OK Kevin,

I have read enough of your statements regarding the situation with
your competing with the Illinois Class Tournament to set the record
straight.

Please note the following:

1. There was no official ICA endorsement of you, Tim Just and Wayne
Clark running your big-money tournament at the same time as the Class
tournament in Springfield. In fact the tradition and precedent has
been that neither the Illinois Open nor the Illinois Class were ever
to be contended with by anyone in the state, period. You state that
you received the ICA's OK to host this tournament, however there is no
such action in the minutes of the ICA's meetings, nor is there any
written evidence that the officer's (including the downstate vice
president) voted on this in any manner. You may state that you told
the president and got his verbal OK, but that agreement is nefarious
at best because there is no evidence that he could make this approval
alone without the rest of the officer's agreement. Please do not lose
sight of the fact that the precedent has been and presently is to NOT
compete in any way, shape or form with the two standard ICA
tournaments. You, as a past president, should be aware of this.

2. While it is your opinion, and possibly that of a few others, that
a Chicago suburb event will not compete with this "downstate" event,
there is no evidence that this is a fact. In fact, regarding this
specific tournament, there is a strong argument that your tournament
will indeed seriously hurt the Springfield event.

3. As you know, Colley Kitson was brought on by you as the editor of
the ICB. Colley is a good friend of mine and I know that he sees you
as a person that would only act in a correct, ethical and legal
manner. If you sent him an ad for your tournament, he would print it
in the ICB without question, this time. You yourself have had direct
access to the tournament calendar web page and can easily put your own
ad in. You did, didn't you? So, you were in a position to make the
tournament a reality and make it look ICA official, except, at the
last meeting, the officer's said that you were wrong. They found out
about your tournament and realized for the first time what
confoundedness you and Tim and Wayne were up to. Please note that
this indeed is testament to my point # 1. above. Therefore you indeed
have gone against the understood rules of playing nice with the ICA
and are directly competing with our group in your tournament setting.

4. You have stated on this forum that you offered money to the
Springfield organizers and were turned down by the ICA officers. Let
us take a moment to shed light on this situation. You were not at the
meeting, Wayne and Tim were. The offer was to give half of the
profits to Springfield. There was no exact amount or minimum offered.
It was said that at one point you had mentioned something on the order
of $100, not much. The control of deciding what the costs of your
tournament are directly in your side's hands. If you decide that each
one of you need to be paid $300 apiece for your services, then $900
will come off the profits. The offer given to the ICA at the time was
extremely intangible and not specific. The officers in good concious
could not accept this "pig in a poke" offer. Why didn't you guys
offer a $300 - $500 minimum recompense to Springfield with a share of
any larger profits? When I was at the Illinois Open in September, Tim
Just told me that he wanted his corporation to lose money this year,
what better way than to support the STATE tournament that you are
adroitly competing with?

5. We are all chess players and should SUPPORT each other not compete
when it comes to operating tourmnaments. You said that you wanted to
compete with Milwaukee's tournament. Why not support them AND the ICA
tournament together. Those that would not want to drive to the
Milwaukee tournament would have the Springfield, ICA tournament.
Those who did not want to go to Springfield would have the Milwaukee
one. Now, with your tournament, you WILL draw players from both of
these and yes, you will jurt the attendance of both. If you truly
wanted to be brotherly and supportive of tournament chess in our area
you would have found another time to run your tournament. You, Tim
and Wayne are certainly not being friendly with the ICA here.

6. Tim and Wayne have proposed to the ICA to run the Illinois Open
for the next five years for the ICA. They wanted to sign a contract
or something to this effect. Why would our group want to give our
most lucrative tournament to some guys that want to hurt it in ways
like this?

7. To the MASKED BISHOP, please either identify yourself or quit
complaining about our state group. You have taken shots at our $18
membership as well as our magazine. We are all a bunch of guys
volunteering to have a good time here. Either take responsibility by
identifying yourself and quit hiding behind your anonymity, or please
be quiet on these issues unless you want to volunteer to fix them
yourself.

