Ethics Complaint against Robert Tanner
samsloan
1664 Davidson Ave., Apt. 1B
Bronx NY 10453
917-507-7226
sams...@amsloan.com
July 20, 2006
Att: Pat Knight
United States Chess Federation
PO Box 3967
Crossville 'TN 38557
Ethics Complaint against Robert Tanner, USCF ID No. 10495334
To the Ethics Committee of the United States Chess Federation:
It is with deep regret that I am constrained to file an ethics
complaint against Robert Tanner, a Member of the Executive Board of the
United States Chess Federation, for violations of Sections 5, 5(e) and
5(g) of the Code of Ethics of the USCF.
I recognize, as we all do, the great contributions Robert Tanner has
made to organized chess. He has organized and directed several US
Championships. He has organized and directed innumerable scholastic
tournaments, has been on the USCF Board of Delegates and had attended
delegates meetings of the United States Chess Federation innumerable
times. He has been the FIDE Zone President. Since 1991, he has directed
251 chess events and 680 sections. As a player, he has played in 197
chess events since 1991.
Few persons in organized chess have made a greater contribution than
Robert "Tanner.
Unfortunately, however, there is an underside to this. It is apparent
from an examination of the recently completed MSA that the entire
tournament career of Robert Tanner as a master is based on extremely
unlikely and almost certainly fabricated results. This constitutes a
violation of Sections 5, 5(e) and 5(g) of the USCF Code of Ethics. This
is a grave matter, especially with the chess world already rocked with
scandals both in the US and Internationally of players caught cheating
using electronic devices and of titles including even the International
Grandmaster title being awarded based on fabricated computer-created
games.
In the case of Robert Tanner, an examination of the MSA shows that
Robert Tanner got the master title and eventually the Original Life
Master Title by playing over and over again in a small closed group of
about five players, none of whom have ever played in a tournament that
was not organized by Tanner and none of whom have ever played any games
outside of that group. More than that, there is the curious fact that
this small entourage of players followed Tanner around to the remotest
corners of America, showing up in small towns where they play only
amongst themselves. They have played against each other in such remote
hamlets as Teton, Wyoming, Wendover, Nevada and Ceres, California.
The chances of these same players popping up together in such diverse
and remote locations is just about zero and therefore one must suspect
that these results are fabricated.
At the same time, whenever Mr. Tanner has played outside of that closed
group, his results have been well below master. He has played in one US
Open, three National Opens and in the recent US Amateur Team East and
his results in all of these events have been around the 2000 level or
lower. Mr. Tanner has never produced even one master result in his
entire chess career in a major open tournament. He has no published
chess games that I have been able to find and no FIDE rating, This is
unusual for a player who has the USCF Original Life Master title.
Here are some specific examples:
Robert Tanner got his one and only 2300 rating in the 1993
International Farewell of Friends in Ceres, California..
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?199301114260-12570599
This was a 6-playcr round robin. Tanner won all five games. The other
five players were all members of a closed group. None of them ever
played anybody else except other members of the closed group. All but
one of them never played chess again.
Tanner s big win was against Andre Peroit, who was rated 2281. However,
Andre Peroit achieved that master rating by several draws against
Tanner.
The first rating of Andre Peroit was a provisional 2356 in the 1992
Wyoming National Parks RR in Jackson, Wyoming, directed by 'I'anner.
This was a three player double round robin against Tanner and another
Tanner foil, Milan Djiatlich. In this tournament, Peroit scored two
draws against Tanner and two wins against Djiatlich.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?199210249630-12532913
Djiatlich himself originally obtained a master rating by winning a
similar small triple-round robin organized by Tanner. After Djiatlich
got that initial master title, Tanner came back again and again
pounding down Djiatlich winning almost all the games so that the master
rating of Djiatlich became the master rating of Tanner.
The second tournament by Andre Peroit was the 1992 Camping
International in Wyoming. This was a triple round robin in two
sections. The other players were Tanner, Djiatlich and Leopold Rodl.
Leopold Rodl was by then down to 1800. He is listed as playing in 15
chess events. All of them were the same small round robin events that
Tanner and the other members of his group were playing in.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?12570595
Again, Rodl follows the same curious pattern of following Tanner around
to tournaments in Utah, Wyoming, Nevada and California, always playing
in this group and never playing outside the group.
