Jarecki's Response To Parr
Larry Parr
Sam Sloan
reading, because this pertains to an incident which occured in 1996
and an issue of Zugzwang magazine which Stan Vaughan himself mailed to
me three years ago.
At that time, Jordan Butler was rated as high at 1647, which made him
one of the top rated 9-year-old chess players in the US, which made
him possibly eligible to be sent as the US representative to the world
scholastic championships and to be a member of the US All-America
chess team plus other benefits.
http://www.uschess.org/ratings/top50/feb.html#Age9-10
Yet, Jordan Butler had played in only Stan Vaughan chess tournaments
and events.
This plus the fact that a large number of Stan Vaughan students had
their names listed in the USCF top-50 lists, combined with reports
that these players were over-rated by as much as 500 points, made it a
legitimate inquiry as to whether the boy in question had played and
won the games which Stan Vaughan reported that he had played and won.
The fact that the boy could not remember the names of the opponents he
had played, did not have the scoresheets and could not remember
anything about the games he had supposedly played added further
doubts.
In spite of the passage of more than three years since that time, the
boy's rating has since dropped to 1473.
http://www.64.com/cgi-bin/ratings.pl/USCF/12614985
I find it remarkable and unsual that a boy who was rated 1647 when he
was 9 years old is now rated 1473 now that he is 12.
As to the question "How can you expect a 9 year old boy to remember
anything about the chess games he played?", I can still remember some
chess games I played when I was nine years old, even though I am 54
now.
Sam Sloan
http://www.samsloan.com/weeraman.htm
>--
>Larry Parr
Phil Innes
> At that time, Jordan Butler was rated as high at 1647,
Provisional?
which made him
> one of the top rated 9-year-old chess players in the US, which made
> him possibly eligible to be sent as the US representative to the world
> scholastic championships and to be a member of the US All-America
> chess team plus other benefits.
> Yet, Jordan Butler had played in only Stan Vaughan chess tournaments
> and events.
Who else played in these events? Other Wünderkind? Also provisionally high
rated, and in such a limited pool of play (always playing up - small number of
games, etc.) what is so surprising for a junior?
e.g. I sign on to a chess group with new handle, play up all the time,
targeting the 2500 crowd - 4 months ago I played 6 games, and was 2700+.
> This plus the fact that a large number of Stan Vaughan students had
> their names listed in the USCF top-50 lists, combined with reports
> that these players were over-rated by as much as 500 points, made it a
> legitimate inquiry as to whether the boy in question had played and
> won the games which Stan Vaughan reported that he had played and won.
These net games are probably 250 points over. Combine this with the
"playing-up" and what have you got?
> The fact that the boy could not remember the names of the opponents he
> had played, did not have the scoresheets and could not remember
> anything about the games he had supposedly played added further
> doubts.
Little nine year olds these days! Unlike you and I Sam - we could pee over
high walls while picking our noses.
> In spite of the passage of more than three years since that time, the
> boy's rating has since dropped to 1473.
So his rating was inflated about 170 points. Is this really unusual in a
provisional junior, playing very targetted games?
> http://www.64.com/cgi-bin/ratings.pl/USCF/12614985
>
> I find it remarkable and unsual that a boy who was rated 1647 when he
> was 9 years old is now rated 1473 now that he is 12.
Perhaps he has suffered coaching. (see minor rant elsewhere, education versus training)
> As to the question "How can you expect a 9 year old boy to remember
> anything about the chess games he played?", I can still remember some
> chess games I played when I was nine years old, even though I am 54
> now.
You are a well preserved 54! Admit there can be a reasonable doubt to your
question, Sam, and I will vote for you (lie! I can't vote) in the election. I
will boost you! I will be kind and generous to your ideas. Warm...
Phil Innes
> Sam Sloan
>
> http://www.samsloan.com/weeraman.htm
Tom Klem
Sam Sloan wrote:
>Larry Parr has obviously not been keeping up with his chess magazine
>reading, because this pertains to an incident which occured in 1996
>and an issue of Zugzwang magazine which Stan Vaughan himself mailed to
>me three years ago.
>
So? Does that matter? Nice try Sloan, but no sale, no sir-ee, no cigar, do
not pass go and do not collect your $200 bucks.
>At that time, Jordan Butler was rated as high at 1647, which made him
>one of the top rated 9-year-old chess players in the US, which made
>him possibly eligible to be sent as the US representative to the world
>scholastic championships and to be a member of the US All-America
>chess team plus other benefits.
>
>Yet, Jordan Butler had played in only Stan Vaughan chess tournaments
>and events.
>
Another blatant lie from Sloan, as evidenced by Kathy Butler's own words
describing Carol Jarecki's introduction to her. Read the letter carefully
Sloan, Jarecki tells Kathy "maybe you noticed me at the nationals"
(paraphrased to save space). I believe these were the nationals in Knoxville
(where Jordan played---but definitely before my time, so I'm just going from
hear say). Ya wanna see photos of the boy and one of his trophies (that's
about twice his size) playing other children at the national level. I'm
going to make a real dedicated search as soon as I post this reply to find
some.
I'm personally very proud of young Jordan. I'm no rocket scientist when it
comes to Chess. My USCF rating OTB was never higher than the mid 1800's. Of
course with the fact that the USCF refused to rate several dozen tournaments
in which I did well, whose to say? Think of me what you will, but frankly,
no ratings, no motivation. Probably what the USCF conspired to do to the
other 1,600 here in Nevada who've dropped out.
Let me tell you this. Jordan beat me. Also, I personally observed the game
played with Rose Bolton (mentioned by Lady Vader) who I noticed playing him
at the Rainbow Library. I asked who she was because I was curious about her
interest in Chess. Not many women play the game, and I wondered if she could
be good or had any kids playing.
