Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 12:54 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 I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

Susan Polgar has stated that she wants to move the Polgar tournament
to Lubbock, Texas and to take over running the event herself. She does
not want it held in connection with the US Open any more.

Previously, the "Polgar" tournament had been designated as a USCF
National Event and has been run by the "Polgar Committee".

I feel that we should not stand in her way. Technically, the event is
USCF Property, but since she wants it, we should co-operate by giving
it to her.

Also, I do not know why it was ever designated as a national event in
the first place. It seems just to be called the "Polgar". No further
name.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?200608110131

I cannot understand how what is essentially an state tournament for
girls ever got designated as a National Event, other than as a
personal favor to Polgar. Since she does not want us to have the event
any more, we should give it to her. This will also relieve the burden
this imposes on USCF Resources.

Since undoubtedly some girls have already made travel plans to attend
the next "Polgar" event in Cherry Hill, we should just hold an event
there with the same qualification rules but with a different name.

Accordingly, I make the following motion:

Resolved that the "Polgar" tournament is no longer a USCF National
event and that the Polgar Committee is hereby disbanded.

I vote yes on this motion.

Sam Sloan

  #2   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 03:00 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2004
Posts: 435
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

samsloan writes:
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?200608110131
I cannot understand how what is essentially an state tournament for
girls ever got designated as a National Event,


That crosstable shows 44 players from 40 distinct states. Illinois,
Texas, Utah, and Oregon had 2 players each and 36 other states had 1
player each. That sounds pretty national to me.
  #3   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 03:08 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 505
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

One of the biggest tournaments for young girls in this country and you
want to smash it down. It is great to see that young females in
particular have a tournament and backing they can call their own and the
Polgars provide it for them. Women's chess has a bright future in the
USA because of the Polgars. I wish them all the luck. They deserve it.

EZoto
  #4   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 11:20 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 5,003
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar


"EZoto" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
One of the biggest tournaments for young girls in this country and you
want to smash it down. It is great to see that young females in
particular have a tournament and backing they can call their own and the
Polgars provide it for them. Women's chess has a bright future in the USA
because of the Polgars. I wish them all the luck. They deserve it.

EZoto


Its like some alternate reality, isn't it? Whereas, what follows appears to
be a better proximate statement:- //Phil Innes

- Earlier this year, the AF4C walked away from the USCF. They decided not to
sponsor the USCF championship. This is an organization which has invested
more than $1,000,000 in the USCF. The cause was directly contributed by USCF
board members.

- UTD declined to sponsor the Denker and Polgar event, citing that the USCF
did not properly recognize UTD as a sponsor. UTD also cited that the SPF did
its job in promoting and recognizing UTD.

- Because of what happened, the Denker committee chair approached the Polgar
committee chair to ask for help in obtaining new scholarships for these
events. In addition, the Denker chair also asked if there is any university
willing to also sponsor the playing venue, lodging and meals for the
players. This would save each Polgar and Denker player approximately $1,000
or more in expenses. In addition, one of the reasons cited for seeking a new
location is the schedule of the US Open is not friendly to the scholastic
players since many states start schools early and some of the players would
have to miss the beginning of school.


- The Denker committee is interested in finding a 5-10 year deal so that the
event would be secured. It is not easy to go out and find new scholarships
each and every single year. The sponsors of the Denker and Polgar event both
agreed to this idea since it would save their players around $100,000 a year
plus $60,000+ in scholarships each year. If you take this number and
multiply it by a 10-year deal, which would be over $1,500,000 in savings and
scholarships.

- A university was found and before the Denker committee and the sponsor can
even visit the campus to inspect the site, members of the current board
decided to falsify the information to purposely mislead the USCF members,
especially the parents of these players. In addition, they insulted and
demeaned the potential sponsor. Why? For political reason.

- Back to the US Championship, there was another potential sponsor who was
interested to invest a substantial amount of money, a million dollars or
perhaps more. After negotiating with some members of this USCF Executive
Board, the potential sponsor was so angry at the horrible and disrespectful
treatment that he received, he walked away and that is to describe it
mildly.

So in the past 5 months alone, our chess politicians destroyed 3
multimillion dollar potential deals.