In the Camping International in Teton, Wyoming, Andre Peroit scored a
draw and a loss to Tanner, three wins and two draws against Djaitlich,
and four wins against Rodl. This gave Peroit a rating of 2280 based on
15 games.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?199211103160-10495334
Now, this entire caravan moved from Teton, Wyoming to Sacramento,
California, where they played against each other in Activity I.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?199212169430-1258291
Here they were joined by a new player named Rondald T Anderson.
Although this sounds like the name of a famous Colorado chess master
named Renard W. Anderson, this is not the same person. This Rondald T.
Anderson was a previously unrated player whose entire tournament career
consists of playing in tournaments against Tanner, Peroit, Djiatlich
and Rodl.
In the Activity I in Sacramento, another double round robin, Andre
Peroit continued his streak of good results. Scoring a draw and a loss
against Tanner, a win against Anderson, two wins against Djiatlich and
two wins against Rodl. This gave Peroit an established USCF Master
rating of 2284 based on 22 games.
Rondald Anderson, the new player, also did well, with two losses to
Tanner, one loss Peroit, a win and a draw against Djiatlich and two
wins against Rodl. This gave Anderson a provisional rating of 2062,
based on seven games.
Moving on, the group next proceeded to the Exhaustion Marathon in
Modesto. This was another five player round robin. This time Tanner
gave draws to Peroit and Rodl. Rodl, who had been losing all his games
until then, this time drew all his games. Tanner won with 3-1. Second
was Peroit with 2.5-1.5. Next was Rodl with 2-2. Then Rondald Anderson
with 1.5-2.5 and last Djiatlich with 1-3.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?199212189460-10495334
Now, the merry band traveled to Ceres. California where in 1993 they
played another round robin among themselves, except there was one new
player, Andrew Phillips. However, this was the only tournament Phillips
ever played in, so he did not upset the apple cart.
The tournament was won by Tanner with 5-0, followed by Rondald Anderson
with 3.5-1.5, Pcroit with 3-2, Phillips with 1.5-3.5, Djiatlich with
1-4 and Rodl with 1-4.
After that, this entire group disappeared never to be seen or heard
from again, except that in 1997 Djiatlich came back to play in the
Gilbert Interclub Matches in Gilbert, Arizona, where he scored 1-3,
with three losses to Tanner and one win against a player named
Zimmerman rated 976.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?199706109320-10495334
Djiatlich was the main provider of rating points to Tanner. Like
Peroit, he started off as a master, played in numerous small round
robins organized by Tanner and, in addition, played two long matches
against Tanner, each providing Tanner with large numbers of rating
points.
His first tournament was the aptly named 1992 Graveyard Shift Sanity in
Ceres, California. This was two double round robins. Djiatlich scored
3.5-.5 against Rodl (amazing how that guy gets around), 4-0 against
Richard Brown Tanner, and 4-0 against Jaime Alvarez (more about him
later). This gave Djiatlich a rating of 2189 based on 12 games.
Djiatlich then traveled to Wendover Nevada where he played in It's a
Gamble. First, Djiatlich played a round robin against Rodl and Alvarez,
winning both games. This gave Djiatlich a rating of 2205 based on 14
games.
Next, they played a triple round robin, this time including Tanner.
Tanner won with 7.5-.5. Second was Djiatlich with 5.5-2.5. Third was
Rodl with 2.5-5.5. Last was Alvarez with .5-7.5.
This result gave Tanner his first master rating. Tanner gained 52
points, raising his rating from 2153 to 2205. This also gave Djiatlich
an additional 10 rated games, so that now his rating was a firmly
established 2194.
Now that Djaitlich had an established rating, he proceeded to play 31
rated games against Tanner. 19 of those games were in long matches. The
other 12 were in these small round robins that Tanner kept organizing
for Djiatlich, Rodl and the rest of the group. By the end of this, the
rating of Djiatlich had dropped to 217 points to 1977, the bulk of
those points having gone to Tanner.
Of the remaining players in the group, Jaime Alvarez is the most
interesting, because he is the ONLY PLAYER who appears to have had a
USCF Rating before entering the group. All of the others entered as
unrated players.
Jaime Alvarez, USCF ID No. 12494565, appears to have started with a
rating of 1937. The MSA does not reveal where he got that rating, from
or on how many games it is based.
His first tournament on the MSA is the Graveyard Shift Sanity. Two
other players entered this four player round robin as unrated players.
They are Rodl and Djiatlich. The remaining player was the son of Robert
Tanner, rated 1697. Thus, the ratings of Rodl and Djiatlich were
pyramided entirely on the rating of Alvarez.
