Don Schultz answers some questions

**samsloan**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHESSDON

From: sdo1
To: CHESSDON

sdo 1: I sent this via email, but I fear I may have the wrong address
for you. My email is or .

DS: Probably my fault, I get an enormous amount of messages and do
mass deletes. If you state the words "forum message" in the subject
line, I won't miss it.

I would be glad to answer your questions and thanks for the kind
words.

sdo 1: Thanks for your past service to the USCF and chess.
1) During the early part of the campaign (February) I asked you about
the chess on TV and you stated there were some things in the works.
Do you have anything more to tell us now?

DS: TV chess is a big deal for chess and and big deals take time and
involve frustrations and disappointments.It is not moving forth like I
hoped and expected but I have not thrown in the towel and it is still
an active project.

sd0 1: Also, back in February, I asked about the USCF-FIDE
relationship.
How do you perceive the relationship between Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE,
Bessel Kok, FIDE Commerce, and how the USCF should interact with the
conglomeration and where we stand now with FIDE?

DS: Yesterday, I sent an email to Bessel Kok and asked him to come to
the US Senior Open where I would arrange a meeting with US chess
leaders for discussions on how we can work with FIDE Global. What kind
of projects are we talking about? For example, Bill Goichberg has an
idea that USCF could market iUSCF's rating system to national
federations throughout the world. For sure, this is impossible or not
interesting for many countries. On the other hand, many other
countries could find very interesting. Our rating system results in
quick rating updates while FIDE system updates ratings at a snail's
pace. Bill believes this could be a service well received by many
country federations and at the same time, profitable to the USCF.

3)What is your opinion of the make up of the new Executive Board?

DS: The Chairperson and President designations were a reasonable
compromise. But Bill and Susan have vastly different ideas on how to
grow chess. Bill is the champion of the Swiss pairing system and has
proven his business acumen by the successes of his Continental Chess
Association. Susan is a public celebrity of the Bobby Fischer level.
How well they work together will determine this board's place in
history.

sdo 1: What do you see as their strengths and weaknesses?

DS: For Bill: strengths - Experience, Business sense, hard worker,
loves chess, weaknesses:[/u] stubbborn to a fault, don't know when to
give-up; For Susan: strengths celebrity status, great speaker
especially at children's tournaments loves chess, world class player:

sdo1:Since the new EB took over, the predominant issue has been the
operation of the USCF Issues Forum. What are your thoughts on the role
the Issues Forum has played and should play in the USCF under our One
Man One Vote (quasi democratic) system?

DS: I now believe one member one vote was a mistake. I favor a major
overhaul of our voting system - first elections of officers by the
voting members not by the Boatd members themselves.

Voting members must register in advance. This increases the liklihood
of a more informed electorate.

Two outside Board member, people of major accomplishments and esteem
outside the world of chess nominated and elected by the delegates.

sdo1 5)What are your chess plans for the future?

Senior Open 2008, Help reorganize the USCF voting procedures \, help
bring in a new generation of leaders, get my rating over its 2000
floor, get Joel channing back to the chessboard, the man in my opinion
has the potential to become a solid "B" player, represent the USCF to
FIDE as delegate from now to the 2010 FIDE Congress, get the movie
project through, get the USCF US Championship format change to have a
defending champion match as part of the cycle, continue as co-chair of
the Cramer Committee for excellence in chess journalism.

Don SchultzCHESSDON

Thank you for your interesting post.

The point I want to make here is that, even though I disagree with
many of your ideas, at least you have ideas and are willing to work
hard to achieve them.

So far, among the four newly elected members of the board, I have yet
to see any of them suggest any ideas. I have not seen even one idea,
good or bad, old or new, come out of the four new board members. By
the way, in his two years on the board, I have yet to see Randy Hough
suggest any ideas either.

As Steve Owens points out, they spend most of their time discussing
the Forum, trying to figure out how to keep it open while at the same
time quashing any criticism of themselves.

I am wondering why these people ran for the board and got elected, if
they cannot think of anything to suggest regarding how to improve
chess and the USCF.

Sam Sloan

**Chess One[_2_]**

"samsloan" wrote in message
...

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHESSDON

From: sdo1
To: CHESSDON

sdo 1: I sent this via email, but I fear I may have the wrong address
for you. My email is or .

