RIP Canadian Open Championship by GM Kevin Spraggett (reposted by permission)

The following is from the blog of GM Kevin Spraggett and is reposted by permission.  Apparently the Canadian Chess Federation is changing its mission away from serving adult players, the same as the USCF and the Marshall Chess Club are.  The yellow highlights were added by me, all else is from GM Spraggett:

RIP: Canadian Open Championship (1956-2014)

CFC  KILLS CHESS TRADITION 

For my readers (Canadian and international) who were wondering about the 2015 edition of Canada’s most PRESTIGIOUS tournament, I have sad news.  Not only has the 2015 Canadian Open been cancelled, but it is unlikely to be resurrected in coming years.  The present mind-set of the CFC executive is to concentrate on junior chess and slowly (quickly!) phase out adult chess.

CFC president Vladimir Drkulec

The writing was on the wall for some time now, but few wanted to believe it. Despite a well documented decline in adult membership in the CFC since 2007, and calls to organize a membership drive to remedy the situation, the CFC refused to act. Adult membership levels are now 50% of normal levels.  All funding of adult-programs have been eliminated.

 

In the past year, the CFC executive has NOT organized the Women’s Championship, which would have qualified a Canadian women to participate in the FIDE world championship knock-out tournament.  Nor has there been a Canadian Men’s Championship in 3 years.  

Nor did the CFC send any representative to the 2014 World Junior. Nor did the CFC send any representative to the 2014 American Continental in Brazil last year.  INSTEAD, only under-18 junior events are planned and scheduled.

 

The problem facing the CFC is NOT financial. In the words of the CFC president, Vlad Druklec, the CFC has ‘lots’ of money.  In his opinion the CFC has just come off of an ‘excellent’ year!  This contrasts to the reality that the Canadian chess community is experiencing: in recent years almost all of the skilled volunteers of the CFC have left.  The Federal government has revoked the CFC’s tax status. The province of Saskatchewan has withdrawn its chess association from the CFC. Virtually all of Canada’s top players have withdrawn from playing in Canada.

 

INSTEAD, the CFC is today run by bitter middle-aged club amateurs and junior-chess  organizers. The downward spiral seems to have gone beyond the point of no return.  At last week’s online meeting of the CFC, the only topic discussed was the passing of a new resolution to double the number of tournaments that Canada’s top players must play in before being considered for the National Team.

 

Given that most of Canada’s top players DO NOT even meet the old number of tournaments, it is thought that the CFC is trying to eliminate adults from the National Team.  If so, soon we can expect Canada to field the WEAKEST National Team in the world.

More On 501(c)(7)

You're a chessplayer, so I know you can deal with something technical.

The Marshall Chess Club is a 501(c)(7) organization.  That means a membership club.  The legal theory is that the member have pooled their resources for a purpose other than conducting a business.  I believe that the club being established as a membership club establishes a contract, not only with the IRS, but with all donors, volunteers and members.  Funds and work provided for one purpose should not be appropriated for a different purpose.

The Marshall was not always a 501(c)(7), but that is only because there was a prior code of laws that said the same thing.  This classification was used for exclusive clubs, such as "gentleman's clubs" and country clubs.

Unlike other such clubs, the Marshall, has had women members, and even a women leader (Carolyn Marshall) from the very beginning.  It had gay members since the very beginning.  I don't know whether it had African American members from the very beginning, but it certainly had them long before I first joined.  When I joined Archie Waters was a member and Roy Barker was on the board.

Teaching chess was not a major purpose of the original Marshall Chess Club, but of course its a very important part of the chess world today.  So the chess teaching should continue, but having the commercial element govern our club is incorrect.

There always have been national and international tournaments at the Marshall, and now that there is a great concentration of  master and above players in the NYC area, there should be even more of them.  But they should be more oriented towards members.  Members should have the right to play in them based on their qualifications, not whether they are political favorites.

If we asked hypothetically whether the Marshall could do more as a business or public service organization, we should not underestimate the tremendous benefit that Marshall has provided over the years as a place to play chess and to socialize.  We are quite unique in this role, while there are other organizations for other purposes.  "Going where the money is" is a typical problem with npn-profit organizations known as "mission drift".

There was one governor in the old days who used to say that a mission statement is a "yuppie thing".  Actually its not.  For a non-profit, aside from it being a moral obligation, it is a required part of the documents that exist in order for us to own property and have bank accounts.

