Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old February 28th 07, 10:11 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

I must vote against the motion to hold the US Championship in
Stillwater, Oklahoma for many reasons, including the following:

1. The amount of the bid, $50,000, is simply too small, considering
that the players will have to pay their own expenses, including
transportation, food and lodging, to get to Oklahoma and stay there
for ten days. Almost all of the players will have to suffer a big
financial loss to play in this event. I predict that many will refuse
to play.

2. Since more than half of the players live in the New York City area,
the tournament should be played there. Two playing sites in New York
are available plus one university dormitory would probably be
available for out of town players.

3. The bidder requires that three spots be given to local players in
Oklahoma. These players are very low rated, including the Oklahoma
State Champion who is rated 2156. The serious contestants for this
event will be rated over 2600. Allowing such low rated players who
have not qualified to play simply ruins the event.

4. The real problem has been caused by Bill Goichberg in announcing
and holding a bunch of qualifier tournaments, even though he knew that
the traditional sponsor had allowed his option to expire in May, 2006
and thus there was no sponsor and no money to hold this event. About
20 of the players have since qualified from events run by board
members Bill Goichberg and Randy Hough. These qualifier tournaments
were never approved or authorized by a vote of the board. Since the
USCF never approved these events, we are under no obligation to honor
them. The overwhelming majority of the top players favor a traditional
14-player or 12-player round robin and that is what should be held.
Bill Goichberg objects because that would cut out his qualifiers. His
qualifiers paid on average $350 entry fees to play in his events. Bill
should simply give them their money back, which many would prefer
rather than having to play in Stillwatrer, Oklahoma, and Bill will
still have made a profit from the other players who did not qualify.

5. I have moved that the Stillwater bid be accepted provided that the
tournament be a 14-player round robin, which almost all of the top
players favor. With a 14-player round robin there would be sufficient
money to hold the tournament. Bill Goichberg rejects this because it
would exclude his qualifiers. However, he and Randy Hough have a
conflict of interest, so they should abstain from voting. They are the
only two board members who are really in favor of the Stillwater bid.

6. The bid requires the USCF to put up $15,000, money which we do not
have. Bill Goichberg claims that we will be able to get that money
from other sources. We should wait to see whether these sources
actually materialize before approving this bid.

7. The bid is provided by a relative of a candidate for election. It
seems that the purpose of this bid may be to enhance that candidate's
chances of being elected, especially since the tournament is scheduled
for exactly the right time for maximum campaign publicity.

8. The USCF Executive Board held a telephone conference call and voted
on this matter on Sunday, February 25. The vote was to withhold a
final vote until after Bill Hall had a chance to contact another
potential bidder or contributor. Unfortunately, Bill Hall has been
sick with the flu, so discussions with this other potential sponsor
have not been held.

9. In his letter to the board asking for this vote, Bill Goichberg
used the words "He thinks", "probably", "Erik seemed to be under the
impression" and "the subject ... was not discussed". Is this the way
serious organizations do business? We are not supposed to deal in
probabilities. We are supposed to deal with facts. We should not
decide this matter until Bill Hall has recovered from the flu and has
had the opportunity to discuss and negotiate this matter with other
potential sponsors and contributors.

10. The top players in this years US Championship take this matter
very seriously because this is a zonal qualification year for the
World Chess Championship and some of them feel that they have a
chance. When they find out about this bid, which has been kept secret
from them until now, they will be outraged. We should not sell the
wishes of our top players down the river simply so that Bill Goichberg
can keep the promises he made to his players that they will be allowed
to play in the US Championship.

For all of the reasons set forth above, I vote "no" on Bill Goichbergs
motion to accept the Stillwater Bid.

Sam Sloan

  #2   Report Post  
Old February 28th 07, 10:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2006
Posts: 444
Default Why I love Leroy Dubeck and Donna Alarie?

Leroy Dubeck helped me get elected. Donna Alarie is helping me go
after the SPF. They're my best friends. They fully endorse Don
Schultz, Joe Lux, Stephen Jones and me.