DS: Probably my fault, I get an enormous amount of messages and do
mass deletes. If you state the words "forum message" in the subject
line, I won't miss it.

I would be glad to answer your questions and thanks for the kind
words.

sdo 1: Thanks for your past service to the USCF and chess.
1) During the early part of the campaign (February) I asked you about
the chess on TV and you stated there were some things in the works.
Do you have anything more to tell us now?

DS: TV chess is a big deal for chess and and big deals take time and
involve frustrations and disappointments.It is not moving forth like I
hoped and expected but I have not thrown in the towel and it is still
an active project.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHESSDON

Is Don doing 'free consulting' with networks?

sd0 1: Also, back in February, I asked about the USCF-FIDE
relationship.
How do you perceive the relationship between Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE,
Bessel Kok, FIDE Commerce, and how the USCF should interact with the
conglomeration and where we stand now with FIDE?

DS: Yesterday, I sent an email to Bessel Kok and asked him to come to
the US Senior Open where I would arrange a meeting with US chess
leaders for discussions on how we can work with FIDE Global. What kind
of projects are we talking about? For example, Bill Goichberg has an
idea that USCF could market iUSCF's rating system to national
federations throughout the world. For sure, this is impossible or not
interesting for many countries.

For sure. So why would Bessel, the new voice of Fide, show up?

On the other hand, many other
countries could find very interesting.

"Many". Well...

Our rating system results in
quick rating updates while FIDE system updates ratings at a snail's
pace. Bill believes this could be a service well received by many
country federations and at the same time, profitable to the USCF.

Don's plan is to do with speed of USCF's rating service [ROFL] compared with
'many' country federations.

3)What is your opinion of the make up of the new Executive Board?

DS: The Chairperson and President designations were a reasonable
compromise. But Bill and Susan have vastly different ideas on how to
grow chess. Bill is the champion of the Swiss pairing system and has
proven his business acumen by the successes of his Continental Chess
Association.

How does competing against USCF with the Swiss pairing system benefit USCF?

Susan is a public celebrity of the Bobby Fischer level.

Nonsense!

No-one is of the Fischer level.

Susan Polgar is a wman who has progressed through troubles Fischer never
experienced, and who predominantly is a force in the US [and in the world]
for young players, especially young women. This has nought to do with
Fischer, whose opinion on these subects is unknown.

The Fischer level was to do with the times in which he played - all else
since is rather compromised. Susan Polgar promotes the right spirit of play
to junior players in our time. That is the similarity.

How well they work together will determine this board's place in
history.

History of what? Of Chess politics?

sdo 1: What do you see as their strengths and weaknesses?

DS: For Bill: strengths - Experience, Business sense, hard worker,
loves chess, weaknesses:[/u] stubbborn to a fault, don't know when to
give-up; For Susan: strengths celebrity status, great speaker
especially at children's tournaments loves chess, world class player:

Also she is stubborn! Very. Especially on matters of principal. He is, of
whatever attribute of character, always in direct commercial competion to
what USCF should do, and to skip such a point is to skip some grand canyon
of appreciation. He is also too old to appreciate the main market of USCF
which is scholastics!

sdo1:Since the new EB took over, the predominant issue has been the
operation of the USCF Issues Forum. What are your thoughts on the role
the Issues Forum has played and should play in the USCF under our One
Man One Vote (quasi democratic) system?

DS: I now believe one member one vote was a mistake. I favor a major
overhaul of our voting system - first elections of officers by the
voting members not by the Boatd members themselves.

Voting members must register in advance. This increases the liklihood
of a more informed electorate.

Two outside Board member, people of major accomplishments and esteem
outside the world of chess nominated and elected by the delegates.

How does the USCF voting system avoid the 'collegiate' vote of local and
self-interested organisers called 'delegates'- ie, the 'Chicago' or 'ward'
system?

sdo1 5)What are your chess plans for the future?

Senior Open 2008, Help reorganize the USCF voting procedures \, help
bring in a new generation of leaders, get my rating over its 2000
floor, get Joel channing back to the chessboard, the man in my opinion
has the potential to become a solid "B" player, represent the USCF to
FIDE as delegate from now to the 2010 FIDE Congress, get the movie
project through, get the USCF US Championship format change to have a
defending champion match as part of the cycle, continue as co-chair of
the Cramer Committee for excellence in chess journalism.

Don SchultzCHESSDON

Thank you for your interesting post.