One difference between a business and a non-profit is that a business should do what makes money.  A non-profit is meant to fill in gaps in terms of providing services that people want, but are not profitable.   The knee-jerk interpretation of economic theory, saying there is no such thing,  flies in the face of a hundred years of history.

The question has been raised as to whether a 501(c)(7) can be transformed into a 501(c)(3).  That actually happened with the Manhattan Chess Club, but it wasn't a major issue because the Manhattan had very little property.

When a 501(c)(7) is dissolved, its assets must be distributed to the members, because that's who owns it.  When a 501(c)(3) dissolves, its assets must go to another 501(c)(3) because it is owned by the public.  Therefore converting a 501(c)(7) to a 501(c)(3) is a form of theft, and is therefore immoral and illegal.   I don't even think it would be legal for the majority to vote to change it to a 501(c)(3) without distributing the shares of equity to those members who desired it.

It is also a form of theft to ban a member from the club without a legitimate purpose.  The board is empowered to remove someone who is adverse to the interests of the club.  But conveniently the board interprets the club and the present board as one and the same.  I don't even consider the board as an institution to be one and the same with the present board.  I was on the Marshall Chess Club Board of Governors before ANY of them were.

This is a rogue board.  The need to show some respect to the law, which corresponds with conditions under which the club first received its property.  They also need to refrain from making patently false statements about members and prospective members at their meetings and in their official communications.

The truth will win out.

Update On Building

President Stuart Chagrin

I have withdrawn the earlier post to avoid unnecessary confusion.

There has been a veil of secrecy over all of the board's actions, and of the actions that have come to light, some are quite bizarre.  But fortunately the worst threat has not come to pass.
 
President Chagrin says there is no plan to sell the building, but there was a proposal involving Mr. Morden.  It may have happened a long time ago, and due to the board's lack of disclosure, rumors are only starting to surface now.  However,  I applaud President Chagrin and his colleagues on their good decision rejecting Mr. Morden's proposal. 

Stuart Morden

At the same time, the board has refused to put any safeguards into place.  I urge that at this time a safeguard should be put into place so that the building cannot be sold or substantially mortgaged without the expressed consent of say 2/3 of the voting members.  I also call upon the board to keep interested members informed. Its our club too!   The club is not the boards private property, so  many of the things they are trying to keep secret they shouldn't be doing in the first place.  Voting members are interested parties.  We shouldn't need espionage to try to find out what is happening with our jointly owned club.

Jon Jacobs on Scholastic Chess (reposted with permission)

I have had time to go through this with a fine tooth comb, but clearly Jon is saying some of the things that I've been thinking in a less organized fashion.  The legalese is that except where noted, Jon does not endorse my various comments, and I don't necessarily endorse all of his.  As he says, he goes a little beyond where I would go:

Jon Jacobs A thousand likes, as the saying goes. I've been warning for years about the withering away of any nurturing of or interest in adult chess -- especially by the USCF (which in abandoning chess promotion on behalf of anyone but kids, has abdicated its primary reason for existing), but also by the news media and many other institutions of muggle (non-chess) society.

I go beyond Graham Ari Jeremy in that I maintain that kids' chess constitutes a fraud in an economic sense. Maybe 1/2 of it is real in a chessboard sense - meaning, that's how many entrants in kids' chess tournaments play legal moves 100% of the time, as required by USCF rules and bylaws governing TD certifications. In an economic sense, however, even the minority of scholastic chess players who actually learn how to play chess, are more like an accounting fraud than a real asset of the USCF. That's because USCF regularly reports "membership" numbers that count real paying members (aka adults) and scholastic "members" as 1 person each... But the scholastic "members", who comprise more than 80% of total reported USCF membership, don't actually "belong" to the USCF, or to the chess community, in any real sense. Rather, all those kids are a captive audience: required to take chess classes by their public (or private) elementary schools, they become USCF members (probably paid for by their schools, in many cases) only so long as they remain in that school chess program. After they age out of it, they cease all involvement in chess.

In the course of restructuring its activities over the past 20 years or so to cater almost exclusively to children's' chess, the USCF has gradually withdrawn most of the attention and support it once provided to real chess, at both the professional and amateur levels. Support for professional chess now comes primarily from private donors and for-profit organizers; while amateur adult chess has been left with no backing at all, beyond occasional coverage in Chess Life.