Alvarez proceeded to play in ten events organized by "Tanner. All of
his opponents were members of the same group.
One of his tournaments was the 1992 Lehman Cave RR Plus in Ely, Nevada.
This tournament included two new players not previously mentioned: Jose
Rodriguez and Miguel Rodriguez. The other players were of course
Djiatlich, Rodl, Alvarez and Tanner. However, since Jose Rodriguez and
Miguel Rodriguez only played in that one tournament, their ratings did
not affect the rating pool.
Here is a complete list of the players who played in this closed group.
Robert Tanner
Milan Djiatlich
Andre Peroit
Leopold Rodl
Rondald Anderson
Andrew Phillips
Jaime Alvarez
Jose Rodriguez
Miguel Rodriguez
Look at how they traveled tar and wide, playing in tournaments against
each other in Teton, Wyoming, Wendover, Nevada, Ely, Nevada, Modesto,
California, Cores California and so on, while never playing anybody
outside of this list. It appears that nobody other than Tanner and each
other has ever even seen these players.
The conclusion is obvious. Indeed, it is sad that such a promising and
dedicated chess personality as Robert Tanner would be involved in such
shenanigans.
The real key is the effect that this had on the Rating of Robert
Tanner.
Before all this, for many years, Robert Tanner consistently had a USCF
rating of about 2100. He came close several times but was never able to
make master. It is apparent from his entire record that Tanner,
frustrated with his inability to make master the hard way, decided to
do it the easy way.
His last tournament before this string of results was the 1991 Utah
Open in Salt Lake City. His opponents averaged 1904 and Tanner scored
3-3. This result cost him 46 rating points and put him outside striking
distance for the master title.
His next tournament was the previously mentioned Its a Gamble in
Wendover, Nevada. This is the previously mentioned triple round robin.
His opponents were Djiatlich, Alvarez and Rodl, all of whom had in the
meantime attained high ratings in Tanner tournaments. Tanner wiped out
the field, gaining him 52 rating points and giving him the master title
for the first time.
His next event was a one-game event where he defeated Rodl, giving him
3 points. After that he played a double round robin against players
rated 1856, 1576 and 1312. However, he drew one game and thereby lost
one point in that event.
His next tournament was the game in 30 RR in Modesto, California.
There, he defeated Djiatlich, Rodl and his own son, giving himself 15
points, putting himself up to a lofty 2223.
In his next three tournaments he lost rating points, putting him down
to 2204 and in danger of losing his master title. He did well in the
National Open, scoring 4-2, but his opponents were all experts and A
Players and his performance was below master, so he lost rating points
anyway.
It was here that he brought back Djiatlich, who conveniently lost a
match to him by 7.5-1.5. This match gave Tanner 44 points, putting his
rating up to 2248, so that now his master rating was relatively secure.
After that, Tanner played in a series of tournaments where his
opponents were Class B. Class C and Class D players. He would usually
win those games but he could never win or even draw against a master.
He did however beat one expert, Bobby Avila, who seems to be the
strongest player Tanner has ever defeated since 1991. Each time Tanner
played in an open tournament, he lost rating points. He would then
bring back Djiatlich, Rodl and one or two of the others and get his
rating points back.
Finally, Tanner held the blow out tournament, the International
Farewell to friends where Tanner won all of his five games against the
usual group and this put his rating up to 2319. Under the rules at this
time, this floored him at 2200 and he could not go lower than that.
Sure enough, after saying farewell to his friends who had provided him
with so many rating points, Tanner lost his 2300 rating in the very
next tournament, the Grants Pass Open in Oregon, where he drew players
rated 2041, 1939 and 1809 and defeated two Class B players.
It took Tanner eight more tournaments before he hit his floor of 2200.
After that, for a period of 22 tournaments from May 22, 1994 until June
23, 1996 Tanner had a rating of exactly 2200, never even one point more
or one point less, because he had once been over 2300. Then, the rules
were changed and Tanner's floor was dropped to 2100. Tanner's rating
quickly sunk to that floor and stayed around there until February 2006.
I need to explain that it was actually mild mannered newspaper reporter
Eric Mark who first discovered that there was something irregular about
Tanner's rating when he actually played Tanner at the February 2006 US
Amateur Team East Championship. Eric Mark won the game.
