In your opinion, what should be the role of the USCF when it comes to supporting professional chess, scholastic chess, senior chess, adult chess, college chess, military chess, correspondence chess, local and state affiliates, etc? Do you think the USCF is doing a good job in following its mission?
USCF Mission
USCF is a not-for-profit membership organization devoted to extending the role of chess in American society.
USCF promotes the study and knowledge of the game of chess, for its own sake as an art and enjoyment, but also as a means for the improvement of society. It informs, educates, and fosters the development of players (professional and amateur) and potential players. It encourages the development of a network of institutions devoted to enhancing the growth of chess, from local clubs to state and regional associations, and it promotes chess in American schools.
To these ends, USCF offers a monthly magazine, as well as targeted publications to its members and others. It supervises the organization of the U.S. chess championship, an open tournament every summer, and other national events. It offers a wide range of books and services to its members and others at prices consistent with the benefit of its members.
USCF serves as the governing body for chess in the United States and as a participant in international chess organizations and projects. It is structured to ensure effective democratic procedures in accord with its bylaws and the laws of the state of Illinois.
The USCF has done a horrible job following its mission. The USCF has wasted too much money with little results.
The mission of the USCF is to line the pockets of BG and his friends.
I think one of them at the 2007 Delegates meeting said – I’ll be at the bar while you all discuss financial issues – but he was the VP of Finance for the previous year. And he also admitted he would not know how to look at financials and needed his accountant to tell him.
The mission of the USCF is to have too many delegates and other individuals prop themselves up on a high pedestal projecting importance on their position when they do not mean anything.
The mission of the USCF is to support the numerous lawsuits from idiots like a former board member.
The mission of the USCF is to outsource lucrative deals to friends, where that money could have been used to support chess.
The mission of the USCF is to make stupid deals like Natrol.
The mission of the USCF is to repay for a website over and over again and never get it done.
The mission of the USCF is to pay tens of thousands in legal fees, never move foward on issues, and let the federation wither and die.
The mission of the USCF has nothing to do with chess, only the appearance of it.
Susan and Paul are only two votes.
They cannot enact anything without a majority.
Randy Bauer is nothing more than an opportunist who bows down to kiss the Goichberg ring. He got in because he road on Susan and Paul’s coattails.
Jim Berry is another opportunist. He puts on this ‘for chess’ face but when it comes down to votes he votes with his buddy Goichberg. He has stabbed Susan and Paul in the back with the way he votes. He cannot buy back their trust with free services or bailing out the US Championships – haha – again in the middle of nowhere Oklahoma! How pathetic!
Joel Channing – the man with the Midas touch is more a poisonous touch. He screwed up the finances, hides it, then comes out to say he knows nothing of finances!
Randy Hough is nothing more than a puppet and Bill Goichberg is the puppetier with his hand up Randy’s wazoo.
Bill Goichberg is Mr. Corruption himself! Look up corrupt in the dictionary and you see Bill’s picture.
A bad joke this EB is and it will bring the USCF to a bad ending.
If you want to be a successful membership organization, you need to be a grassroots movement. It’s the only way to do it, really.
There isn’t a single membership organization in the country that relies on its professional staff to do all the work of the organization.
Instead, they figure out how to energize members and then they rely on those volunteers to do the heavy lifting and a lot of the fundraising.
The national organization guides these efforts and/or sets policies to ensure that these efforts are consistent with the organization’s overall goals. But otherwise steps back.
No matter how many good intentions people have, the professional staff of the USCF will never be able to do everything people would like the USCF to do. The Board needs to figure out what to keep and then needs to outsource the rest.
Some suggestions: I think you need to maintain ChessLife or a Webzine/Site for promotional purposes and for communicating with members. You also need to sell the rating system. Nowadays, people get ICC and PlayChess ratings, it’s true, but I think a lot of us still consider our USCF OTB rating our “real” rating.
Tournaments, chess in schools, industrial leagues, local clubs, the USCL, chess in prisons, chess for the blind, book sales, etc. can and should be run by outside groups, whether those groups do it for profit or on a volunteer basis.
In exchange for a fee or a % of entry fees, USCF should lend its name for promotional purposes, provide some core materials (i.e., a curriculum or lesson plan for a teacher who wants to use chess in the classroom), and rate games. But should not get bogged down in organizational tasks and/or funding.
I’m NOT saying that we shouldn’t have tournaments like SPICE or the recent one in Chicago that afford opportunities for professional players. Clearly, we should. But its not realistic to expect USCF to fund these and USCF shouldn’t get entangled in trying to organize them. Some how, some way, you need to get the state organizations, your local affiliates, private companies and/or individuals to do all this. USCF should limit itself to promoting the tourney and might consider sending a represntative to it, but not a whole lot more.