>This plus the fact that a large number of Stan Vaughan students had
>their names listed in the USCF top-50 lists, combined with reports
Reports? Now here's a fine example of what's wrong with the USCF. A
competitor complains to the USCF that, while nobody broke any rules,
something is wrong. Due process is trampled, people's lives and livelihoods
are destroyed, and the ethicsless committee reprimands a guy, but they don't
quote any section of the code upon which it is based. All of this based on
hatred and jealousy.
>that these players were over-rated by as much as 500 points, made it a
answered in the other post. Dan Conver just wanted a big trophy haul in my
opinion, and was sandbagging. Plain as that. That's why he got the USCF to
violate it's own rules and drop the ratings of the scholastic members of the
Meadows School.
>legitimate inquiry as to whether the boy in question had played and
>won the games which Stan Vaughan reported that he had played and won.
It was never legitimate. It was just the dirty, rotten, lying politicians
way of keeping Nevada down so they could carpet bag here, and guarantee a
clear field for people like Goichberg. In addition to the fanatical ravings
of such lunatics as can be found around the federation who stop at nothing
to get their way with the voting members, by sending dirty, lying, filthy
NAZI propaganda around to the members of Eastern European origin, which
turns out to be more dirty, rotten, lying filth from the likes of Jerry
Hanken, Allan P Magruder, Dan Conver, Ken Horne, a whole host of lying
scumbags from USCF headquarters, et al. All in the name of the 'character
issue'. You vile scum sucking pigs. The only character you know is the first
letter in the word that I can't post here but starts with the sixth letter
of the English alphabet and rhymes with a quacking fowl.
I personally had to witness an Adolf Hitler birthday card and other vile
NAZI propaganda that was so obviously fake and so putrified that I wanted to
throw up. Considering that over half of my family tree in Poland and Italy
was killed by the monster Adolf, and his willing accomplices, it was all I
could do to restrain myself. All of this was shown to me by Allan P
Magruder. You wanna know why he showed this garbage to me? Because I
happened to have met Stan Vaughan. Right after this meeting and after I had
taken a few lessons from him, Dan Conver began telling me that Stan was a
'weak' and 'over-rated' player. He (conver) stated that Vaughan was not even
strong enough to beat an average A player. Guess what? Conver was just
jealous and hated Vaughan because he had questioned getting four blacks in a
five round tournament (a decision that Jarecki defended, I believe) and Stan
had a successful scholastic program. Vaughan challenged him and that other
brain surgeon Jerry Weikel (also making the same dubious claims about
Vaughan's playing strength) for a large sum of money. They always made
excuses and begged the question. In other words, they were and are CHICKEN
to play someone who they told others couldn't beat an average A player.
This argument is ALWAYS made by these villainous jerks. 'He's overrated, he
cheats, he does this, he does that". Problem is, they're just jealous.
Whammo, along comes the USCF who decides it is in Goichberg's (and others)
best interest to fan the flames of jealousy and hatred (with their
disgusting hit letters purporting Nazi leanings on Vaughan's part----all of
which is totally made up). They decide to keep Nevada from uniting and
developing a five thousand member base (yes folks, we were well on our way
to that and my projections showed that we would have had 5,000 by now) The
whole idea of all this is to WIN AT ANY COST. And I'm not talking over the
board here, because IMHO, they couldn't do that.
I'm sick of these people. Mental midgets like Sam Sloan, who is so insecure
and has such low self esteem that he has to constantly be referring to
himself and President Clinton in the same breath (to impress us). Or telling
us how he argued this or that at the US Supreme court. Who cares? What has
any of that to do with Chess? Or how, he's a big expert on this or that ("I
looked it up in the Law Library and ... "). Yuch!? The only people that I
personally know who look up anything at the law library are usually ex-cons.
REAL Lawyers have their own CD or books. Everything that Sam says could
probably be characterized in the DSM-IV handbook by a qualified
psychiatrist.
>
>The fact that the boy could not remember the names of the opponents he
>had played, did not have the scoresheets and could not remember
>anything about the games he had supposedly played added further
>doubts.
>
>In spite of the passage of more than three years since that time, the
>boy's rating has since dropped to 1473.
>
I'm not sure exactly how active Jordan is these days, but I can assure you
the quality and quantity of competitive players has dropped like a rock here
in Nevada thanks to the USCF and their psycophants.
>
>I find it remarkable and unsual that a boy who was rated 1647 when he
>was 9 years old is now rated 1473 now that he is 12.
>
Maybe he got sick and tired of having to defend his upbringing, heritage and
lost interest.
>As to the question "How can you expect a 9 year old boy to remember
>anything about the chess games he played?", I can still remember some
>chess games I played when I was nine years old, even though I am 54
>now.
>
More insecure crap from Sloan. I can still do this, I can still do that.
Have you no shame or honor? We all know what you think you can still do.
I've seen the pictures on your website of one of your female victims. Do you
know Sam, that what you are doing is considered abuse in some legal
situations?
Brother, Reuben Fine had it right when he described Chess players in terms
of the psychosis. The collection of liars and miss-fits which the USCF trots
out to spew wild vile stories would even make Freud blush.
BTW, we did complain to the Ethicsless committee about Jarecki. They never
even wrote back saying they had received anything. Well, I believe I have
the registered return receipt somewhere in the files.
All in the name of character. What a joke. You voting members, hear me: you
need to throw off the yoke of tyranny which has enabled the USCF to use the
machina horrifica (TDCC, PB and Ethics) to destroy peoples lives. They're
still at it, and they're doing it in your names. If you don't find your
conscience's and do something about it, you won't have much to worry about
in a few short years, your mailmen will be happier to see you and, the USCF
will cease to exist. Some of you may say: "Good, now I can go back to my
soap opera". I hope that you do. Just do the right thing before you go off
to sleep.