Why did they go this route? Because it's where the money is. Even though neither the USCF nor individual tournaments get financial support from the US or local governments, taxpayer funding nevertheless now supports the careers of perhaps thousands of chess teachers, via public school chess programs. Some time in the late 1980s, a turning point was reached in convincing school authorities that all kids should be taught to play chess. A great many people in the chess community who seek to earn a living from chess found this to be the answer to their long-deferred dreams. And those people, although a minority of adult chess players, tend to be more active than most, in the USCF and other chess organizations. So that is how it went down.

Four Eras and 501(c)(3)

The Goldwater era often denigrated, I think by those who were not real chessplayers.  Goldwater's vision for the club was that chessplayers would come in, play chess, and leave.  There was also alot of socializing.  No one thought of chess as an educational activity in those days.   So what more could a chessplayer want?

A big blow to the club was how Goichberg was invited in to sponsor tournaments and then later he was thrown out.   As much as I liked Goichberg's tournaments, I don't think this was the correct move.  The Marshall had one style and Goichberg had another.  So I think these mistakes dealt a severe blow to the Marshall.

If I had known then what I know now, I would have suggested that board disclose the financial situation and underscore how all existing members should bring in new members to keep the club solid financially.

During the Haft era the club was very lively and there were many internationals, thanks in part to Eric Schiller, Erik Moskow, and Richard Gross.  GM Maurice Ashley and IM Josh Waitzskin were among the participants.   One question I don't think was ever answered was whether Leon borrowed money against the building to fund the internationals.

 It seems that sometimes when a new regime takes over, all the records from past regimes disappear.  It is really important for each regime to disclose what they are doing so that later regimes can learn from there experiences.  It is extremely important to do things by the book, so that you can disclose what you are doing.  One great thing that Leon did which isn't widely remembered is that he joined two of the apartments in the building into one, thus ending rent stabilization.

During the Prince era there started to be major discussion about 501(c)(3), tax deductible public service status.  I'm trying to think of the motivations at the time.  This was still well before the big chess teaching boom.  I think alot of it was due to a misunderstanding of how great the club already was and what an important role it was already playing in many people lives.

There was a bit of financial pressure, due to a poorly timed dues increase, but I still think the best solution would have been do more of what we were already doing.  I think there was a certain amount of scheming going on.  One or too people wanted to "sell" the club in the same manner that the Manhattan was sold to Adams and Kossak.

Now the club has gone full throttle on the 501(c)(3).  You know there was talk about how 501(c)(3) would bring us more internationals.  How many round robin internationals has the club had in the last six years? Is it two or is it three?  One of the tournaments had the unusual advent of a norm being denied because of a pre-arranged draw.   The most recent Swiss international was not superswiss (meaning fewer norms possible) probably due to organizational considerations rather than lack of funds.  Not enough foreign players.

The club is increasingly become a place for elitist rich people (and I am not saying all rich people are elitist), wannabees, and their hangers on to pat eachother on the back.    While there is still some chess going on, political games have fully replaced sound management.  Behind the scenes there are problems which are going to be detrimental.

Recently some people, including some who are supposed to be my friends have accused me of lying because I want to be president.  Actually I offered to be president, and I still don't think I would be one of the worst choices.  No one in their right mind would *want* to be president at stage of the game.  Someone would have to be pretty crazy or pretty stupid.  The best you can hope for is someone with a strong sense of obligations,  and I quite happy that there is extremely little chance it will be me.

The Women of the Marshall Chess Club

Karff -  Rivero

Heh, if you thought there were going to be pictures of young women with their breasts hanging out, I am sorry to disappoint you.  You should know me better than that.  Actually I can't do justice to all of the strong women chessplayers who frequented the Marshall Chess Club.  I know next to nothing about chess.  I can just tell you that the Marshall was long a major centre of women's chess.  As usual I mostly know about the administrators.  Even there I could use some more information.


I know that Mona Karff provided an endowment which lasts until today, to fund the Edward Lasker Memorial Tournament (Marshall Club Championship).

Caroline Marshall

As much as I can determine, Caroline Marshall was the first female administrator.   Frank seemed to be more into playing than administering.  The minutes of the board meetings suggest to me that Mrs. Marshall was actually the most powerful leader in the club, but there was a kind of give and take in those days.  Of course, in those days some of the board members still owned shares of the building.  Now the shares in the building are owned by the club.