A possible exception might by the US Championship. It’s important to have one each year. Either find a sponsor that will ensure one each year or national may have to get involved.
Another exception might be the Olympiad teams, since they represent the country as a whole. USCF should be involved in selection of team members, coaches, finding sponsors and, if necessary and available, funding.
I don’t think USCF needs to fund individual players, but it can perhaps help find sponsors, donors or patrons for them. It can also be a clearinghouse to find them students, simuls or speaking engagements. Yes, it would be nice if we had more GMs and if we didn’t lose talented players to investment banks (can’t say I blame them there) or poker. But I don’t see what USCF can really do about this, other than to try to raise the interest in chess generally and hope that makes chess a more respected and lucrative profession.
So, how to generate interest in chess? I admit this is not an easy question to answer, but it seems to me that we’re on the right track in the schools in presenting chess as something that will make you smarter and more disciplined.
Other than that, I think we need to present chess more as a sport than as a mere game. I don’t want to encourage any philosophical debates on whether chess is a game, an art, a science, a sport, whatever; it’s a fact of life that, in the USA, sports is where the money goes.
The message here should be ruthlessly consistent. For example, tournament reports should convey the rush to the finish, the tension, the competitive aspects; get rid of the reports that praise the hotel, thank the organizers or interview some kid in the under-1600 section. We need to rise above all that.
Food for thought.
The USCF should support Kamsky and other top professionals.
Let’s stick to the questions that were asked:
In your opinion, what should be the role of the USCF when it comes to supporting professional chess, scholastic chess, senior chess, college chess, military chess, correspondence chess, local and state affiliates, etc? Do you think the USCF is doing a good job in following its mission?
Richard, thanks for your well presented view.
Thanks!
Susan Polgar
Who approved paying for a number of websites that don’t work? How much money has been spent so far for this garbage? We could have funded the US Championship for that money.
As with most mission statements, the USCF Mission Statement is intentionally and properly too vague to constitute an action plan.
ANNUAL MISSION PLAN (AMP)
In the same spirit, the Executive Board should issue an “Annual Mission Plan” that lists…
(AA) the specific one or two goals the USCF wants to achieve or progress that year, and
(BB) the specific actions it will undertake to satisfy the plan (and ideally to measure its success or failure).
A good AMP can fit on one sheet of paper.
My answer to Susan’s blog question — No, I do not think the ExecBoard is formally setting specific incremental goals with associated action items.
Directly growing adult membership and renewals rates should always be the primary goal of the USCF.
GeneM
CastleLong.com , FRC chess960
The USCF is wasting way too much money on ridiculous items. The USCF should should do more to support adult chess, scholastic chess and professional chess.
As Charles Darwin said: “In the survival of favoured individuals and races, during the constantly recurring struggle for existence, we see a powerful and ever-acting form of selection.” Thus our professionals rise to the top.
We must support Kamsky! If there is not enough money available, we must sell assets, property until his needs are sated. If need be we can implement a chess tax on our youngest members forcing their parents to cough up the money. We can reward the young ones with party favors and enhanced ratings.
Go Kamsky!!!
The above was great for my morning laugh. The board had problems long before Susan and Paul got in. Apparently, anon 14:00 conveniently forgets that and wants to place all the problems on Susan and Paul rather then where they are supposed to be.
The USCF would far better support its mission by having more currently or recently high level active players on its board than its current composition. Names you hear about in news articles, winning tournaments, top-100 in the United States types players so that there will be some level of player representation on the EB.
In recent history it has had too many bureaucrats and politicians and yes lawyer or lawyer dependent types.
Follow the money folks, and you will see where the motivations and alliances lie.
USCF deserves a C+ to B- by its own mission statement mostly on the good job they are doing on Scholastic Chess and the much improved Web Site and Rating system.
But as the Chess Federation of the richest nation on earth, I would like see the USCF raise his international profile and foster partnerships with other Chess Federation in the Americas and the Caribbean in the promotion of Chess.
The USCF needs to put greater resources in putting together the US Championship. Scrape the Swiss system in favor of a strong robin tournament by rating with couple of spots for the best Junior and highest rated female player.
Ideally USCF should find sponsorship for a match between the winner of this tournament and the Current US Champion but a round robin tournament will be a big step forward.
We cannot follow in Kirsan’s lead in choosing questionable venues such as Las Vegas, Kalmikya or Khanty-Mansiysk for such important contests. Oklahoma is fine for a Scholastic championship but the US Chess Championship should be held in major Chess Centers of the US like New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Boston, Miami, LA.
Is there a committee that oversees the USCF EB?
How can members make sure their money is being spent wisely?