Seriously, if you continue down the path of villainy, hatred, jealousy,
Anti-Nazi fomented hit letters, with failure to meet the basic principles of
recognized standards of ethics common decency and due process, the
ill-mannered louts who represent you, will continue the sickening decline
and eventual destruction of the USCF. Do you want that? Mark my words. Sam
Sloan will be forced to go ruin American Shogi if Lady Vader and her consort
prevail.
Tom Klem
Tom Klem
Phil Innes wrote in message <3778B421...@sover.net>...
>Sam Sloan wrote:
>
>> At that time, Jordan Butler was rated as high at 1647,
>
ESTABLISHED!
>
> which made him
>> one of the top rated 9-year-old chess players in the US, which made
>> him possibly eligible to be sent as the US representative to the world
>> scholastic championships and to be a member of the US All-America
>> chess team plus other benefits.
>
>> Yet, Jordan Butler had played in only Stan Vaughan chess tournaments
>> and events.
>
>Who else played in these events? Other Wünderkind? Also provisionally high
>rated, and in such a limited pool of play (always playing up - small number
of
>games, etc.) what is so surprising for a junior?
>
Coach Vaughan's philosophy (also touted by then President Barry) was to have
three sections of a Saturday afternoon Game in 45 (3 rd RR). The top section
would have masters and experts usually, the middle section patzers like me,
and the third section would usually be scholastic. If a scholastic member
won their section, they were given the opportunity to 'play up' to the
patzer section where they victimized the terrorized few. Winning the patzer
section, they were enabled to go higher, etc.
President Barry said, and I agree with him, (paraphrase from the Yearbook
1995?), if a child plays a game with a peer and wins, no biggie. If that
child beats an adult, there is a greater chance that the USCF will retain
him as a member.
>e.g. I sign on to a chess group with new handle, play up all the time,
>targeting the 2500 crowd - 4 months ago I played 6 games, and was 2700+.
>
No Phil, it was not like that. You are buying into the propaganda of hate
and the lies of villainous scum. I have plenty of court documents which
prove this, including (if memory serves) the complete transcript where the
USCF attornies (some Expert Chess players) were shown not to understand the
USCF ratings system at all. In fact, the big lie is the tactic that they use
continually here. Tell the lie over and over, and sooner or later people
will believe it. Of course, the organization is destroyed, but who cares?
>> This plus the fact that a large number of Stan Vaughan students had
>> their names listed in the USCF top-50 lists, combined with reports
>> that these players were over-rated by as much as 500 points, made it a
>> legitimate inquiry as to whether the boy in question had played and
>> won the games which Stan Vaughan reported that he had played and won.
>
>These net games are probably 250 points over. Combine this with the
>"playing-up" and what have you got?
>
Stan Vaughan has his faults. Cheating at Chess is NOT one of them. Believe
me, Stan HATES to lose a game of Chess and would not admit to it unless it
really were so. Many of the games in question were witnessed by me
personally, and I have affadavits from dozens of others who either played in
or witnessed the scholastic/adult encounters.
>> The fact that the boy could not remember the names of the opponents he
>> had played, did not have the scoresheets and could not remember
>> anything about the games he had supposedly played added further
>> doubts.
>
>Little nine year olds these days! Unlike you and I Sam - we could pee over
>high walls while picking our noses.
>
>> In spite of the passage of more than three years since that time, the
>> boy's rating has since dropped to 1473.
>
>So his rating was inflated about 170 points. Is this really unusual in a
>provisional junior, playing very targetted games?
>
He WAS NOT provisional for the time frame mentioned.
>> http://www.64.com/cgi-bin/ratings.pl/USCF/12614985
>>
>> I find it remarkable and unsual that a boy who was rated 1647 when he
>> was 9 years old is now rated 1473 now that he is 12.
>
>Perhaps he has suffered coaching. (see minor rant elsewhere, education
versus training)
>
>> As to the question "How can you expect a 9 year old boy to remember
>> anything about the chess games he played?", I can still remember some
>> chess games I played when I was nine years old, even though I am 54
>> now.
>
>You are a well preserved 54! Admit there can be a reasonable doubt to your
>question, Sam, and I will vote for you (lie! I can't vote) in the election.
I
>will boost you! I will be kind and generous to your ideas. Warm...
>
Sir,
It is your privilege to be as kind and generous to whomever you wish. I only
urge you to consider what these people stand for and act accordingly. They
lie, cheat, steal and commit felonious acts: all in your name. Don't let
them drag the USCF down with them. I urge you, consider the facts.
Tom Klem
li...@ork.net
> Yet, Jordan Butler had played in only Stan Vaughan chess tournaments
> and events.
Where does/did he live? In the region in which those tournaments are held,
or in Pennsylvania, and he had to fly thousands of miles to each
tournament? (Note: This is a legitimate question. I do not know the
asnwer to it)
> The fact that the boy could not remember the names of the opponents he
> had played, did not have the scoresheets and could not remember
> anything about the games he had supposedly played added further
> doubts.
I don't remember the friggin names of my opponents from a Swiss last week,
and the games all blend into a blur for me, now that I play many ICC
games. Does this invalidate my OTB games? (And I'm a lot older than 9
years old, and not so hyper-excited when I play formal tournament games
anymore--imagine how much more so for a 9 year old kid).
> In spite of the passage of more than three years since that time, the
> boy's rating has since dropped to 1473.
> I find it remarkable and unsual that a boy who was rated 1647 when he
> was 9 years old is now rated 1473 now that he is 12.
Really? Every single kid's rating goes up by 500 points every couple of
years? No kid's rating ever goes down? Do you really think it is unusual
and remarkable that a kid has dropped 150 points? Do you think that
ratings are precise to that degree?
I think you don't, and I think you are lying if you say you do.
> As to the question "How can you expect a 9 year old boy to remember
> anything about the chess games he played?", I can still remember some
> chess games I played when I was nine years old, even though I am 54
> now.