Unfortunately only a few stories about her remain.  It was she who conferred special full member status on GMs Lombardy and Mednis.  She brought Peter Sepulveda on to the board.  He was the youngest board member at that time, and probably is the longest serving one.  One other very prominent club member, I won't say who, remembers Mrs. Marshall yelling at him to pick up the pieces.  Is that all we can remember about one of our founders?

Mary Bain who tied with Kathryn Slater

During most of the Goldwater years, the operations of the club were really run by Kathryn and Bill Slater.   Kathryn was one of the top women's players of her day, and Bill was also pretty strong.  She was the club's Secretary and Treasurer.  Ginny D'Amico (now Ginny Hoffmann) also worked at the club in those days.  Kathryn worked at a bank and she didn't take any bullshit.  My first impression of her was that she was too grumpy and authoritarian.  Of course in a later stage of life, I realize that its the person who is friendly all the time or who seems friendly all the time, who are always causing confusion and animosity by promising or seeming to promise what he will not deliver.

WCGM Carlsen

Betty Trahim Seminara was night manager after Joe Pandolfini (Bruce's stepfather) before IM Jay Bonin.  The club was pleasant when she was there.  She always seemed to know what the young people were up to, but she let us do it anyway.  I believe she was present for Fischer's last televised interview in New York, which was conducted at the chesstable in the South East corner of the great hall.  Its the same place where GM Magnus Carlsen sat, and the same bench, but a different table.  They threw the table out.

WIM Dolly Teasley was a US Women's Champion and a long time Governor of the club.  I think that like me, she like the non-commercial atmosphere of a membership club.  She was the kind

WIM Rachel Crotto

of Governor the club would always count on in a fight.  The club some strategical issues even in those days.  Fortunately the good guys won out for a long time.  Another US Women's Champion who was good friends in the olden days was WIM Rachael Crotto.

Marianna Bellizzi, was a very active president, and deserves a lot of the credit for bringing the club out of the post-Goldwater slump.   I think she is the only female president of either the Marshall or the Manhattan.  Not only were she and her husband Doug presidents of the two respective clubs at the same time, but they are the only married couple where both spouses were presidents of the Marshall.  It was during Marianna's presidency that FM Brian McCarthy brought in Marshall Gambit the Cat.

Polly Wright

IA Sophia was an active volunteer through many presidencies.   Polly Wright goes back to the 80s, when Goichberg ran tournaments at the club.  She was also more recently a Governor and left when Steve got kicked out.  She runs the Robert Peretz Chess Club in Scarsdale.  I also went to mention Adia Onyango, who runs the Kingsman Club in Brooklyn.  The Kingsmen go back even longer than me.  There are currently two women on the board:  Long-time board member Sandra Oliver and FIDE Vice President WIM Beatriz Marinello.


I am not going to say much about the many women in chess organization who are contemporary.  If you think about it, its obvious who they are and how much they contribute.  So they are no less important.  I just want to talk about who kept things going in the olden days.

Adult vs Children's Chess

Young Magnus Carlsen

Every game is an adventure, and I think that's why we all like it.  Age, background, socioeconomic status or disability don't matter.  What we look for in an opponent is someone of similar strength.

Josh Waitzkin (Right)

Chess is a social activity.  I was going to say its especially good for a shy person, or for a stranger in a strange land, but instead I'll recommend it without reservation.  I've met people in chess I've been friends with for decades.  As for meeting a future spouse or whatever, its happened for a few people.  I don't particularly recommend it for that.

Sukkot Booth

Chess is used educationally because children like it, and it can be used to develop certain processes or characteristics.  So the child is not just enjoying the adventure, but is also preparing for quests of real life.  Some items that come to mind immediately:


1. Observing a problem in its entirety
2. Analyzing it thoroughly
3. Analyzing contemplatively
4. Using logic
5. Using intuition and creativity
6. Using experience
7. Learning from others
8. Observing time limits
9. Patience and persistance

As an older adult, I use chess for one other purpose, which is self-assessment.  To see if I'm sharp on a particular day, and to observe what makes me more or less sharp.  I don't recommend chess as an assessment too for children.  Firstly they're being assessed too much already. Secondly it works for me because I have a certain amount of self-knowledge built up over the years, and I am doing it for myself as opposed to someone else.