On the wall chart, Tanner's rating was 2101 but when Eric Mark checked
the MSA later he found that Tanner's rating had been raised to 2200.
As we now know, this was because Walter Brown and Mike Nolan had
suddenly "discovered" that Tanner should have been awarded the OLM
Title years before and therefore his rating was raised retroactively to
2200.
Take a look at:
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?200602209081-10495334
You will see that Tanner, number 723, lost to Eric Mark, number 614,
who was rated 1949.
Tanner played four games in this tournament against opponents averaging
2016. Tanner scored 1.5-2.5, for a performance rating of 1916.
Eric Mark wrote several Internet postings complaining about this, but I
did not notice them until a few days ago.
The bottom line is that Robert Tanner has obtained a master's rating
without ever defeating even one legitimately rated master in a
tournament game. He did win one game against Andre Peroit and two
against Milan Djiatlich but their masters ratings were attained
entirely by playing in rigged Tanner tournaments. Peroit and Djiatlich
never played in any other tournaments. Tanner was also able to hold his
master rating by playing 31 games including two long matches against
Milan Djiatlich, a player who got his rating by playing entirely in
rigged Tanner tournaments and never playing in any other tournaments.
Tanner then got the Original Life Master title by sitting on a floor of
2200 for years without ever defeating a master and just about never
even beating an expert. lie has acquired this 2200 floor by his wins
against Peroit and Djiatlich, whose ratings were rigged. Even counting
those floored games, Tanner was still not entitled to the Original Life
Master title because they included several long matches and matches do
not count.
In 1992, when Tanner had a master rating, he played a match against
Milan Djiatlich, winning 7.5 to 1.5. Tanner gained 44 points to 2248.
Milan Djiatlich lost 50 points to 2061. Then, in November 1992, he
played another ten game match against Milan Djiatlich, this time
winning by 8.5 - 1.5 Tanner's rating rose by 10 points from 2279 to
2289, and his opponent lost 13 points from 2022 to 2009.
In May 1994, Tanner played a match against Diane Bernard, rated 1822.
Tanner won 3-1. He did not lose any points but she gained 18 points to
1840. In October, 1994, he played a four game match against Paul G.
Cripe. Tanner lost all four games. His rating did not go down because
Tanner was on his floor of 2200, but his opponents rating went up from
2262 to 2301. In September, 1995, he played another match against Paul
G. Cripe which he lost by 4.5 to 1.5. As Tanner was floored, he lost no
points, but his opponent gained 29 points from 2233 to 2262.
Thus, Tanner played a total of 33 match games during the period when he
was rated 2200. He played 19 games against Milan Djiatlich, 10 against
Paul Cripe and 4 against Diane Bernard. These 33 games were used in the
count for 300 games for the OLM Title.
In short, Robert Tanner has rigged and manipulated the rating system.
By so doing, he has obtained for himself both the master title and the
Original Life Master Title.
I want to say here that I have long considered Robert Tanner to be a
friend. Perhaps not a close friend, but a friend nevertheless. At one
USCF meeting, Tanner was so kind as to obtain for me the status of
delegate. He is definitely a good guy and a gentleman at all times.
Over a period of many years he has performed great services to the
United States Chess Federation and to chess.
Nevertheless, the evidence is overwhelming that Robert Tanner has
rigged the rating system and has given himself titles to which he is
not entitled. This is a grave and serious matter that cannot be
overlooked or brushed aside.
For all of these reasons, I hereby file an ethics complaint against
Robert B. Tanner.
Very Truly Yours,
Sam Sloan
Sworn to before me this 20th
Day of July, 2006
_______________________
KAYO KIMURA
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01KI6112896
Qualified in Kings County
Commission Expires July 12, 2008
Mike Murray
>Nevertheless, the evidence is overwhelming that Robert Tanner has
>rigged the rating system and has given himself titles to which he is
>not entitled. This is a grave and serious matter that cannot be
>overlooked or brushed aside.
Years ago, some friends and I sat around drinking beer and
brainstorming ways to game the rating system. Here was my suggestion:
(1) start out with a group of twenty "A" players.
(2) Have a few tournaments which one player wins overwhelmingly,
thereby harvesting points from the others. This lucky guy sits out for
a while.
(3) The other 19 players go out into the open tournament world and win
back their points.
(4) You then have a few more tournaments where one of the remaining
players wins overwhelmingly. Lucky number 2 then sits out.
(5) The other 18 players go out and win back their points.
etc., until you have ten or eleven fairly highly rated players.
