Last year, Susan Polgar complained on her Blog that there were too many
players in the US Championship and that the prizes were too small.

If you search, you can still find her complaints unless she has deleted
them.

Now, by contrast, she has come out against "chess politicians" who
attack "sponsors".

Here is a quote from Susan Polgar's current Blog on the 2007 US
Championship:

"We can always disagree and we are all entitled to our own opinions.
But demeaning and attacking good people and sponsors and harming the
USCF is not an option."

I agree fully. Susan Polgar's constant attacks on me, who was her only
defender in controversies in which she was involved some years ago, and
on the entire rest of the board, as she did in her article published on
ChessCafe, are certainly harmful to the USCF and to chess in general.

As usual, Susan does exactly the things that she accuses others of
doing.

Sam Sloan

"samsloan" As usual, Susan does exactly the things that she accuses
others of
doing.

You popped her cherry back when she was 12? 14? So she probably has a warm
spot in her heart for you.

samsloan wrote:
Last year, Susan Polgar complained on her Blog that there were too many
players in the US Championship and that the prizes were too small.

If you search, you can still find her complaints unless she has deleted
them.

Now, by contrast, she has come out against "chess politicians" who
attack "sponsors".

Here is a quote from Susan Polgar's current Blog on the 2007 US
Championship:

"We can always disagree and we are all entitled to our own opinions.
But demeaning and attacking good people and sponsors and harming the
USCF is not an option."

I agree fully. Susan Polgar's constant attacks on me, who was her only
defender in controversies in which she was involved some years ago, and
on the entire rest of the board, as she did in her article published on
ChessCafe, are certainly harmful to the USCF and to chess in general.

As usual, Susan does exactly the things that she accuses others of
doing.

Sam Sloan

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006...ip-begins.html

Dear all,

I may not agree with Mr. Erik A. when it comes to the format of the US
Championship and I spoke out against it. However, I think the AF4C has
done a good overall job with the US Championship and I thank them for
supporting chess in this country. I also thank Mr. Erik A. for taking
that giant step in saving the US Championship.

He is a professional businessman. I am confident that he will fix this
situation properly. He took the heat and paid out the mistakes last
year even though it was not his direct fault. There is a very good
chance that he would do the same this time.

Let's give him a chance to rectify this situation before jumping all
over the AF4C. I agree that the players should not take the heat
because it was not their faults. This has always been one of my biggest
battles with the USCF.

I also know Robert Tanner and John Henderson. They are good guys but
they simply blundered badly even though it was not done intentionally.
No one can feel worst than them right now. There is no need to keep
pounding on this fact. I am 100% sure this will not happen again.

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
www.PolgarChess.com
www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com

Posted by: Susan Polgar at March 14, 2006 10:29

"We can always disagree and we are all entitled to our own opinions.
But demeaning and attacking good people and sponsors and harming the
USCF is not an option."

I think that the sponsors should not give to any organization that
participates in the World Chess Championship as long as we are kept
out. I have a right to attack sponsorship of racist games in violation
of Article V of the OLMYPIC CHARTER. As long as you keep us out of the
World Chess Championship as was done in 2006, Susan Polgar should
expect attacks.

Marcus Roberts
Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and Nevis to FIDE

samsloan wrote:
Last year, Susan Polgar complained on her Blog that there were too many
players in the US Championship and that the prizes were too small.

If you search, you can still find her complaints unless she has deleted
them.

Now, by contrast, she has come out against "chess politicians" who
attack "sponsors".

Here is a quote from Susan Polgar's current Blog on the 2007 US
Championship:

"We can always disagree and we are all entitled to our own opinions.
But demeaning and attacking good people and sponsors and harming the
USCF is not an option."

I agree fully. Susan Polgar's constant attacks on me, who was her only
defender in controversies in which she was involved some years ago, and
on the entire rest of the board, as she did in her article published on
ChessCafe, are certainly harmful to the USCF and to chess in general.

As usual, Susan does exactly the things that she accuses others of
doing.