Upcoming Bruce Bowyer Tournament

Here is the announcement from Pat Bowyer.  For now I think I'll just add a few pictures from last years event:

Ted, Nick, Kevin, and Tony

  

Announcing 17th Annual 

Bruce Bowyer Memorial 

Chess Tournaments!!!

Coming in April!!

Ron, Peter, Steve, and Ted

We are happy to announce the 17th year of this beloved event in honor of my late brother Bruce.  We’ve moved again, and this year we’ll be at that fabulous Beaux Arts landmark, the New York Estonian House. Please come join us for the friendliest chess event in all of NYC, and step up to compete with some of the finest chess players on the planet!  Hey to all our chess-lovin’ friends out there—It’s that time again! Thanks to the continued generosity and loyalty of our sponsor, https://www.roycefunds.com/Looking forward to seeing you all again this year!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APR. 9 17th Annual Bruce Bowyer Memorial
TROPHIES PLUS $$ & GRAND PRIX POINTS: 15 (ENHANCED)
4SS, G/45 d10. **NEW LOCATION!** ESTONIAN HOUSE,
43 East 34th Street between Second and Third Avenues. 212.684.0336.

Estonia House

~ and ~
APR. 10 17th Annual Bruce Bowyer Memorial
SCHOLASTIC Tournament
TROPHIES PLUS CASH!! 5SS, G/30 d10. Open to all students thru grade 12. EF: $10
** NEW LOCATION!! *** ESTONIAN HOUSE, 243 East 34th Street between Second and Third Avenues. 212.684.0336.
See the USCF website for further information, more details & registration info will be posted here soon:
http://www.uschess.org/tlas/upcoming.php?STATE=NY

Bruce Bowyer

Scott, Mike, Jay, Yefrem, Peter

Robert vs Leif

Pat and Jay

Pat and Alex

Pat and Rich

Conclusion re Marshall and Shoutouts!

There may be more to add to this soon, but at this writing, I don't have any further word about their planning to throw me out of the club or any other retaliation.

Some friends suggested that I stop speaking out so that I would be allowed to remain in the club and could run for the board.  While I would like to remain in the club, speaking out is more important.  Especially since I haven't felt welcome in the club in years.

Some people may think I am an attention seeker or have a cantankerous nature.  I think its more that I have the background to understand what is happening there, and have slightly more audacity than most people.  I mean when its in a rightful cause.  I am certainly interested in other people's experiences and insights.

So I would like to repeat my previous advice and then give a shout out to a number of the chess organizations in the NYC area:

1.  If you love the Marshall Chess Club, join the Marshall Chess Club.

2. Participate -- come to the annual meeting and vote.  There will be people to vote for this time.

3. Do not submit to coercion.  Express your views.  If you see something, say something.  The truth will win out.

4.  Trust the people who have been there for you all along.  Distrust their adversaries.

5.  If you are on the board, consider that you are not the only ones who love the Marshall Chess Club.  You are not the only ones who have equity in the Marshall Chess Club. You do not have a monopoly on the truth.


My advice is, if you don't understand something, don't vote for it.  Don't vote for candidates you don't know.

Now a shout out to many of the great chess organizations in the NYC area:

Brooklyn Strategist
Bruce Bowyer Chess Foundation
Chess Center of New York
Chess Forum
Chess In The Schools
Continental Chess Association
Fairfield Chess Club
The Kingsman
Long Island Chess Club
Marshall Chess Club
Nassau Chess Club
New Rochelle Chess Club
New York Chess and Games
PS 318 Chess Club
Queens Chess Club
The Rahway Chess Club
Robert Peretz Chess Club

Marshall and Success Academy

Harlem Success Academy 5

There is some sort of partnership or cross promotion going on between the Marshall and Success Academy.  I am not quite sure what it means for the administration.  Whether it is an identification with the right-wing agenda, a dubious form of social climbing, or just that they think they can bring in money by renting out rooms.  They can't.  The terms of our tax exemption involve a cap on unrelated business income and on the use of the premises.

Employees of Success Academy are joining the Marshall, not just for playing chess, but to vote in the elections.  One Success Academy employee already attempted to run for the Marshall Board.  When I started a Marshall politics group on Facebook, immediately 6 Success Academy employees tried to join.

Tom told me that he doesn't want me posting about charter schools on his Marshall Discussion Group, so I will get into it a bit here.  To start with, I am in favor of decentralized k-12 and parents having full choice.