Sam Sloan

  #3   Report Post  
Old March 1st 07, 09:15 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

Quote:
Originally Posted by chessoffice
The 2007 US Masters is now in a similar situation
to the 2006 Chicago Open, the main difference being that the Chicago
Open was authorized as a qualifier by the expected 2007 sponsor who
then changed his mind, while the 2007 US Masters was not intentionally
authorized to be a qualifier at all.

Bill Goichberg
The question now is whether the organizer of the US Masters will
politely take down from his website the claim that his tournament is a
US Championship Qualifier, or whether we are headed for a legal battle
over this.

Bill Goichberg and Bill Hall have already contacted this organizer and
told him that his tournament is not a US Championship Qualifier, plus
the organizer has responded on the USCF Forum, so he knows about it,
but he still persists in calling his tournament a US Championship
Qualifier.

Sam Sloan

  #4   Report Post  
Old March 2nd 07, 11:14 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

Quote:
Originally Posted by relyea
Bill,

I think I've seen this somewhere before, but it is appropriate for
this topic. Can you please (re)post the list of the qualifiers for
the championship?

Alex Relyea
Since you are oner of the organizers of the US Championship, I request
that you take a close look at Bill's list of qualifiers.

Please bear in mind that the board never voted on and never approved
either Bill's list of qualifying tournaments or his list of players
who have qualified.

I believe that many of the players on Bill's list of players who have
qualified did not really qualify.

For example, Susan Polgar states that she is not going to play.

Bill says that therefore the number 4 rated woman should play instead.

I say that this position should not be filled and the number of
players should be reduced by one.

For example, Bill says that the player who finished 11th in the US
Open has qualified, because all those in the top ten were already in.

In short, Bill wants to make sure that 34 players play in the mega-
Swiss US Championship so that as players drop and decline their
invitations (as I believe many will) others lower on the list will be
substituted in their place.

By contrast, I believe that every time a player declines his
invitation the number of players should be reduced or else the top
rated players from the USCF rating list should be substituted.

Right now the highest rated player who is not yet in the US
Championship is Larry Christiansen, who is rated number 7 in the USA
but did not play in any of the Goichberg qualifying tournaments. I
believe that Christiansen should be given the spot vacated by Susan
Polgar, not the number 4 rated woman.

Sam Sloan

  #5   Report Post  
Old March 2nd 07, 03:17 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 323
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

On Mar 2, 6:14 am, "samsloan" wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by relyea
Bill,

I think I've seen this somewhere before, but it is appropriate for
this topic. Can you please (re)post the list of the qualifiers for
the championship?

Alex Relyea

Since you are oner of the organizers of the US Championship, I request
that you take a close look at Bill's list of qualifiers.

Please bear in mind that the board never voted on and never approved
either Bill's list of qualifying tournaments or his list of players
who have qualified.

I believe that many of the players on Bill's list of players who have
qualified did not really qualify.

For example, Susan Polgar states that she is not going to play.

Bill says that therefore the number 4 rated woman should play instead.

I say that this position should not be filled and the number of
players should be reduced by one.

For example, Bill says that the player who finished 11th in the US
Open has qualified, because all those in the top ten were already in.

In short, Bill wants to make sure that 34 players play in the mega-
Swiss US Championship so that as players drop and decline their
invitations (as I believe many will) others lower on the list will be
substituted in their place.

By contrast, I believe that every time a player declines his
invitation the number of players should be reduced or else the top
rated players from the USCF rating list should be substituted.

Right now the highest rated player who is not yet in the US
Championship is Larry Christiansen, who is rated number 7 in the USA
but did not play in any of the Goichberg qualifying tournaments. I
believe that Christiansen should be given the spot vacated by Susan
Polgar, not the number 4 rated woman.

Sam Sloan


I agree with Sam's logic on this one. Larry would be a great addition
to the US Championship; I assume everything here is factual - an
assumption rife with peril...



  #6   Report Post  
Old March 2nd 07, 09:09 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveTN
Ok, guys. The EB voted to approve it, there are no
other sponsors/patrons, so what do we do about it now?
I do not propose doing anything about it. Frank Berry won the bid and
now he can run the tournament anyway he wants.