Regards,

Ron Suarez

To the MASKED BISHOP, please either identify yourself or quit
complaining about our state group. You have taken shots at our $18
membership as well as our magazine. We are all a bunch of guys
volunteering to have a good time here. Either take responsibility by
identifying yourself and quit hiding behind your anonymity, or please
be quiet on these issues unless you want to volunteer to fix them
yourself.

First off, what makes you think I haven 't volunteered in the past, to help
the ICA justify the excessively high dues it charges? What makes you think I
wasn't a long-time, active member of the ICA, back in its, uh, heyday?

Second, your whole previous post is a laundry list of exactly WHY people
like me should complain about the ICA. If you think you served your cause
well by whining about the Just/Clark/Bachler fest, you didn't. Why should
anyone schedule their tournaments to suit the ICA's needs? What does the ICA
do for me, or for anyone? Oh yeah, I forgot...that great magazine. Another
organization that charges high dues because of their periodical...sound
familiar?

Third, I and many others are looking forward to the Just event, and plan to
play there. They are well-run and the competition is always good. I sure as
hell am not driving down to Springfield, especially to be popped for an
additional 18 bucks to re-up with the ICA. And here's a reality
check...no-one is about to drive down to Springfield from Chicago in this
weather anyway. You aren't losing players because of the Just tourney, but
if you keep presenting the ICA position in this naggy, paranoid fashion,
you'll sure lose a few more.

Finally, why should I "identify" myself? Will it make my point of view any
more valid? What do you need for an ID... a downloaded photo of my driver's
license? Or do you just want a name that's not obviously an alias?

How about....Jim Hauser? Happy?

--TMB

There was no official ICA endorsement of you, Tim Just and Wayne
Clark running your big-money tournament at the same time as the Class
tournament in Springfield.

But the ICA nonetheless had no problem selling the entire inside front cover
of their current issue to advertise it. Money talks, I guess, even in the
principled world of state chess tournament planning.

TMB

In article , Ron Suarez says...

Hi Ron,

Sounds to me like you've been buffaloed, and not given all the information.
Here are a few key points. Before you crucify me, try giving a hearing to both
sides of the story.

1. There was no official ICA endorsement of you, Tim Just and Wayne
Clark running your big-money tournament at the same time as the Class
tournament in Springfield.

Actually, this is completely untrue, Ron. See below.

In fact the tradition and precedent has
been that neither the Illinois Open nor the Illinois Class were ever
to be contended with by anyone in the state, period. You state that
you received the ICA's OK to host this tournament, however there is no
such action in the minutes of the ICA's meetings, nor is there any
written evidence that the officer's (including the downstate vice
president) voted on this in any manner.

Ron, can you list any Illinois tournaments that have ever received an ok in the
way you describe? Outside of the ICA awarding a bid, I can't think of a single
such instance over the past 30 years. Admittedly, I might be missing something,
but certainly not a great number of events would have met these conditions. You
are using a standard here that has never been used.

Certainly, everyone in our group knew that Springfield was planning the event.
(Even though some ICA officers have spread the falsehood that only I knew.) We
also learned that another major Chicago chess club was planning an event on the
same day. (Some officers have also said that was completely false.)

Springfield is over twice the distance from Chicago as Milwaukee is. What we
were hearing from players is that they were not going to go to Springfield, but
that they were going to go to Milwaukee.

As a result, we decided to plan an event. Let me mention a few key things:

When the ICA president was contacted about the event, NO TLA HAD BEEN SUBMITTED.

When the ICA president was asked if the event could be a mini-event on the
Illinois tour, we were told YES.

Given that Bill Smythe had just stopped handling the calendar, and that the VP's
had not yet picked it back up, how much more official do we need it? -- since
normally "approval" consists of sending one's tournament to the calendar
clearinghouse.

Now let me give you a counterexample. During my administration, when someone
came to me about running a major tournament that conflicted with several
historical events, I told them it was a conflict and that they shouldn't do it.
When it turned out that they couldn't back out of the arrangement, I had them
work things out directly with the other organizers. The communication was very
clear.