The charter school movement is tied in closely with the idea of idea of vouchers.  While vouchers will help those who are already paying tuition for their child, I believe that it will worsen the condition of public schools.  That's not good for society.

The most usual criticism of charter schools is that they increase their test scores by getting rid of children with low test scores.  I can see both sides to this, but I don't think its a good idea.  Firstly, there is a serious question of whether tests test anything meaningful.  I'm not saying that as someone who has low test scores.  I have fairly high test scores, though I am not good at reading or mathematical calculation.  They test parsing, not reading of math.  Also the biggest challenge for society is not in science or technology.  We're doing well in those areas.  The biggest challenge is different people living together.

Charter schools are kind of a bait and switch.  Model charter schools are funded in part by wealthy donors who want to destroy the public education system.  So the problem is not so much with the schools themselves.  Its more that the pool of funding will not increase proportionally as more children go to charter schools, so that as more children go to charter schools, the funding per child will drop.

One of the many recent news articles about Success Academy.  Go to Google News to see plenty of them:

 Filing Alleges Bias at Success Academy Network Against Students With Disabilities

Okay then.  What about something more chess related:

Charter school of 11,000 students drops foreign language—what they offer instead may stun many

I can see chess being offered by schools in the same manner as art, music, and athletics.  I would consider a foreign language more important than chess though.

An alarming new study says charter schools are America's new subprime mortgages

Cory Evans Gets Bullied

LACASA Chess Team

I was having what seemed like a normal email conversation with board member Cory Evans, and it quickly metastasized into something unpleasant and unsavory.

The conversation was about whether there should be classes for children at the club.  My short answer for this is no.  This activity is being pursued by the administration because it seems profitable, and doesn't involve pesky adult chessplayers (except the ones making money from the classes).

Archie Waters

It creates an undue liability situation for the club.  As I understand it, one child has already been seriously injured.  There are is also a lack of space for adults to play chess.  Of course we should continue to have some junior members, but there are other venues that are more suitable for all-child activities.  Schools and community centers love such activities because they can profitable for them, they have the space for it, and that's what they do.

While the overwhelming majority of the kids taking chess lessons at the club are white kids from middle class or well off families, it turns out that there is a class or classes for "underprivileged" kids.  So Cory accused me of being racist and elitist and hating kids, and threatened to tell Nelson Farber.  Then he started lecturing me on inter-generational poverty.  Kind of ironic for a Baruch teacher to lecture a City Tech teacher on inter-generational poverty.

Ted and Nagib

You probably don't know or care who Nelson Farber is, but he is a former board member.  I'm not quite sure how he got put in charge of deciding who is or is not a liberal.  In any case, I have no secrets at the club, and I have no personal relationship with Cory, so I called his bluff by sending copies of our correspondence to Nelson and posting it on Facebook.

GM Marshall

I told Cory that I would sue him if he libeled me.  He is a politician, so I told him that I would donate to his opponent if he ran for office again.  I told him that I would speak to his opponent.  Cory said that I was bullying him, and that I was threatening his job.


Cory's remarks border on slander.  I wish he was not inclined to stray so close to the line, but if he goes over the line, litigation will be my only recourse.  It matters whether something is true or not.  As Cory presumably uses his actions on the board to garner campaign contributions, he should know that he is garnering campaign contributions for his opponent as well.

Blitz Chess

- Steve in background

To the best of my knowledge, he has never won an election to hold public office, so I am not threatening his job.  But if he was running for public office, his honesty or lack thereof would be an issue.  I have no idea what Cory means when he says I am bullying him.  I have no special powers to bully anyone.  I don't threaten to throw people out of the chess club because they are saying something other than what I want them to.   But if he says its so, then it is so.

I should add that I called him a fascist.  In my view a fascist is someone who believes that the end justifies the means, and their only end is to personal power.  All else is just a matter of scale.

Some people just don't get it.

Anyhow after this exchange, the board started the process to throw me out by an email vote.  I don't know what became of that.  I imagine they will soon meet in person to throw me out.  Its an ideal activity for those who don't want to deal with the club's real problems.  Notice that they didn't consider reprimanding Cory for insulting me or threatening me.  It doesn't work both ways.   Nothing there does.

This kind of nasty "when are you going to stop beating your wife" type of politics accompanies the takeover of the Marshall from the members by a small elitist clique.  This is an unfortunate result of chess being fashionable.

