"Bruce" wrote in message
ups.com...


Having been out of the loop mostly for 4 years I will only say that
USCF is an eternally political organization. While there is nothing
wrong with Ms. Polgar trying to promote chess, sometimes being on the
board politicizes everything a person wants to do.

Look at all the people who were pretty well respected as chess
promoters. Once they got elected to the board they were viewed as
sycophants, pandererers for political power, self ingratiators or do-
nothings.

More diplomatically grin I said something similar to 2 new board members
this morning. I said, "get thee to an interview, and please don't continue
that 'official announcement thing' which never contains any information".
Feeling pleased with my prose, I then informed the no-doubt startled board
members that "its like drowning in Maple Syrup."

This included not just the well known politicos who have a
vested interest in controlling or influencing the board but in others
that started out with sincere, honest motives.

Actually, you make a good point - and it will be worth monitoring on a
continuous basis.

Of course, its not just an American thing, look at the Russians! The talk
was that Karpov would have beaten Ilyumzhinov, but the Russian Fed didn't
back him. The Russ Fed vote would have swayed an additional 15 countries.

It was my experience that those people get sucked into the petty
quarrels and political alliances which are merely an accepted reality
of Board membership.

I think the 'petty' aspect of things you mention is just so! The scope of
USCF is not a very active or engaging prospect to preside over, and the
pettiness of it all seems much like explosive nervous tension resounding
round the teeny little tent.

I think most of my own aggression in this respect is that people have
convinced themselves that this scale of affairs is inevitable. My hope for
Polgar and Co is that they will be able to persuade people otherwise -
though there is going to be some arm-wrestling on who controls what.

At least the current division of labor on the board should clearly identify
who is primarily responsible for what, and I await with interest to
understand the respective roles of President and Chairman.

Cordially, Phil Innes