The point I want to make here is that, even though I disagree with
many of your ideas, at least you have ideas and are willing to work
hard to achieve them.

So far, among the four newly elected members of the board, I have yet
to see any of them suggest any ideas. I have not seen even one idea,
good or bad, old or new, come out of the four new board members. By
the way, in his two years on the board, I have yet to see Randy Hough
suggest any ideas either.

As Steve Owens points out, they spend most of their time discussing
the Forum, trying to figure out how to keep it open while at the same
time quashing any criticism of themselves.

This is fair criticism by Sloan, lacking only the context that it is himself
who occasions such attention. It is a big point for me to say,
'neverhtless'.... or as Taimanov said, Nolens Volens.

If the new board is stalled over both Sloan, and the 'position' of the
current president, then not when, but how will it recover itself to manage?
I doubt it will in the next twelvemonths.

I am wondering why these people ran for the board and got elected, if
they cannot think of anything to suggest regarding how to improve
chess and the USCF.

Sam Sloan admits wonderment, but it may be said for him that he has exposed
a certain predeliction to not very much by the board he was on. The current
board needs deal with the lack of conficdence in themselves which will not
go away by ignoring serious issue. Of the 1,001 that Sam Slaon has raised,
six of them are critical. There are another 6 which he avoids, equally
critical.

This board is so d.o.a. it is remarkable anyone continues on it - Goichberg
squarely represents the old guard, and [albeit his own income from that]
represents any other effort as worthless :: the newcomers affirm that [2 of
them] while 2 of them do not, suggesting there is more than self-interest
has suggested.

The newcomers will likely lose, and USCF will continue to bleed to death
sometime in the next few years. No-one will bother attending the funeral.

Phil Innes

Sam Sloan

**marcuswroberts@hughes.net**

On Dec 1, 5:34 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"samsloan" wrote in message

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHESSDON

From: sdo1
To: CHESSDON

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHESSDON

sdo 1: I sent this via email, but I fear I may have the wrong address
for you. My email is or .

DS: Probably my fault, I get an enormous amount of messages and do
mass deletes. If you state the words "forum message" in the subject
line, I won't miss it.

I would be glad to answer your questions and thanks for the kind
words.

sdo 1: Thanks for your past service to the USCF and chess.
1) During the early part of the campaign (February) I asked you about
the chess on TV and you stated there were some things in the works.
Do you have anything more to tell us now?

DS: TV chess is a big deal for chess and and big deals take time and
involve frustrations and disappointments.It is not moving forth like I
hoped and expected but I have not thrown in the towel and it is still
an active project.

Is Don doing 'free consulting' with networks?

sd0 1: Also, back in February, I asked about the USCF-FIDE
relationship.
How do you perceive the relationship between Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE,
Bessel Kok, FIDE Commerce, and how the USCF should interact with the
conglomeration and where we stand now with FIDE?

DS: Yesterday, I sent an email to Bessel Kok and asked him to come to
the US Senior Open where I would arrange a meeting with US chess
leaders for discussions on how we can work with FIDE Global. What kind
of projects are we talking about? For example, Bill Goichberg has an
idea that USCF could market iUSCF's rating system to national
federations throughout the world. For sure, this is impossible or not
interesting for many countries.

For sure. So why would Bessel, the new voice of Fide, show up?

On the other hand, many other
countries could find very interesting.

"Many". Well...

Our rating system results in
quick rating updates while FIDE system updates ratings at a snail's
pace. Bill believes this could be a service well received by many
country federations and at the same time, profitable to the USCF.

Don's plan is to do with speed of USCF's rating service [ROFL] compared with
'many' country federations.

3)What is your opinion of the make up of the new Executive Board?

DS: The Chairperson and President designations were a reasonable
compromise. But Bill and Susan have vastly different ideas on how to
grow chess. Bill is the champion of the Swiss pairing system and has
proven his business acumen by the successes of his Continental Chess
Association.

How does competing against USCF with the Swiss pairing system benefit USCF?

Susan is a public celebrity of the Bobby Fischer level.

Nonsense!

No-one is of the Fischer level.

Susan Polgar is a wman who has progressed through troubles Fischer never
experienced, and who predominantly is a force in the US [and in the world]
for young players, especially young women. This has nought to do with
Fischer, whose opinion on these subects is unknown.