  #5   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 07:14 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
Rob Rob is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,980
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

On May 29, 5:20 am, "Chess One" wrote:
"EZoto" wrote in message

news:[email protected]

One of the biggest tournaments for young girls in this country and you
want to smash it down. It is great to see that young females in
particular have a tournament and backing they can call their own and the
Polgars provide it for them. Women's chess has a bright future in the USA
because of the Polgars. I wish them all the luck. They deserve it.


EZoto


Its like some alternate reality, isn't it? Whereas, what follows appears to
be a better proximate statement:- //Phil Innes

- Earlier this year, the AF4C walked away from the USCF. They decided not to
sponsor the USCF championship. This is an organization which has invested
more than $1,000,000 in the USCF. The cause was directly contributed by USCF
board members.

- UTD declined to sponsor the Denker and Polgar event, citing that the USCF
did not properly recognize UTD as a sponsor. UTD also cited that the SPF did
its job in promoting and recognizing UTD.

- Because of what happened, the Denker committee chair approached the Polgar
committee chair to ask for help in obtaining new scholarships for these
events. In addition, the Denker chair also asked if there is any university
willing to also sponsor the playing venue, lodging and meals for the
players. This would save each Polgar and Denker player approximately $1,000
or more in expenses. In addition, one of the reasons cited for seeking a new
location is the schedule of the US Open is not friendly to the scholastic
players since many states start schools early and some of the players would
have to miss the beginning of school.

- The Denker committee is interested in finding a 5-10 year deal so that the
event would be secured. It is not easy to go out and find new scholarships
each and every single year. The sponsors of the Denker and Polgar event both
agreed to this idea since it would save their players around $100,000 a year
plus $60,000+ in scholarships each year. If you take this number and
multiply it by a 10-year deal, which would be over $1,500,000 in savings and
scholarships.

- A university was found and before the Denker committee and the sponsor can
even visit the campus to inspect the site, members of the current board
decided to falsify the information to purposely mislead the USCF members,
especially the parents of these players. In addition, they insulted and
demeaned the potential sponsor. Why? For political reason.

- Back to the US Championship, there was another potential sponsor who was
interested to invest a substantial amount of money, a million dollars or
perhaps more. After negotiating with some members of this USCF Executive
Board, the potential sponsor was so angry at the horrible and disrespectful
treatment that he received, he walked away and that is to describe it
mildly.

So in the past 5 months alone, our chess politicians destroyed 3
multimillion dollar potential deals.


The quickest way to keep someone from swimming in your pool is to pee
in it. Sam and a few others seem to do this quite well.
Rob



  #6   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 07:50 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,390
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

On 29 May 2007 11:14:24 -0700, Rob wrote:

The quickest way to keep someone from swimming in your pool is to pee
in it.


Insufficient. You have to publicize that action.. In fact, publicity
alone may be enough.

BTW, that was NOT a lemonade snow-cone.
  #7   Report Post  
Old May 30th 07, 01:21 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
Rob Rob is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,980
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

On May 29, 12:50 pm, Mike Murray wrote:
On 29 May 2007 11:14:24 -0700, Rob wrote:

The quickest way to keep someone from swimming in your pool is to pee
in it.


Insufficient. You have to publicize that action.. In fact, publicity
alone may be enough.

BTW, that was NOT a lemonade snow-cone.


LOL!
Brilliant Mike. We now know why Sam Sloan has his own newsgroup in
Yahoo. He has to publizise his urination

  #8   Report Post  
Old May 31st 07, 06:03 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default I have a motion to give the Polgar to Polgar

On May 29, 2:50 pm, Mike Murray wrote:
On 29 May 2007 11:14:24 -0700, Rob wrote:

The quickest way to keep someone from swimming in your pool is to pee
in it.


Insufficient. You have to publicize that action.. In fact, publicity
alone may be enough.

BTW, that was NOT a lemonade snow-cone.


I thought tossing a Baby Ruth in was the quickest
way? The pee spreads around, and is difficult to
detect unless you swallow a mouthful of water.

-- pool bot

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
Larry Parr visits Sam Sloan's websites to learn about Pokémon [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 57 January 30th 07 02:43 PM
Sam Sloan censured by Executive Board Duncan Oxley rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 30 December 8th 06 12:22 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:20 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