The question has been circulating as to whether the Marshall has ever had an African American Governor.  I know of at least two:  Roy Barker, who was good friends with Johnny Marks, and Ted Vialet who is a good friend of mine going back to the Manhattan Club days.  I think there may have been others, perhaps Erskine Robinson, but it would have been during times I wasn't around much so I don't remember.  

100th Anniversary Dinner

Some of us had dinner at Keene's Steak and Chop House, the first location of the Marshall Chess Club, to celebrate the club's 100th anniversary.  Word is that the board discussed suing us for trademark infringement.

This happened after Ginny Hoffmann organized the advance viewing of Pawn Sacrifice on behalf of the club.  She did it with tickets given to her and her husband, not to the club.

Ginny then offered to organize a dinner at Keene's Chop House on behalf of the club.  She approached the board with the idea, and they seemed uninterested, so some of us decided to eat dinner anyway.

This wasn't a commercial activity.  Well maybe on Keene's Chop House's part, but not on our part.  The club didn't have a competing a commercial activity.   The club does not have a trademark.  It is not authorized to conduct any trade.  This is a matter of law, not a matter of opinion.  Its tax exempt status is based on the condition that it is not a business, it cannot run or host a business.  It may receive a limited amount of passive income and that's it.

Marshall Threatens to Ban Me - Part I

It was just before Christmas, I was at work when I received an email for Stuart Chagrin saying that if I did not desist from my Facebook posts, that the Marshall would not allow me to renew my membership.

So this seems like a new idea.  Memberships have been declined and people have been banned, but never has the club decided that someone may not renew.

Whether or not you agree with what I am saying, I don't think such an action would be legitimate.  The board is empowered to remove someone who is detrimental to the club.  There are people who would like to distort the truth, but the problem is their actions, not my utterances.

I requested a list of utterances that they found objectionable, and they sent it to me.   My lawyer reviewed my statements and said that most are a matter of opinion, and some are assertions made in good faith.  None are actionable.  I wrote some long letters to the board explaining my utterances.  These explanations are not secret.  I would post them here if there are enough requests.  The board pretended to not understand them though I think they are perfectly clear.


I wanted to run for club president, but I don't have enough support to do that.  I then offered to run for the board without running for president and 11 voting members signed my petition, including three past presidents, Howard Prince and both Bellizzis.  There are clearly two sides to this.




I know some people don't agree with me, but I am disturbed by how some people who definitely do agree with me are afraid to speak up.  What could happen?  There is a group of about 11 people (almost as large as the board) who largely agree with me.  I don't attend this group anymore, but the group is still characterized by Stuart as being my group.  I frankly don't appreciate that so much of the onus is on me.   Some people are thinking that if they speak up, they won't be elected.  Frankly I think its more important to speak out.

Click these words for Video:  From Orwell's 1984 - Goldstein Two Minute Hate Rally

The 911 Meeting

No New Yorker is going to joke about 911, but Stuart decided to hold another more limited meeting on September 11th.  I guess he likes historical dates for his meetings.

At the Bastile Day meeting, Stuart announced that Zachary Cohn would be working on the club's bylaws.  I think he said I could get in touch with Zachary if I wanted to have some input or something like that.

I wrote Zachary but didn't get any reply.  So I wrote my own version of what I thought the bylaws should be.  They can be found here:   https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hrlMKM1coOkaFqWtzOS5nFv_TdsGRNqUvzxJFUIS9C4/edit?usp=sharing

Zachary wrote his own version of the bylaws, based largely on the original Certificate of Incorporation.  It is not surprising to see that the original purposes of the club social and the playing of chess, not teaching or promoting chess.

The meeting was congenial, mainly because the more unsavory people weren't there.  But it may turn out to be more significant than most people think.


One major topic was removing senior members' voting powers.  I am not sure why anyone would want to do this but:  a) We are going in the direction where fewer adult members than ever will be able to vote;  b)  As the number of voting members shrinks, the proportion of those voting members who are on the board increases;  c) Several of the administration's adversaries are senior members.

GM J. Polgar

We also raised the issue of why the employees are voting.  The current bylaws say that only the members who pay the highest level of dues may vote.  The managers don't pay any dues.  We pay them.   In my view, the club is mandated by law to be non-commercial, so no one who makes a significant portion of their income at the club should be allowed to vote.  Grandmasters and International Masters are currently not allowed to vote.  It is the lesser chess professionals who are voting.