(6) One of this select groups then harvests most of the rating points
from his newly "strong" competitors.
(7) This process can continue indefinitely, ending up with one or more
really high-rated dudes.
This scam has the advantage of being much harder to detect than the
scheme of which you accuse Tanner, although I admit none of us
schemers ever thought of using the rating floors that creatively.
By the way, despite Ethics Committee censure, he's evidently still a
Life Master.
David Kane
"Mike Murray" <mikem...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:gvcpm2dmrgruki8re...@4ax.com...
I'm not sure it really is harder to detect. Any time the misrated
players play in open tournaments, they will have suspicious
results. The beauty (if you can call it that) of Tanner's scheme
is that he didn't have to start with "A" players or interact with
the rating pool at all. He simply generated high-rated players from
initially unrated players (by scoring poorly against them) and
then boosted his own rating by later scoring well against them.
> By the way, despite Ethics Committee censure, he's evidently still a
> Life Master.
According to the Sloan post, he was given a "reprimand", something
weaker than "censure". I feel bad for those who earned their
Life Master.
Mike Murray
<david...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I'm not sure it really is harder to detect. Any time the misrated
>players play in open tournaments, they will have suspicious
>results.
Not if you "harvest" the points judiciously -- say, you have a 1950
player and you prune him down to, oh, 1820.
> The beauty (if you can call it that) of Tanner's scheme
>is that he didn't have to start with "A" players or interact with
>the rating pool at all. He simply generated high-rated players from
>initially unrated players (by scoring poorly against them) and
>then boosted his own rating by later scoring well against them.
That part was elegant. But, the closed pool raised suspicions. The
players in my scheme have a lot exposure to open events, and play many
outside opponents.
>> By the way, despite Ethics Committee censure, he's evidently still a
>> Life Master.
>According to the Sloan post, he was given a "reprimand", something
>weaker than "censure". I feel bad for those who earned their
>Life Master.
There has to be a significant financial advantage for a promoter to be
a Life Master with a peak rating of over 2300. And it certainly must
help to get a choice of committee assignments, if that's what one
wants. Kinda like an college administrator getting a mail-order PhD
or Ward Churchill becoming an Indian.
David Kane
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:15:23 -0800, "David Kane"
> <david...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>I'm not sure it really is harder to detect. Any time the misrated
>>players play in open tournaments, they will have suspicious
>>results.
>
> Not if you "harvest" the points judiciously -- say, you have a 1950
> player and you prune him down to, oh, 1820.
>
>> The beauty (if you can call it that) of Tanner's scheme
>>is that he didn't have to start with "A" players or interact with
>>the rating pool at all. He simply generated high-rated players from
>>initially unrated players (by scoring poorly against them) and
>>then boosted his own rating by later scoring well against them.
>
> That part was elegant. But, the closed pool raised suspicions. The
> players in my scheme have a lot exposure to open events, and play many
> outside opponents.
True, but it also takes more people, longer,
etc. In theory, the Tanner scheme doesn't
even require collusion.
>>> By the way, despite Ethics Committee censure, he's evidently still a
>>> Life Master.
>
>>According to the Sloan post, he was given a "reprimand", something
>>weaker than "censure". I feel bad for those who earned their
>>Life Master.
>
> There has to be a significant financial advantage for a promoter to be
> a Life Master with a peak rating of over 2300. And it certainly must
> help to get a choice of committee assignments, if that's what one
> wants. Kinda like an college administrator getting a mail-order PhD
> or Ward Churchill becoming an Indian.
I'd be surprised if this were driven by financial gain.
My speculation is that Tanner knew he was
well-connected enough to get away with
it and just couldn't resist the temptation.
It will be interesting to see whether any
of the other USCF insiders have any
comment or whether they will all take
part in the whitewash.
Also worthy of comment is the apparent
absurdity of the USCF's policy concerning
Life Master. According to Sloan's complaint:
"As we now know, this was because Walter
Brown and Mike Nolan had suddenly
"discovered" that Tanner should have been
awarded the OLM Title years before and
therefore his rating was raised retroactively to
2200." I do hope that Mike Nolan sets the
record straight by clarifying that he was
following the rules, and hopefully can also
add some insight as to how such a blatantly
illogical rule came to be enacted in the first
place.
Mike Murray
<david...@comcast.net> wrote:
> In theory, the Tanner scheme doesn't
>even require collusion.