Yes, but not every kid is like you were at that age, Sam, and hopefully
none will turn out like you did.
ASCACHESS
>or in Pennsylvania, and he had to fly thousands of miles to each
>tournament?
Jordan Butler lives in Las Vegas and I know from personal knowledge that he
attended at least two national championships that I organized. He was among
the top finishers.
As a member of the national scholastic committee, I was aware of the charges
being made against Stan Vaughn. However, if the story told here is true
regarding Mrs. Jarecki's misrepresentation of her position as a journalist when
she was really on a clandestine fact finding mission, then the accusations
against Stan Vaughn are nothing.
Unimportant by comparison.
Aren't we supposed to be the good guys?
If the story is true, then USCF (if it had a hand in granting permission to
Mrs. Jarecki) initiated actions which border on child abuse.
If the story is true, then lifting a child's hopes that his story is about to
be covered for a national magazine and then dashing those hopes with
accusations and inquisition is inhuman.
Under anyones definition, was it the child's fault?
Wasn't he totally innocent under any criteria?
Didn't Jordan Butler, a 9 year old with no knowledge of the larger issues
surrounding him, become USCF's victum?
I am amazed the Butler family did not sue.
There are two ways of dealing with these problems.
You can shine light on them and correct the problems or you can sweep the
problems under the rug.
USCF consistently chooses the second solution.
Richard Peterson
dox...@usa.net
that Jarecki was just doing her job and did nothing
improper?
Klem gives second-hand accounts from the mother. Like
Parr, I would like to hear from her.
It is my opinion that Klem misstates facts and puts his
own slant on the whole matter.
A heck of a lot sleaze went down in Nevada, but I feel
NOT from the side of the USCF.
Ratings were manipulated, false tournaments submitted...
Vaughan plays his wife and son in garage to win grand prix??
A friend of mine told me just the other day he forgot
to vote in one of the "elections" but someone kindly
sent in a ballot with his "signature"...
Is it possible Klem (who had his TD cert. revoked)
just has an axe to grind??
I hope Parr is sure of his 'facts'.
Duncan Oxley
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
klgt...@spam.cornell.edu
: There are two ways of dealing with these problems.
: You can shine light on them and correct the problems or you can sweep the
: problems under the rug.
: USCF consistently chooses the second solution.
Speaking of which...any more info on the forged contract? I am
surprised at the lack of outrage...
K
--
Note - change address if replying to this post:
klg3 AT cornell DOT edu (<-- make the obvious changes...)
ASCACHESS
>Speaking of which...any more info on the forged contract? I am
>surprised at the lack of outrage...
>
>K
>
Me too!
Although I can understand why our senses of outrage would be dulled at this
point.
You would think that the forgery of a national tournament agreement would be a
big deal.
It seems some would like for this to go away, at least until after the
election, but this is not an election issue.
But this is far, far from dead.
Despite several requests, they have not released my original bid. Either they
are holding it for political reasons, which would show that the bid matches my
original contract and does not match their forged contract, or the office
cannot find my original bid either.
Hmmm!
Something is rotten in New Windsor.
Richard Peterson
ASCACHESS
>to vote in one of the "elections" but someone kindly
>sent in a ballot with his "signature"...
>
You think that story is good...
I sent in a contract to USCF with my signature on it and it ended up a
different contract with a different signature.
Richard Peterson
Tom Klem
dox...@usa.net wrote:
>Has anybody here considered the horrible possibility
>that Jarecki was just doing her job and did nothing
>improper?
>
Some job, kill the dreams of a nine year old. Who issued the orders? Vito
Corleone? Even he wouldn't have done this thing.
>Klem gives second-hand accounts from the mother. Like
>Parr, I would like to hear from her.
>
I published the letter directly from Ms Butler's own hand. Want me to scan
it into the computer as a graphic? I will be happy to send it to you or post
it here.
>It is my opinion that Klem misstates facts and puts his
>own slant on the whole matter.
>
I respectfully submit that you are entitled to your opinion. Your apparent
'blind faith' in the USCF does not bode well for it, especially if you are
one of the annointed few who get to vote.
I tell the truth. Do you? Remember Duncan, all we have in this life is who
we are and what we stand for. "How can we fool 'em today" is not printed on
my door mat.
>A heck of a lot sleaze went down in Nevada, but I feel
>NOT from the side of the USCF.
>
The only sleaze that I ever saw was in the two inch thick 'dossier' which
Allan P Magruder and Jerry Hanken were circulating around America, the land
of the FREE, and the home of the brave. This collection of garbage,
manufactured evidence, and villainous tripe was shown regularly to the
faithful at official USCF tournaments. I was shown this junk in the skittles
room at UNLV, an institution which I revere. Close personal friends of mine
received parts of this 'dossier' on Vaughan through the US Mails. They
(Hanken and Magruder) viciously purported that Stan Vaughan was a Nazi and a
criminal. This went on for years without either a legal or ethics response
(via the diseased machinery of the USCF, BTW) from Vaughan. At first, I
thought it was just the natural desire to maintain some shred of 'Chess
Peace' on Vaughan's part. I have come to share the more cynical view that he
realized just how corrupt and immoral every level of the incompetent
governance structure of the USCF is.
>Ratings were manipulated, false tournaments submitted...
>
THE BIG LIE. THE BIG LIE. THE BIG LIE. THE BIG LIE. THE BIG LIE. THE BIG
LIE. THE BIG LIE.
>Vaughan plays his wife and son in garage to win grand prix??
>
>A friend of mine told me just the other day he forgot
>to vote in one of the "elections" but someone kindly
>sent in a ballot with his "signature"...
>
A friend of mine went to the moon. Who is owner of this purloined ballot?
>Is it possible Klem (who had his TD cert. revoked)
>just has an axe to grind??