Bill Goichberg has often stated that the sponsor has a right to decide
the format of the tournament. This has been Bill's justification for
announcing the qualification tournaments without consulting the board.

However, now that Frank Berry has the bid to do with it as he pleases,
my recommendation to him is to cut the field from 34 to 14, on the
grounds that his bid of $50,000 is simply not enough to run a 34
player tournament.

Of course, Bill Goichberg will go completely nuts if Frank Berry does
that, but the general membership and the top players will applaud.

Sam Sloan

  #7   Report Post  
Old March 3rd 07, 11:07 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

Quote:
Originally Posted by chessoffice
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsloan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveTN
Ok, guys. The
EB voted to approve it, there are no other sponsors/patrons, so what
do we do about it now?
I do not propose doing anything about it. Frank Berry won the bid and
now he can run the tournament anyway he wants.
Not true. His bid specified a 9-round Swiss.
I have written to the Berry Brothers and asked them to change it to a
14-player round robin. If they decide to do that it will pass, because
I have the votes. It will pass by 4-2. Your motion passed by the
thinnest of margins 3-1-2. One person who voted for it was actually
against it and the two voters who abstained were against it too.

There are four solid board members who would prefer the 14-player
round robin.
Quote:

Quote:
Bill Goichberg has often stated that the sponsor has a right to
decide the format of the tournament.
Not necessarily, it depends on USCF's agreement with the sponsor.

Quote:
This has been Bill's justification for announcing the
qualification tournaments without consulting the board.
I announced the qualifiers as Erik Anderson asked me to announce
them. In past years USCF has done this without a Board vote.
All Anderson wrote in response to your listing of the qualifying
tournaments was four words: "Its fine with me". You make it sound like
he proposed that those tournaments be qualifiers. In reality, he had
previously written to you to cut all the qualifying tournaments.
Quote:

Quote:
However, now that Frank Berry has the bid to do with it as he
pleases, my recommendation to him is to cut the field from 34 to 14,
on the grounds that his bid of $50,000 is simply not enough to run a
34 player tournament.
Sam, in the debate about Frank's bid, you proposed that he run it as a
round robin. You also suggested that he run it in New York. His
answer was that if USCF doesn't want to have it as a 9-round Swiss in
Stillwater they should send back his $50,000 deposit.
Not true, his letter by Hanken said that if we insisted on having the
tournament in New York, to send him back his money. He stated that he
insisted on having it in Stillwater. He did not insist on it being a 9-
round Swiss.
Quote:

Quote:
Of course, Bill Goichberg will go completely nuts if Frank
Berry does that, but the general membership and the top players will
applaud.

Sam Sloan
The bid he submitted has committed him to run a Swiss, and he has
objected to your suggestion that he run a round robin, so I would have
to think that the chances of Frank declaring it will be a round robin
are about as slim as the chances that virtually all USCF financial
records are about to be destroyed.

Bill Goichberg
In my opinion, it is highly likely that Mr. Berry will eventually come
to see the wisdom on my recommendation, especially if as I believe
many of the 34 players refuse to travel to Stillwater at their own
expense and the USCF is unable to pay him the $15,000 he requires.

Sam Sloan

  #8   Report Post  
Old March 3rd 07, 11:34 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid

In case anybody missed the last point, the Berry Bid requires that the
USCF pay $15,000 to Mr. Berry to run it as a 34 player Swiss.

However, if the tournament is a 14-player round robin, the $50,000
that Mr. Berry has already put up is sufficient to hold the
tournament.

In other words, the USCF is being required to pay $15,000 just so that
the players who qualified from Bill Goichberg's tournaments can play
in the US Championship.

I do not think the members should have to pay this money. I think that
Bill Goichberg should pay the $15,000, especially since he collected a
lot more than that from players who entered his tournaments hoping to
qualify to the US Championship.

Sam Sloan

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 7 March 3rd 07 11:34 PM
Why I voted "No" on the Stillwater Bid samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 7 March 3rd 07 11:34 PM
I have voted Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 2 June 10th 05 12:27 AM
USCF has voted again to move to Crossville Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 3 March 20th 05 09:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017