Heh, heh. It doesn't even require *games*.
>>>> By the way, despite Ethics Committee censure, he's evidently still a
>>>> Life Master.
>>>According to the Sloan post, he was given a "reprimand", something
>>>weaker than "censure". I feel bad for those who earned their
>>>Life Master.
>> There has to be a significant financial advantage for a promoter to be
>> a Life Master with a peak rating of over 2300. And it certainly must
>> help to get a choice of committee assignments, if that's what one
>> wants. Kinda like an college administrator getting a mail-order PhD
>> or Ward Churchill becoming an Indian.
>I'd be surprised if this were driven by financial gain.
>My speculation is that Tanner knew he was
>well-connected enough to get away with
>it and just couldn't resist the temptation.
It probably helps with FIDE schmoozing.
David Kane
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:12:46 -0800, "David Kane"
> <david...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>> In theory, the Tanner scheme doesn't
>>even require collusion.
>
> Heh, heh. It doesn't even require *games*.
The most favorable interpretation for Tanner is that the
players and games actually existed and were played fairly, but that
he selectively submitted results to boost his rating. In that case,
his mysterious European friends could have been completely
naive as to what was occurring.
In any case it doesn't help Tanner much.
Mike Nolan
>I do hope that Mike Nolan sets the
>record straight by clarifying that he was
>following the rules, and hopefully can also
>add some insight as to how such a blatantly
>illogical rule came to be enacted in the first
>place.
I had nothing to do with Tanner being given OLM status, and was not even
aware it had been done until someone posted about it.
I'm not sure what rule you're referring to.
--
Mike Nolan
Duncan Oxley
"David Kane" <david...@comcast.net> wrote
> It will be interesting to see whether any
> of the other USCF insiders have any
> comment or whether they will all take
> part in the whitewash.
>
David:
Here are two posts by board members on the "USCF Forums":
---
Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:15 am
Until now, I did not wish to make a comment based on
a mere rumor of scandal. However, since now we have
a situation which has been channel through a formal action
I must say that I am strongly believe that Robert Tanner
should resign as a member of the USCF Executive Board,
Zonal President and FIDE Commissions.
I believe, we are at least FIVE Past USCF President
who share the same opinion.
This is a very sad case of political disgrace. I consider
Robert Tanner a friend, but all things consider he must
do what is best for the USCF.
Beatriz Marinello
Past President 2003-05
---
Tue Nov 28, 2006 5:11 am
I have also recommended that Robert resign the above posts.
He has done a lot of good work for USCF and the events
considered by the Ethics Committee occurred about fifteen
years ago, but it would be harmful to the federation to have
him continue as our representative under these circumstances.
Bill Goichberg
--
Personally I wanted harsh punishment however after reading
Tanner's defense I think there is enough of a counter-argument
to raise a legitimate doubt as to if the players and games were
real. I'm not saying he's innocent, I'm saying there is not a case
"beyond all reasonable doubt".
I'm also tired of seeing his name dragged through the mud.
--Duncan
David Kane
"Mike Nolan" <no...@gw.tssi.com> wrote in message
news:ekkpun$oqf$1...@gw.tssi.com...
I confess to not knowing what happened or what
should have happened per USCF rules. Both Sloan
and Tanner refer to having a 2200 floor and suggest
that it has something to do with his becoming OLM.
I understand that the OLM is awarded to those who
maintain a master rating for a certain number
of games. It also seems that Tanner played quite a lot of
games near a floor of 2200. That is, he was consistently
performing below the 2200 level but those games might have
been counted toward the OLM requirement.
So apart from any general description you would
like to offer, there a couple of specific questions.
Was Tanner given the correct floor? Do games
played while on a 2200 floor count toward the
OLM requirement?
By the way, I did not mean by repeating Sloan's
veiled accusation against you that I believe there is
anything to it and I'm sorry if it appeared that way.
I referred to you in my post because you usually
have the answers to these sorts of questions
and it would invite you to rebutt Sloan's claim in
this forum, which you have.
David Kane
"Duncan Oxley" <No@Thanks> wrote in message
news:12mrufb...@corp.supernews.com...
Yes, I see that quite a few members have taken decisive
stands.
>
> Personally I wanted harsh punishment however after reading
> Tanner's defense I think there is enough of a counter-argument
> to raise a legitimate doubt as to if the players and games were
> real. I'm not saying he's innocent, I'm saying there is not a case
> "beyond all reasonable doubt".