The Fischer level was to do with the times in which he played - all else
since is rather compromised. Susan Polgar promotes the right spirit of play
to junior players in our time. That is the similarity.

How well they work together will determine this board's place in
history.

History of what? Of Chess politics?

sdo 1: What do you see as their strengths and weaknesses?

DS: For Bill: strengths - Experience, Business sense, hard worker,
loves chess, weaknesses:[/u] stubbborn to a fault, don't know when to
give-up; For Susan: strengths celebrity status, great speaker
especially at children's tournaments loves chess, world class player:

Also she is stubborn! Very. Especially on matters of principal. He is, of
whatever attribute of character, always in direct commercial competion to
what USCF should do, and to skip such a point is to skip some grand canyon
of appreciation. He is also too old to appreciate the main market of USCF
which is scholastics!

sdo1:Since the new EB took over, the predominant issue has been the
operation of the USCF Issues Forum. What are your thoughts on the role
the Issues Forum has played and should play in the USCF under our One
Man One Vote (quasi democratic) system?

DS: I now believe one member one vote was a mistake. I favor a major
overhaul of our voting system - first elections of officers by the
voting members not by the Boatd members themselves.

Voting members must register in advance. This increases the liklihood
of a more informed electorate.

Two outside Board member, people of major accomplishments and esteem
outside the world of chess nominated and elected by the delegates.

How does the USCF voting system avoid the 'collegiate' vote of local and
self-interested organisers called 'delegates'- ie, the 'Chicago' or 'ward'
system?

sdo1 5)What are your chess plans for the future?

Senior Open 2008, Help reorganize the USCF voting procedures \, help
bring in a new generation of leaders, get my rating over its 2000
floor, get Joel channing back to the chessboard, the man in my opinion
has the potential to become a solid "B" player, represent the USCF to
FIDE as delegate from now to the 2010 FIDE Congress, get the movie
project through, get the USCF US Championship format change to have a
defending champion match as part of the cycle, continue as co-chair of
the Cramer Committee for excellence in chess journalism.
Don SchultzCHESSDON

Thank you for your interesting post.

The point I want to make here is that, even though I disagree with
many of your ideas, at least you have ideas and are willing to work
hard to achieve them.

So far, among the four newly elected members of the board, I have yet
to see any of them suggest any ideas. I have not seen even one idea,
good or bad, old or new, come out of the four new board members. By
the way, in his two years on the board, I have yet to see Randy Hough
suggest any ideas either.

As Steve Owens points out, they spend most of their time discussing
the Forum, trying to figure out how to keep it open while at the same
time quashing any criticism of themselves.

This is fair criticism by Sloan, lacking only the context that it is himself
who occasions such attention. It is a big point for me to say,
'neverhtless'.... or as Taimanov said, Nolens Volens.

If the new board is stalled over both Sloan, and the 'position' of the
current president, then not when, but how will it recover itself to manage?
I doubt it will in the next twelvemonths.

I am wondering why these people ran for the board and got elected, if
they cannot think of anything to suggest regarding how to improve
chess and the USCF.

Sam Sloan admits wonderment, but it may be said for him that he has exposed
a certain predeliction to not very much by the board he was on. The current
board needs deal with the lack of conficdence in themselves which will not
go away by ignoring serious issue. Of the 1,001 that Sam Slaon has raised,
six of them are critical. There are another 6 which he avoids, equally
critical.

This board is so d.o.a. it is remarkable anyone continues on it - Goichberg
squarely represents the old guard, and [albeit his own income from that]
represents any other effort as worthless :: the newcomers affirm that [2 of
them] while 2 of them do not, suggesting there is more than self-interest
has suggested.

The newcomers will likely lose, and USCF will continue to bleed to death
sometime in the next few years. No-one will bother attending the funeral.

Phil Innes

Sam Sloan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have bessel kok's e-mail address. Don Schultz does not have the
contact base or asset base
to impress a camel owner in Saudi Arabia. This is just pure garbage.

What impresses me is money. Bill Goichberg has done something with
chess. Don Schultz
is simply a broke failure from IBM, bragging about who his precieved
contact base is. Don's
network is worth very little.

Bessel Kok, wouldn't give North America a glass of water.

Net Net... I pay attention to the money.