Do you see a clear difference there in actions Ron? You should. If the ICA
president had said -- "Look, I understand why you want to do this, I'd really
rather you didn't" do you really think we would have run it anyway? Ron, I
think you know me better than that. I arranged for the IL Class to be
downstate. Was there a downstate ICB editor prior to me? Think about that a
moment.


You may state that you told
the president and got his verbal OK, but that agreement is nefarious
at best because there is no evidence that he could make this approval
alone without the rest of the officer's agreement.

Then he should have told us that. Certainly as president I would have felt that
I could have said yes or no to something that didn't involve spending money or
entering ICA into a contract -- it was a matter of policy, not a matter of
needing everyone's approval. VP's have the power to approve their calendars.
Are you saying the president has less power?

Ron, if he meant no, he should have just said no. It's that simple.

Instead, here is a quote from Tim Just in an 8/21 email to me which addressed
several points that were enumerated:

"6. "The president" (Name was used) suggested we could make this a mini-tour. I
would need to check on that."

So you see, Ron, that not only did we ask -- the idea of us being on the tour
was the suggestion of the ICA president.



Please do not lose
sight of the fact that the precedent has been and presently is to NOT
compete in any way, shape or form with the two standard ICA
tournaments. You, as a past president, should be aware of this.

I was aware of a precedent for the Open, I was not aware of a precedent for the
Class, and actually thought that over the years there had been tournaments on
the same day as the Class. I could be wrong, but will double check as I have
time.



2. While it is your opinion, and possibly that of a few others, that
a Chicago suburb event will not compete with this "downstate" event,
there is no evidence that this is a fact.

Yes, but that's also not an argument Ron - because there is no evidence that it
isn't a fact. But also see my comment later on the offer we made.

In fact, regarding this
specific tournament, there is a strong argument that your tournament
will indeed seriously hurt the Springfield event.

As I said, the information we got indicated to us that the people who would go
to Springfield were going to go anyway, and that we would draw primarily from
Milwaukee.

Note:

Nov. 28-30 William Martz Memorial North Central Open Enhanced GPP: 30
Wisconsin

6SS, 40/2, 25/1 (Rd 5 is 40/2 SD/1) Country Inn and Suites, 1250 S Moorland Rd,
Brookfield WI 53005. (262)782-1400. Two sections: Open section: EF $50, $10 more
if rec’d after 11/21. $$G: 450-350-275, Class prizes (b/40) Expert: 175, U2000
$120-80. Reserve section: open to under 1800. EF $40, $10 more after 11/21.
$$(b/40): 200-150, C 120-80-50, D 120-80-50, E/under 80-50. Single half-point
bye available for any round if requested at entry. Comp EF available for 2200+,
contact organizer for details. Reg: 11/28 8:30-9:30AM. Rds: 10AM & 6PM on 11/28
and 11/29, 10AM and 4PM on 11/30. HR: $69 ($79 for a suite); Info: email:
or call (414)358-3052. Ent: Milwaukee Chess Foundation, 8000
W Beechwood Ave, Milwaukee WI 53223, checks payable to Milwaukee Chess
Foundation. www.wischess.org/tournaments/NCO.html.

or

Nov. 28-30 Illinois Class Championships GPP: 10 Illinois

5SS, G/2. Signature Inn. 3090 Stevenson Drive (immed. West of I-55, exit 94),
Springfield. 217-529-6611. HR: $62+tax, must mention tournament, must reserve by
11/22. An ICA Maxi-Tour and Ex-Urban event. ICA membership required, $18, OSA.
$$4,000 b/100. 6 sections: Master/Expert 500-300-200; Class A, B, C, D, and E &
under each 300-200-100. Unrateds may play in any section but may not win more
than $50 except in master/expert section. Sched. Reg: Fri: 1-4pm. Rds: Fri. 5pm,
Sat. 8:30-1:15-6:00, Sun. 10am. Awards at 2:30pm. One half-point bye available
any round except 5th. EF: $49 if received by 11/22, $69 thereafter. Play up one
section for $5 extra. Ent/Info: Thomas Knoedler, 2104 S. 4th St., Springfield
62703. 217-206-6056 days, 217-523-7265 evenings, except Wednesday. Info only:
David Long, 217-522-0489. Bring boards, sets, and clocks-none provided.