>
I am proud to say that I am no longer a member of the USCF TD ranks. I
resigned from the USCF in July of 1998. Bozo the Clown revoked me around six
months afterward.
>I hope Parr is sure of his 'facts'.
>
You can rest assured on that point. I have alot more evidence at the
attornies office than I have published here.
Duncan, I am not a political neophyte. I know what depths of depravity to
which the human spirit is capable of plummeting. In the beginning, even I
was shocked. Now nothing La Caissa Nostra can do will shock me. The are
totally without merit and deserve not even our time. The sole reason I post
here is to 'NEVER LET THEM FORGET'.
I presume that you are a man of good conscience. I am not their judge.
With sincerest wishes for your survival,
Tom Klem
JimEade
>point.
Precisely my problem.
The team of Cavallo, Goichberg and Schultz commits one outrage after another,
each more deplorable than the last, yet they seem to be getting away with them.
I'll keep trying, right on through August, but it's someone else's turn after
that.
James Eade
Remove the Sheesh to respond
Phil Innes
>
> Phil Innes wrote in message <3778B421...@sover.net>...
> >Sam Sloan wrote:
> >
> >> At that time, Jordan Butler was rated as high at 1647,
> >
> >Provisional?
>
> ESTABLISHED!
Hi Tom - Consider for a minute what the rest of us could possibly make from
these claims and counter claims. Which is true? Is it possible to find out a
few things by asking questions? However - I post was responding to Sam Sloan -
I wondered if he was a-mischief making, or if he really could think of no
reason why a selective group of juniors may have inflated ratings.
My comments did not propose the opposite of what you say below as something
that Phil Innes knows - but questions why Sam presents the case as he does.
---
At a more general level of truth telling, I should be interested to know if
both sides would agree to arbitration on the several items you have listed below.
As we have witnessed elsewhere in these threads, it is a nonsense to expect an
organisation to not consider its own interests, even within an ethics
committee, when the chair of the committee insists on anonymity because of
"political factors."
So USCF cannot be the arbiter of your claims and its own estate and expect to
convince us of very much.
Anyway - why no arbitration on each of the distinct issues?
Respectfully, Phil Innes
Larry Parr
Tom Klem
Phil Innes wrote:
>Tom Klem wrote:
>>
>> Phil Innes wrote in message <3778B421...@sover.net>...
>> >Sam Sloan wrote:
>> >
>> >> At that time, Jordan Butler was rated as high at 1647,
>> >
>> >Provisional?
>>
>> ESTABLISHED!
>
>Hi Tom - Consider for a minute what the rest of us could possibly make from
>these claims and counter claims. Which is true? Is it possible to find out
a
>few things by asking questions? However - I post was responding to Sam
Sloan -
>I wondered if he was a-mischief making, or if he really could think of no
>reason why a selective group of juniors may have inflated ratings.
>
>My comments did not propose the opposite of what you say below as something
>that Phil Innes knows - but questions why Sam presents the case as he does.
>---
Understood, thanks.
>At a more general level of truth telling, I should be interested to know if
>both sides would agree to arbitration on the several items you have listed
below.
>
I'm not sure if we could ever put the genie back into the bottle. For
example, yesterday, I received a mailing from Stan Vaughan announcing that
the Nevada State Chess Association, Inc board had voted to leave the USCF
altogether. Not a very positive prospect for a settlement. I fought for four
years to keep NSCA, Inc alive, and now it appears that they have voluntarily
committed suicide. Ich.
Even, so, I would be willing to try. I believe in the human spirit, so long
as everyone plays by the rules and tells the truth. I hate liars. Sorry if
that is not politically correct (and I know it is not), but I just can't
stand people who lie. You just can't rely on them, and what is worse,
suppose they tell a lie about you, and I find out later that it was a lie?
I'll always have that doubt about you, won't I? Stan Vaughan, and to some
degree, myself, because I have defended him on principle, will suffer from
the stigma that the USCF created when it continually lied, ignored pleas for
help, and in short demonstrated their malfeasance when they failed to do the
right thing for dues paying, honest members. That's why I have an aversion
to them. Now I don't mean people who occasionally tell a lie (because anyone
who says he doesn't tell a lie once in awhile is by definition a liar); no,
I mean those who make it a practice of telling lies.
In my view, that is exactly what has been going on in the USCF for years.
Alot of good people have been destroyed and have turned away from the USCF
for this very reason. "Bad associations spoil useful habits." And when it
comes to a hobby like Chess, revulsion == repulsion.
>As we have witnessed elsewhere in these threads, it is a nonsense to expect
an
>organisation to not consider its own interests, even within an ethics
>committee, when the chair of the committee insists on anonymity because of
>"political factors."
>
Yes, I would tend to agree with you there. But solve this problem you must,
if you are to survive as an organization. Revulsion == Repulsion. Fact of
life. Chess is just a hobby to over twenty million americans (20,000,000).
And yet, the USCF is declining, people are leaving, it's leaders with
precious few exceptions, have gone completely power mad. They've not only
lost sight of the mission, they can't even see the planet. They have
forgotten the one basic fact about human existence. What goes around, comes
around. Because of the bad actions of a few mean spirited, jealous people,
all have had to suffer.
>So USCF cannot be the arbiter of your claims and its own estate and expect
to
>convince us of very much.
>
Again, total agreement so far. They certainly haven't shown us much when it
comes to even being able to spell the word ethics, and forget about due
process. Not Invented Here. The old NIH factor.
>Anyway - why no arbitration on each of the distinct issues?
>
In a word: money. The USCF does not believe that destroying members has any
affect on them.
The USCF and many of it's politicians make alot of money from Chess, and Las
Vegas is the Valhalla for such enterprise.There is also the factor that
Chess at the highest levels which it is played, is a glamorous and exciting
elixir for some personality types. They will do anything to be able to
hob-nob with the Chess illuminati of the world, and it just so happens that
they didn't regard the Country Cousins (we the people of Nevada) with the
proper respect that one would normally associate with civilized human
behavior and paying customers.