Kirsan, OK has money
Bill Goiichberg, OK has money
Marcus Roberts, yes I have money
Eric Moskow, claims to have money, and I beleive the claim

Beyond that list of people, I am not impressed in Chess.

The entire game is broke.

Judge Lafferty, he adds some class to this opposition group. The real
claim / issue / problem is that PAUL TROUNG
is doing AWFUL things, like death threats, and no harm seems to come
from him. Finally,
a former DA / Judge who says it like it is: "****" ED Bill Hall! What
else can you do, beg for Paul not to make
death threats? An ass whipping is to kind for Mr. Troung

We have gone for over 10 years without new people, worldwide, to chess
politics. No new money
has come to chess in my adult lifetime.

Why?

Paul Troung!

Marcus Roberts

**samsloan**

--- In , chessdon@... wrote:

In a message dated 12/1/2007 11:51:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
chesspride@... writes:

I was referring to 1) your plan to change the format of the US Championship
in a way that repeats the "title as private property" debate that was settled
decades ago -- bad, bad, bad...and 2) your idea to change the voting methods
for EB. We can't keep changing formats and voting methods every year.

To have a championship tournament one year followed by a match with the
defending champion the next year does not repeat the title as private property.
To say so it does is too big a stretch. USCF owns the title match and if a
fighter can't or refuses to participate, he forfeits.

Don Schultz

I think that Eric Johnson raises a point that I had not previously
considered.

For example, remember that Susan Polgar won the Woman's World
Championship in a match in 1996. She was scheduled to defend her title
in a match in 1998.

However, when the time came to defend her title, she said that she was
pregnant and requested and was granted a postponement. Then, in 1999
after the child was born she said she was nursing and wanted another
postponement. Finally, when a dot-com company was going public for $2
million to sponsor the Xie Jun-Polgar Match, she wanted another
postponement but this one was denied, so she filed suit against FIDE.

Similarly, Karpov claimed that FIDE had made a verbal agreement with
him that he would be world champion for two years. When in 1999 FIDE
scheduled a world championship after only one year, Karpov sued.

These were just two times that FIDE has been sued over this. Does not
your proposal that the US Champion have a right to defend his title in
a match open the door to similar lawsuits?

Sam Sloan

**marcuswroberts@hughes.net**

On Dec 2, 8:28 am, samsloan wrote:
--- In , chessdon@... wrote:

In a message dated 12/1/2007 11:51:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
chesspride@... writes:

I was referring to 1) your plan to change the format of the US Championship
in a way that repeats the "title as private property" debate that was settled
decades ago -- bad, bad, bad...and 2) your idea to change the voting methods
for EB. We can't keep changing formats and voting methods every year.

To have a championship tournament one year followed by a match with the
defending champion the next year does not repeat the title as private property.
To say so it does is too big a stretch. USCF owns the title match and if a
fighter can't or refuses to participate, he forfeits.

Don Schultz

I think that Eric Johnson raises a point that I had not previously
considered.

For example, remember that Susan Polgar won the Woman's World
Championship in a match in 1996. She was scheduled to defend her title
in a match in 1998.

However, when the time came to defend her title, she said that she was
pregnant and requested and was granted a postponement. Then, in 1999
after the child was born she said she was nursing and wanted another
postponement. Finally, when a dot-com company was going public for $2
million to sponsor the Xie Jun-Polgar Match, she wanted another
postponement but this one was denied, so she filed suit against FIDE.

Similarly, Karpov claimed that FIDE had made a verbal agreement with
him that he would be world champion for two years. When in 1999 FIDE
scheduled a world championship after only one year, Karpov sued.

These were just two times that FIDE has been sued over this. Does not
your proposal that the US Champion have a right to defend his title in
a match open the door to similar lawsuits?

Sam Sloan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Don Schultz answers some questions	samsloan	rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)	4	December 2nd 07 03:11 PM
Don Schultz answers some questions	samsloan	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	4	December 2nd 07 03:11 PM
(rev 1.9) How To Find Out Any Secret Of Anyone - 'Remote Knowing' As Done By Any Sane Person - {HRI 20070616-V1.9}	Koos Nolst Trenite	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	1	June 24th 07 02:18 AM
Don Schultz Answers, and now, The Questions!	Chess One	rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)	6	April 4th 07 08:18 PM
Questions for Schultz - Stop ducking the questions	Ray Gordon	rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess)	4	February 9th 06 01:41 PM