is already well represented by a number of institutions and does not need the USCF in order to flourish. On the other hand it appears that the USCF desperately needs the Scholastic revenue to function.
It is this dynamic imbalance that needs to be addressed, and if people such as yourself always think it is negative to do so, well then no wonder the USCF has deteriorated into a White Elephant run by a bunch of petty bureaucratistas.