For another reason, Don Schultz and Stan Vaughan go way back. All the way to
Florida, where they had disagreements in the past, fomented by a lunatic
named Max Zavanelli (who Stan Vaughan got into trouble with because he
didn't heed Zavanelli's request for him to be replaced by a stronger player
on the US Amateur Postal Team match with a foreign land). Zavanelli asked
Vaughan to feign illness, in order to be replaced by a stronger player.
Vaughan refused. I would have too. Zavanelli and the USCF formed common
cause against Vaughan and trumped up some manufactured evidence (even Ken
Horne agrees with this assessment) to disenfranchise Vaughan, who had become
popular with the players, even aspiring or achieving a regional VP post.
Vaughan didn't help anything with his strictured code of honor, particularly
where his honor was/is concerned. This closed him off from any possible
compromise on even the most basic issues. A trait, to be sure, which did not
ennure him to the powers that be in Chess at the time or now. The USCF
decided to flush him down the toilet, and the resultant sucking sound can be
heard even today across the land. "Flush, flush, flush. We don't like this
one, we don't like that one. Flush, flush, flush. Oops. There goes 1,600
players. Too bad. too bad. too bad."
With a little understanding and compassion for the other guy, all of this
trouble could easily have been avoided. However, because the USCF refused
even to acknowledge legitimate complaints (like the Lady Vader---Carol
Jarecki affair) no elections for six years and too many complaints to list
all of them here (around a dozen), Magruder just figured he could do what he
wanted. The USCF promoted this attitude through the presumption of power
which they afforded Magruder here in the state, and the vast majority of
players just quit. It is my belief that the USCF instructed Magruder in the
fine art political and technical manipulation (clearly, he was an apt pupil)
among other things, along with other machinations which occured here that I
shall not go into for legal reasons. (I won't say anything that I can't
prove).
So here we sit. 1,714 fine dues paying, card carrying, rated chess playing
members of the USCF flushed down the toilet. Under 100 left. I have tried to
help restart things here by providing technical support (databases,
tournament expertise and the like) to several local TD's here, but turnout
has so far been very light. Without the feeder system that Stan Vaughan (or
someone like him) can provide through contact with the public in the school
system and the public libraries, Chess will continue to be of negligible
effect in the Silver State. I'm quite sure that this makes New Windsor happy
and proud, to be sure. They aren't interested in Chess in the Silver State,
only their grandiose plans for hob-nobbing with the rich and famous, and
whatever new plot they can foist on the people of Nevada. Oh, and by the
way, some of them are rubbing their palms with glee.
Thank you for your thought provoking questions,
Tom Klem
Tom Klem
Larry Parr wrote:
> OPEN MESSAGE TO TOM KLEM
>
> Mr. Klem: You state that am ethics complaint lodged against Carol
>Jarecki in the lamentable affair of Jordan Butler and her abusive
>behavior toward the boy received no response from the Ethics Committee.
>
> Sir: let's try it all again. This time in public. Let's get the
>complaint formulated here on rgcp; lets publicly dispatch notice of it
>to Ethics Committee chairman Andrew Thall; let's both e-mail and send a
>hard copy to Ernie Schlich at the USCF; and let's make repeated public
>inquiries on this forum as to the process of the consideration.
>
I agree. I will begin at once to formulate the charges into a proper format
for the first draft.
Tom Klem
Wickdeer
>From: "Tom Klem" <the...@lvcm.com>
>Date: Wed, 30 June 1999 11:15 AM EDT
>Message-id: <93075551...@news.remarQ.com>
The USCF higher ups, in an effort to rebuild sagging adult membership, have
been engaging in sleezy behavior to lure former members back into the fold so
they can file ethics complaints.
Hey, it seems to be working with Mr. Parr and Mr. Klem.
Wick Deer
Tongue firmly in cheek.
dox...@usa.net
I respect everybodys right to their own opinion.
However, I am wondering if you really believe
some of the things you are saying??
I know a little bit more than you think
about the Nevada situation.
Duncan Oxley
In article <93070624...@news.remarQ.com>,
> totally without merit and deserve not even our time. The sole reason I
post
> here is to 'NEVER LET THEM FORGET'.
>
> I presume that you are a man of good conscience. I am not their judge.
>
> With sincerest wishes for your survival,
> Tom Klem
>
>
dox...@usa.net
asca...@aol.com (ASCACHESS) wrote:
> >A friend of mine told me just the other day he forgot
> >to vote in one of the "elections" but someone kindly
> >sent in a ballot with his "signature"...
> >
>
>
> I sent in a contract to USCF with my signature on it and it ended up a
> different contract with a different signature.
>
> Richard Peterson
THIS I do believe.
Duncan Oxley
Phil Innes
to take outstanding issues with the United States Chess Federation to arbitration.
It would be useful if Mr. Klem could very simply itemise those issues which he
feels should be arbitrated. This seems to me to be an entirely reasonable way
to settle the dispute.
What could the objection be?
Phil Innes.
(PS, below I have snipped much, and make mostly personal replies to Mr. Klem.)
> I'm not sure if we could ever put the genie back into the bottle. For
> example, yesterday, I received a mailing from Stan Vaughan announcing that
> the Nevada State Chess Association, Inc board had voted to leave the USCF
> altogether. Not a very positive prospect for a settlement. I fought for four
> years to keep NSCA, Inc alive, and now it appears that they have voluntarily
> committed suicide. Ich.
Would they also agree to (1) itemising contentious issues (2) agree to binding
arbitration ?