Seriously Ron, would you drive twice as far to go to the second tournament if
the two tournaments were being randomly held 100 and 200 miles from you?



3. As you know, Colley Kitson was brought on by you as the editor of
the ICB. Colley is a good friend of mine and I know that he sees you
as a person that would only act in a correct, ethical and legal
manner. If you sent him an ad for your tournament, he would print it
in the ICB without question, this time. You yourself have had direct
access to the tournament calendar web page and can easily put your own
ad in. You did, didn't you?

OK, so let's deal with this part first.

The downstate and the metro VP have the responsibility for the Illinois
tournament calendar. Bill Smythe had, for several years, volunteered to do that
for them. Bill finally burned out and sometime over the summer stopped. As a
result, I stopped getting calendar updates from Bill. If you check, I believe I
told Bill many months ago, long before the Springfield bid, in fact, that I was
looking at a number of dates in the fall for tournaments, including the one we
eventually used.

But at any rate, no one has been sending me tournament information for weeks,
probably months at this point.


Did you know, Ron, that NO ONE HAS EVER sent me information for the IL Class in
the calendar? I took the info from the USCF TLA and added it myself because I
felt it should be posted. I did that for other events, including the Rockford
tour event and our tour event. This was not a unique circumstance to us Ron.

Did you know, Ron, that I SENT AN EMAIL TO ALL THE OFFICERS ASKING IF THE AD WAS
OK?

I NEVER RECEIVED A RESPONSE. I eventually tried to play-up the Class and
tone-down our event by changing color and font size. The fact is though, our
event has some side events and so it takes more space overall. I did this on my
own Ron, because I wanted to make certain that I was trying to address concerns,
even if no one got back to me.

Did I put our event in the calendar? Yes. Just like I did for any other event.
And I asked for feedback on how both events looked from the officers and
received NONE.


So, you were in a position to make the
tournament a reality and make it look ICA official, except, at the
last meeting, the officer's said that you were wrong.

I don't know what they said, because I couldn't be there. You see, although I
am on the ICA Board of Directors, I wasn't provided a meeting notice, nor was I
provided any information about the meeting for the calendar online.

So, by the time I was told about the meeting, I already had other plans and
could not attend.

Surprisingly, the person responsible for these notices is my biggest critic.

If the officers said that I, on my own, made this a tour event, and that no one
talked to the president about it first, then they are flat out lying. And there
were enough open conversations about this at the Illinois Open that I would
suspect that other TD's not involved in running this tournament would know that,
although I cannot confirm that with certainty at this point.

They found out
about your tournament and realized for the first time what
confoundedness you and Tim and Wayne were up to. Please note that
this indeed is testament to my point # 1. above.

We provided them the details. We asked for their feedback on the website. The
president suggest the event to be on the tour.

Let me give you another explanation. Some people among the officers f---'ed up.
Instead of working with us on a solution, they've tried to make us the
scapegoat.

Therefore you indeed
have gone against the understood rules of playing nice with the ICA
and are directly competing with our group in your tournament setting.

Were you told that we offered multiple financial settlements and were turned
down?


4. You have stated on this forum that you offered money to the
Springfield organizers and were turned down by the ICA officers.

Yes. This is true.

Let
us take a moment to shed light on this situation. You were not at the
meeting, Wayne and Tim were.

Yes, see above. I've already addressed that.


The offer was to give half of the
profits to Springfield. There was no exact amount or minimum offered.

Nor should there be. If the tournament was unsuccessful and lost money, then
there isn't much of an argument that it drew heavily away from Springfield. If
the tournament is successful

It was said that at one point you had mentioned something on the order
of $100, not much.

No, I offered that as a MINIMUM, along with additional numbers. And that offer
was prior to the current offer.