Sam Sloan

The article Wayne Praeder cited is not the one I was thinking of. In
the article I was thinking of, Susan Polgar complains that the 2006 US
Championship had too many players and the prizes were too low. By
contrast, lately Susan has been complaining about "chess politicians"
who criticize the format of the forthcoming US Championship which has
not even been played yet. Here is what Susan wrote, complaining about
the 2006 US Championship:

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006...onship_05.html


Wednesday, April 05, 2006
My take on the latest US Championship


The 2006 US Championship (Excerpts from my column at ChessCafe.com)

The 2006 US Championship recently took place from March 1-12 in San
Diego, California, and was sponsored by America's Foundation for
Chess (AF4C). The 64 participants were split into two groups of 32,
with the winners from each group meeting in the final. In the end two
former Ukrainians were crowned new national champions: GM Alexander
Onischuk of Baltimore, Maryland and IM Anna Zatonskih of Long Island,
New York. Onischuk pocketed $25,000 and Zatonskih $12,500.
Congratulations to the 2006 United States Champions!

The winners of Group A were Onischuk and defending champion WGM Rusa
Goletiani, while the Group B winners were Zatonskih and GM Yury
Shulman. The latter advanced because of better tie-breaks after a three
way tie for first with GM Gata Kamsky and GM Larry Christiansen. It is
a shame that Gata and Larry did not have the chance to decide their
destinies over the board, but instead had to rely on some
luck-of-the-draw tie-break system.

In the first half of the tournament, two players made the biggest news
for different reasons. WIM Batchimeg Tuvshintugs scored 3½ points in
the first 5 games, defeating GM's Fishbein, Kreiman, and Becerra,
while drawing GM Gulko. In the meantime, defending champion Hikaru
Nakamura lost to IM Friedel in round 1, escaped with a draw against NM
Kleiman in round 2, and lost to WGM Baginskaite in round 3.

In the second half, GM Shulman, who was very steady throughout the
first 8 rounds, scoring 6½ points out of 8, was leading Group B until
his shocking loss to GM Fishbein in the last round, which allowed GM
Kamsky and GM Christiansen to catch up to him. In the meantime, after a
horrid start, GM Nakamura reeled off 5 consecutive wins to pull within
1 point from the rock solid GM Onischuk, who quietly had the best
overall tournament of any player. Hikaru pushed very hard and came
within a hair from catching up. However, GM Onischuk played perfectly
to hold on with the black pieces to win Group A and eventually the
national title.

The championship offered a $250,000 prize fund, which is an impressive
total amount, but after it is distributed, most players barely broke
even, considering it was a twelve day event (9 rounds plus break day
and arriving early to adjust to time zone change). Only 18 players
received more than $3,250, while 46 players received less than that.
After deducting the cost of airline tickets, transportation, meals,
hotels (around $150 per night at the tournament's official hotel:
Humphrey's Half Moon Inn and Suites) and miscellaneous expenses,
perhaps there would be enough left over for a good dinner in San Diego.
Also many players had to take approximately 2 weeks off from their
jobs.

Another odd thing about the distribution of prizes was that, for an
identical score of 6½ points, Yury Shulman, Gata Kamsky, and Larry
Christiansen received $17,000, $10,300, and $6,000 respectively. This
is quite stunning, as tie-breaks are usually used to determine
placements, not the actual prize money, especially with a ratio of
nearly three times more.

There have been countless discussions about the two section format,
which inevitably leads to some inequity in the playing field no matter
how it is divided up. Most of the people I spoke to did not like it. I
have heard many fans suggest lowering the number of participants to 32,
which is an excellent idea. It would increase the quality of the
participants as well as provide bigger prizes for the players. The US
Championship should only include the absolute best players in America
and having 32 of the strongest players in just one section would be
better and fairer in my opinion.

However, the biggest debate among many chess players was the actual
championship match format. The first nine rounds were all played with a
standard time control. Yet, in the championship final, the players had
to play a 2-game rapid match for the national title! It really sounds
crazy, but it is true and it raised quite a few eyebrows.

This is simply unthinkable in the serious chess world. What does rapid
chess have to do with a standard time control national championship?
Nothing whatsoever and the formats should never be mixed! This can be
compared to the failed FIDE World Knockout Championship format.

Defenders of the format point out that most of the top players
participated in this year's US Championship. So, the format is fine.
Well, most of them would also play bullet chess while wearing polka-dot
outfits if the organizer was offering $250,000 in prizes. Most players
have to compete to make a living, and others compete because of the
prestige of qualifying for the US Championship. But that does not mean
that the format is not flawed. The AF4C is a wonderful organization and
I very much appreciate what it has done for US chess, but I hope that
the folks in charge would seriously consider protecting the integrity
of our national title.

For more, please click here. Posted by Picasa

posted by SusanPolgar at 4/05/2006 05:57:00 AM