----
> So here we sit. 1,714 fine dues paying, card carrying, rated chess playing
> members of the USCF flushed down the toilet. Under 100 left. I have tried to
> help restart things here by providing technical support (databases,
> tournament expertise and the like) to several local TD's here, but turnout
> has so far been very light. Without the feeder system that Stan Vaughan (or
> someone like him) can provide through contact with the public in the school
> system and the public libraries, Chess will continue to be of negligible
> effect in the Silver State. I'm quite sure that this makes New Windsor happy
> and proud, to be sure. They aren't interested in Chess in the Silver State,
> only their grandiose plans for hob-nobbing with the rich and famous, and
> whatever new plot they can foist on the people of Nevada. Oh, and by the
> way, some of them are rubbing their palms with glee.
I am neither rich or famous Tom. But I can tell you without the slightest
doubt or equivocation that powerful agencies in chess are not looking for
groupies, but for competent partners. You should really assess how healthy
chess is in America and "by their fruits, know them."
I think that in responding to my initial note that you made a move that can
heal a rift. I congratulate you for considering such dry old stuff when you
obviously feel strongly about it all, and right or wrong, have suffered
through it.
We have a saying in Scotland about this (but fortunately I have forgotton it)
I'm off to Cambridge Springs for a few days with a special camera that can
capture the amateur thrill that went around the world to millions some time
ago, sped by the spirit of Frank Marshall.
Phil Innes
Whaines277
Just askin', because I know you need to be members of an organization when you
file "ethics" protests.
>> Sir: let's try it all again. This time in public. Let's get the
>>complaint formulated here on rgcp; lets publicly dispatch notice of it
>>to Ethics Committee chairman Andrew Thall; let's both e-mail and send a
>>hard copy to Ernie Schlich at the USCF; and let's make repeated public
>>inquiries on this forum as to the process of the consideration.
>>
>
>I agree. I will begin at once to formulate the charges into a proper format
>for the first draft.
>
>Tom Klem
W C (Bill) Haines
StanA2
>about the Nevada situation.
And maybe you think you know more
than you do?
You have a big mouth, but I don't see
you present any facts.
Tom Klem
Wickdeer wrote in message <19990630152703...@ng-ck1.aol.com>...
>>Subject: Re: Jarecki's Response To Parr
>>From: "Tom Klem" <the...@lvcm.com>
>>Date: Wed, 30 June 1999 11:15 AM EDT
>>Message-id: <93075551...@news.remarQ.com>
>>
>>
>>Larry Parr wrote:
>>> OPEN MESSAGE TO TOM KLEM
>>>
>>> Mr. Klem: You state that am ethics complaint lodged against Carol
>>>Jarecki in the lamentable affair of Jordan Butler and her abusive
>>>behavior toward the boy received no response from the Ethics Committee.
>>>
>>>complaint formulated here on rgcp; lets publicly dispatch notice of it
>>>to Ethics Committee chairman Andrew Thall; let's both e-mail and send a
>>>hard copy to Ernie Schlich at the USCF; and let's make repeated public
>>>inquiries on this forum as to the process of the consideration.
>>>
>>
>>I agree. I will begin at once to formulate the charges into a proper
format
>>for the first draft.
>>
>>Tom Klem
>>
>
>The USCF higher ups, in an effort to rebuild sagging adult membership, have
>been engaging in sleezy behavior to lure former members back into the fold
so
>they can file ethics complaints.
>
>Hey, it seems to be working with Mr. Parr and Mr. Klem.
>
>Wick Deer
>Tongue firmly in cheek.
ROTFL!!
Tom Klem
dox...@usa.net wrote:
>Tom,
>I respect everybodys right to their own opinion.
>
>However, I am wondering if you really believe
>some of the things you are saying??
>
>about the Nevada situation.
>
>
Would you care to share that knowledge with the rest of us, or should we
wait with baited breath?
Tom Klem
dox...@usa.net
the whole mess than I ever will.
dox...@usa.net
sta...@aol.com (StanA2) wrote:
> >I know a little bit more than you think
> >about the Nevada situation.
>
> than you do?
>
> You have a big mouth, but I don't see
> you present any facts.
>
DAVEROOK
claiming that Carol Jarecki did with this Butler kid-I have not a clue. Did I
miss a prior poste or an article somewhere. Fill me in I am sure I am not the
only one who is not getting this story?
Dave Spigel
Tom Klem
enclosed quoted letter at the bottom of this note) occurred here in Las
Vegas. Apparently (from the discovery process records), Robert Ferguson (and
possibly others), sent Ms Jarecki, Arbiter Internationale on a secret
mission. Known only to her and her covert sponsors, her mission was to
collect 'dirt' on one individual named Stan Vaughan, a chess promoter here
in Las Vegas.
The mission of Ms Jarecki was to spend a week in Las Vegas, interviewing
former students of Stan Vaughan to find out what could be learned that would
prove the truth of Ms Jarecki and Dan Conver's assertions that Stan was an
evil, ratings manipulator.
In the pursuit of this goal, deception was planned and executed on the
unsuspecting children and parents of those children, and the letter which I
will quote for you here today, is right out of the case files. If memory
serves me correct, I received this letter at my home.
I had heard of this incident in great detail before receiving the letter.
The parents of the nine year old boy who Ms Jarecki harrassed for two hours
of a Wednesday afternoon, were at first outraged. They later were calmed
down, in my opinion, by the passage of time, and the assurance by myself and
others that steps were being taken to correct the grievous wrongs being
foisted upon the children and local chess populace through the efforts of
the USCF.
Some of the things which were related to me personally, were not put in the
letter and I will not repeat them here, except to say, they are almost as
horrible as you can imagine, and it is my belief that Kathy understated the
facts in order to avoid embarrassment to the young lad.
It gives me no pleasure to relate these things to you, or to publish any of
the accounts of the filth which exists in the USCF, but unfortunately, La
Caissa Nostra still rides the range, with your money. The damage these
people have done, should never be forgotten, and believe me, as long as I
draw breath, I won't.