While this meeting didn't seem significant, it was probably legally required before introducing bylaws changes.  We will probably see the bylaws changes on the ballot in June.  My advice is, if you don't understand something, don't vote for it.  Don't vote for candidates you don't know.




Last time I heard, managers would not be allowed to vote from now on, but students (over 18) would be able to vote.  There is nothing wrong with this in and of itself, except that its the kind of move the board makes to perpetuate their own power.   That is not a legitimate way of doing things.

Bastile Day Meeting

Governor Rachlin vs WCGM Carlsen

We found that the Annual Meeting in June had left most of our questions were unanswered, so we requested another meeting.  So Stuart granted us another meeting on Bastille Day.

Stuart started filibustering with usual bs about how wonderful everything supposedly is.  Fortunately several of us interrupted him to remind him of the pre-agreed purpose of the meeting.

One of my friends made up a list of about 20 points of contention.  I think such a list can serve a legitimate purpose, but we were probably ill advised to attempt to cover it at a meeting.

Tom Molloy started with the first item, asking whether Buchbinder and Warren was still the building's management company.  Larry Price snapped that it still was, and that Tom already knew that.

David Spigel

What got lost in the shuffle is this:  There is a narrative that Larry Price is indispensable because he takes care of the building.  Actually Buchbinder and Warren has taken care of the building quite competently for decades, since long before Larry Price even joined the Marshall.

Maya Chiburdanidze

Stuart brought up how my concerns about the club selling the building were unfounded.  I disclosed that he was the one who first told me that Larry Price wanted to sell the building.  Sophia also disclosed that Larry Price had told her he was interested in selling the building.

IM Mena vs IM Norowitz

Larry Price said that it was something he had considered years ago, and that now it isn't going to happen.   One thing did not ring true to me:  He said that in the club's neighborhood, you do not fix up a building for the purpose of selling it.

10 West 10th Street (Left)

The building my father used to own at 10 West 10th Street, my former home, has not been inhabited in over 10 years, but in this time, it has been renovated and resold multiple times.  Of course you fix up a building in order to sell it!  This is what his building looks like now:  http://corenyc.com/10-west-10th-street-closed  (click "more" and view floor plans).

GM Marshall

I brought up the issue of 501(c)(7), the tax code for membership clubs, and how I sincerely believe that the club is not in compliance with them.  The codes have specific ceilings for non-member income and non-member use of the premises.  Board member and attorney (who is up for election this year) Gus Coritsidis said something like, "Why don't you let the lawyers on the board handle it?"

They keep saying things which suggest that the lawyers on the board are handling it.  But I challenge any and all lawyers on the board to state *in writing* that they approve of the club's current federal reporting policies.  They could be disbarred.

We discussed Stuart's right to serve as president, given that he no longer qualifies to be a resident member as he no longer resides in the NYC area.   Larry defending him, saying the bylaws only require a board member to be a resident when they are running for the board.  The fact that he is no longer a resident member does not matter.  This was also the meeting where Stuart told the lie that when Frank took over the club had no money.  Doug Bellizzi who was there and had been president before Frank corrected him.



Then we somehow got into a discussion about Dmitri Shneider, with "executive director" Bryan

IM Igor Shliperman

Quick saying over and over that Dmitri loves the club just as much as I do.  When I was treasurer, I monitored the club's cash flow on a frequent basis.  If someone asked me how much money the club had and where it was, I could tell them.  During Dmitri's stint as treasurer, when Marcus left, records disappeared.   The president didn't know how much money the club had or didn't have, and had to go to the board to ask for donations.  Sorry, Bryan.  No. That is not the same.

FWCGM Fischer (Right)

Stuart promised us a follow-up meeting, but never delivered.  He claimed that there was too much hostility.  He would never admit that the hostility is a result of his actions as opposed to some inherent character flaw suddenly manifesting itself.

Around this time, some of us sent a letter to Stuart and the board listing the laws that we thought they were not complying with and telling them they must comply.  Stuart reportedly objected to the word "must".

While we are not perfect, the values of fairness and honesty are pervasive in the chess community.  Those who are not fair and honest may last awhile and may do a great deal of damage, but in the long run, the fairness and honesty of our community will win out.