I'd say there are various levels of guilt. At one extreme, we can
imagine a deliberate scheme involving fabricating players and
submitting phony events. At the other extreme, there is
the possibility that real games were fairly played against
real people, and the wrongdoing constituted of abusing
his TD status to selectively submit results in order to boost
his rating. Neither qualifies as innocent in my book, but
the degree of rationalization required is different in the
two cases.
> I'm also tired of seeing his name dragged through the mud.
>
Yet I think seeing rules fairly applied does boost the
reputation of the organization. And in the chess world "doing
the right thing" isn't something to be taken for granted.
Mike Nolan
>So apart from any general description you would
>like to offer, there a couple of specific questions.
>Was Tanner given the correct floor? Do games
>played while on a 2200 floor count toward the
>OLM requirement?
OK, that's a reasonable question to try to answer, though I don't know
how (or even if) it applies to Tanner at this point.
Let me put together something outlining the OLM program as I understand it,
run it past a few people to check for errors, and I'll try to get it
posted within a few days.
--
Mike Nolan
Vince Hart
David Kane wrote:
> >
> > Personally I wanted harsh punishment however after reading
> > Tanner's defense I think there is enough of a counter-argument
> > to raise a legitimate doubt as to if the players and games were
> > real. I'm not saying he's innocent, I'm saying there is not a case
> > "beyond all reasonable doubt".
>
> I'd say there are various levels of guilt. At one extreme, we can
> imagine a deliberate scheme involving fabricating players and
> submitting phony events. At the other extreme, there is
> the possibility that real games were fairly played against
> real people, and the wrongdoing constituted of abusing
> his TD status to selectively submit results in order to boost
> his rating. Neither qualifies as innocent in my book, but
> the degree of rationalization required is different in the
> two cases.
>
I agree that there is a difference but I would not use the word
"extreme" to describe that difference. In both schemes, you have a
player who was unable to achieve and/or maintain the master level. In
both schemes, the player convinces himself that he is deserving of the
title despite his failures and conceives a plan to achieve it outside
of fair and unbiased competition. I think that the main difference is
in the degree of self-deception that is required in that in one scheme
the player convinces himself that he is really acting within the rules..
Louis Blair
7 ...
7 Here are two posts by board members on the "USCF
7 Forums":
7 ---
7
7 Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:15 am
7
7 Until now, I did not wish to make a comment based on
7 a mere rumor of scandal. However, since now we have
7 a situation which has been channel through a formal action
7 I must say that I am strongly believe that Robert Tanner
7 should resign as a member of the USCF Executive Board,
7 Zonal President and FIDE Commissions.
7
7 I believe, we are at least FIVE Past USCF President
7 who share the same opinion.
7
7 This is a very sad case of political disgrace. I consider
7 Robert Tanner a friend, but all things consider he must
7 do what is best for the USCF.
7
7 Beatriz Marinello
7 Past President 2003-05
7
7 ---
7
7 Tue Nov 28, 2006 5:11 am
7
7 I have also recommended that Robert resign the above posts.
7 He has done a lot of good work for USCF and the events
7 considered by the Ethics Committee occurred about fifteen
7 years ago, but it would be harmful to the federation to have
7 him continue as our representative under these circumstances.
7
7 Bill Goichberg
7 ...
_
Also:
_
"... As to what to do about Mr. Tanner, one thing we
cannot do is remove him from the board. He was
elected by the members to a four year term that
expires in 2009. He is entitled to serve in that
position and I would not even think of trying to
remove him.
_
He can however be removed from his positions as
USA Zone President and as a member of the FIDE
Qualification Commission, FIDE Rules Commission
and FIDE Ethics Commission. I hope that he
voluntarily resigns those positions to save the USCF
and himself the embarassment of removing him from
those positions.
_
He can and should be removed from his positions as
liaison to various USCF Committees, including the
Rules Committee.
_
I doubt that he will be hired to direct any more national
scholastic tournaments. It will be up to Tim Just to
start proceedings to revoke his TD certification. ..."
- Sam Sloan (Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:35 am)
_
_
"I've told the Board that I think Robert should resign."
- Joel Channing (Thu Nov 30, 2006 1:44 am)
_
_
"... Robert;s friends understood [the severity of what
Robert did] and gave him good advice which I have no
doubt will result in his resignation and removal from
USCF governance. ..." - Don Schultz (Fri Dec 01, 2006
8:52 pm)