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 The province of Saskatchewan has withdrawn its chess association from the CFC. Virtually all of Canada’s top players have withdrawn from playing in Canada.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.