Try this Ron. Did the officers try to negotiate, or did they just say no? This
isn't a chess game. It's not checkmate or nothing.

The control of deciding what the costs of your
tournament are directly in your side's hands. If you decide that each
one of you need to be paid $300 apiece for your services, then $900
will come off the profits.

If this was an issue, you should have asked. I am not being paid a salary for
any of my services for the event. Tim and Wayne are not being paid a salary as
organizers. If they act as TD's, they might be paid the same as other TD's (I'm
fairly certain that at least one of them had volunteered to work for free.)

The offer given to the ICA at the time was
extremely intangible and not specific.

We offered to provide a full accounting of the tournament, and offered a very
tangible amount.

The officers in good concious
could not accept this "pig in a poke" offer.

Then why not negotiate the sticking points instead of saying "No."


Why didn't you guys
offer a $300 - $500 minimum recompense to Springfield with a share of
any larger profits?

OK, so suppose our touranment loses $2,000 (entirely possible). My arrangement
with Tim and Wayne is that I cover all loses. So, for an unsuccessful
tournament which arguably would have done no damage to Springfield, I would be
out $3,500. Where is the logic there? You've assumed what you want, didn't ask
why it didn't fit our situation, and then got mad at us.

When I was at the Illinois Open in September, Tim
Just told me that he wanted his corporation to lose money this year,
what better way than to support the STATE tournament that you are
adroitly competing with?

I am not involved in Tim's personal corporation.

Question: Why should I promise the Class a fixed amount when there is no direct
evidence of any damage to the tournament? This is especially true given that my
share of profits are being donated to a HS chess team. See it from the other
side, Ron.


5. We are all chess players and should SUPPORT each other not compete
when it comes to operating tourmnaments. You said that you wanted to
compete with Milwaukee's tournament. Why not support them AND the ICA
tournament together.

Because we had a number of players in the area who said that they would travel
to neither, but who were interested in a metro event.

Those that would not want to drive to the
Milwaukee tournament would have the Springfield, ICA tournament.

Or alternatively, NO tournament, Ron.


Those who did not want to go to Springfield would have the Milwaukee
one. Now, with your tournament, you WILL draw players from both of
these and yes, you will jurt the attendance of both.

Generally, there hasn't been a tendency to see conflicts across state lines. If
there were, there wouldn't be an Illinois Open or a Chicago Open each year. I
see that as an unconvincing argument, Ron.

If you truly
wanted to be brotherly and supportive of tournament chess in our area
you would have found another time to run your tournament. You, Tim
and Wayne are certainly not being friendly with the ICA here.

For the price and availability of the hotel, there wasn't another time for this
event.


6. Tim and Wayne have proposed to the ICA to run the Illinois Open
for the next five years for the ICA. They wanted to sign a contract
or something to this effect. Why would our group want to give our
most lucrative tournament to some guys that want to hurt it in ways
like this?

I'm not involved in that. Perhaps because they run successful events that make
money for ICA?


7. To the MASKED BISHOP, please either identify yourself or quit
complaining about our state group. You have taken shots at our $18
membership as well as our magazine. We are all a bunch of guys
volunteering to have a good time here. Either take responsibility by
identifying yourself and quit hiding behind your anonymity, or please
be quiet on these issues unless you want to volunteer to fix them
yourself.

Regards,

Ron Suarez

I'm still happy to sit down and talk to people Ron. But I think that as is the
case in most stories, there is more than one side. What I have seen is very
little cooperation on this issue, even though I have asked for it. Instead, I
have seen officers trying to make me out as the bad guy to get themselves off
the hook.

I think you know me better than that. If you guys want to work something out,
I'd still be happy to talk.

Kevin

Kevin L. Bachler

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 23:33:35 GMT, "The Masked Bishop"
wrote:

To the MASKED BISHOP, please either identify yourself or quit
complaining about our state group. You have taken shots at our $18
membership as well as our magazine. We are all a bunch of guys
volunteering to have a good time here. Either take responsibility by
identifying yourself and quit hiding behind your anonymity, or please
be quiet on these issues unless you want to volunteer to fix them
yourself.

First off, what makes you think I haven 't volunteered in the past, to help
the ICA justify the excessively high dues it charges? What makes you think I
wasn't a long-time, active member of the ICA, back in its, uh, heyday?
Uhmmmm, I never said you hadn't or were or were not...

Second, your whole previous post is a laundry list of exactly WHY people
like me should complain about the ICA. If you think you served your cause
well by whining about the Just/Clark/Bachler fest, you didn't. Why should
anyone schedule their tournaments to suit the ICA's needs? What does the ICA
do for me, or for anyone? Oh yeah, I forgot...that great magazine. Another
organization that charges high dues because of their periodical...sound
familiar?
Uhmmmm, I wasn't whining. I was letting the truth about Kevin's
postings be known by another viewpoint...

Third, I and many others are looking forward to the Just event, and plan to
play there. They are well-run and the competition is always good. I sure as
hell am not driving down to Springfield, especially to be popped for an
additional 18 bucks to re-up with the ICA. And here's a reality
check...no-one is about to drive down to Springfield from Chicago in this
weather anyway. You aren't losing players because of the Just tourney, but
if you keep presenting the ICA position in this naggy, paranoid fashion,
you'll sure lose a few more.

OK,...I'm not paranoid, moron. If anyone is paranoid it is you as
you think the ICA is out to take all of your measely monies, and
obviously wants to control your every movement...moron. If you think
$18 is too much money for you in your debilitated state, then
alright... The weather is fine here in the state, nice temperatures
and all...moron.

Finally, why should I "identify" myself? Will it make my point of view any
more valid? What do you need for an ID... a downloaded photo of my driver's
license? Or do you just want a name that's not obviously an alias?

How about....Jim Hauser? Happy?

--TMB

Angry little puppy, aren't you.... Remember, my address to you was to
either quit hiding behind your anonymousness or come on in to help...
By the way, the only Jim Hauser from Illinois that the USCF lists is
some unrated dude whose membership expired some 15 years ago....is
that you?!?!?

I think you need to calm down and get a grip. If you want to take
this up personally, you know where to find me.....moron.



Ron Suarez

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:12:58 GMT, "The Masked Bishop"
wrote:

There was no official ICA endorsement of you, Tim Just and Wayne
Clark running your big-money tournament at the same time as the Class
tournament in Springfield.

But the ICA nonetheless had no problem selling the entire inside front cover
of their current issue to advertise it. Money talks, I guess, even in the
principled world of state chess tournament planning.

TMB



Hmmm, then you either are a member that receives the ICB, or you are
truly a moron that needs to read someone else's.

Ron Suarez

OK,...I'm not paranoid, moron. If anyone is paranoid it is you...moron.
The weather is fine here in the state, nice temperatures and all...moron. If
you want to take this up personally, you know where to find me.....moron.

Why, Ron...are you calling me a moron?

Ah, name-calling. I often have to tell my 5-year old that it's a sign of low
intelligence. My 12 year old has managed to learn that, and has moved on to
more effective debating tactics. How old are you?

BTW...I just pulled the name Jim Hauser out of the phonebook. Sorry to send
you running.....

--TMB

P.S. "anonymousness" is not an English word. "Anonymity" is what you're
looking for. Dictionaries on sale at amazon.com

or you are truly a moron that needs to read someone else's.

"Moron" is a biggie with you, isn't it? I'm sorry, Ron...it's losing punch
with each iteration...

TMB

"Ron Suarez" wrote in message
...

I think you need to calm down and get a grip. If you want to take
this up personally, you know where to find me.....moron.

I'm forming a posse to clean out Chicago. You're invited.

StanB

If you want to take
this up personally, you know where to find me.....moron.

One wonders if the ICA staff would thrill to this kind of outreach. I
suppose desperate times call for desperate measures, but if Ron's
name-calling, let's-hit-the-street style of debate is the best they can come
up, then maybe the looming downfall is well-deserved.

TMB