Letter sent to NSCA, Inc Board by the boy's mother
"Wednesday afternoon Carol Jarenski called me. She said she was working with
the Chess Federation and I might have seen her at the Nationals in Little
Rock. She asked WI knew who she was, I said "no" and I really didn't catch
her name. She said she was in town for a few days and since she was here she
thought she might interview Jordan. I asked what the interview was for and
she
said she wanted to ask Jordan a few questions and interview him for Chess
Mates magazine. I was under the impression she was going to write an article
about him and submit it to the magazine and maybe they would publish it.
So I said sure and gave her directions to my house.
"When she came on Thursday, January 4th, Jordan was very excited to be
interviewed. We first talked about Las Vegas and how it had grown and she
told
us about tournaments she had been the official at, and she told us she was
good friends with Pandolfini and other big names in chess. Then she asked
Jordan how long we had lived in Henderson and what schools Jordan had
attended. She wanted to know exactly when Jordan attended those schools and
why he switched schools. At this point she told us Jordan was not allowed to
play chess for Fong Elementary School. I explained how Jordan's school,
Bartlett Elementary, does not have a chess team, and the Principal at Fong
gave Jordan a zone variance for sports to allow him to play with their very
active chess team. This is a common thing to do in the Clark County School
District since many schools have certain activities that other schools
don't.
She said unless Jordan physically took classes at the building he couldn't
play with their team. I told her he physically went there every Wednesday
for
chess. She said he couldn't be on their team.
"She asked how Jordan got started in chess, and if my husband and I are
members of the Chess Federation. I told her no. When we mentioned that
Jordan
took lessons from Stan Vaughn she asked what we thought of him as a coach. I
said I thought he was single-handedly responsible for scholastic chess in
Clark County and that he was great. She asked which schools he taught at. I
said Fong, Cimarron High School, and I thought the Meadows school and a
middle
school, and that he volunteered all his time. She asked how much do lessons
go
for in Las Vegas. I said we paid $10.00 an hour. She asked what Stan does
for
a living and she said `Does anybody really know?" I said he was a writer.
She
said "He makes enough to support himself?" I said "Apparently." At this
point
we still thought this was an interview about Jordan.
"She said "Let's talk about your tournament history. Where do you usually
play?" We said he played every Saturday at various libraries around town.
She
wanted to know exactly where. She said "How do you know you are playing in a
rated game?" We said we just assumed the games were rated. She brought out
some computer generated cross tables of a tournament Jordan played in last
June 29th. She asked him do you remember playing this person and that
person,
and did you see this person play this other person and who won. Where was
this
tournament played? Jordan couldn't remember much about it.
"We mentioned that Jordan beat his first expert the Saturday before and she
wanted to know where that was played and against whom. She wanted to see
Jordan's notation book but he didn't take notation of that game. She looked
up
his opponent in the rating list and checked out his rating.
"At this point she had been at our house for an hour and a half and I left
the
room to attend to my other children for about 15 minutes. When I returned
she
had three papers with typed questions that she had asked Jordan while I was
gone and she had filled in the answers. She encouraged me to look over the
papers and she wanted Jordan and I to sign each page to confirm the answers
were correct.
"Here are some of the questions:
. Have you ever played in a rated game with Stan Vaughn?
. Have you ever played in a rated game with Glenda Vaughn? Have you
ever seen her play?
. Have you ever played in a rated game with Rose Bolten? Have you
ever seen her play?
. Have you ever played in a rated game with Steve Early?
. Have you ever played in a rated game with Lucas de la Cruz? (and
one other name I can't think of)
. Where are Stan Vaughn's tournaments usually held?
. How much does he charge for the tournaments?
. What is the time control?
. Do you ever play in tournaments at Stan Vaughn's house?
. How do you know you are playing in a rated game?
. Has Stan Vaughn ever put together a tournament to increase you
rating to get on the All American Team? Did he say that was
what the tournament was for?
. What is your current rating?
. Have you ever played Snapper McGoughy?
. Do you always play in the adult section?
. Can I borrow your notation book and send it back to you in a few
days?
"I pointed out that I didn't think Jordan could remember every person he has
ever played and I refused to sign and I wouldn't let Jordan sign it either.
Then she left.
"I felt very bad for my son who was expecting to be interviewed for a
magazine
and is a smart enough kid to realize that he was being questioned about his
coach, a man he has respect and affection for. Jordan plays in tournaments
every Saturday, every Wednesday he plays at Fong Elementary, and twice a
month
he goes to the Las Vegas Chess Club. He also plays in many other tournaments
locally and out of state. He has played in many, many tournaments since June
1995, and its unreasonable to expect him to remember every opponents name.
"Since I am not familiar with the regulations of the Chess Federation, and I
am not familiar with the names of the officials, I had no idea if this was
some kind of an official visit or not. My son wants to continue playing
chess
so we cooperated and answered her questions honestly. I don't know if
anything
we said was damaging to Stan Vaughn. I do know that coming to my house under
the false pretense of writing a magazine article is a despicable thing to do
to a nine-year-old boy.
"Katherine Butler"
DAVEROOK wrote in message <19990713182758...@ng-fk1.aol.com>...
Phil Innes
(see long post 3:04 14 July 1999)
1) What is the current situation between Nevada and USCF?
I understand that there was a recent court ruling, but do not know the extent
of the ruling and who may talk about it.
2) Is it known who initiated the USCF investigation of Mr. Vaughn and are its
instructions available as a public document? Otherwise I feel that Mr Klem has
made several statements which have gone unanswered, but which seem worthy of
an answer.
It IS the duty of chess officials to investigate and rule on players and
ratings - and as I understand it, Carol Jarecki made a correct call on the
school attendance issue. She is a referree - she determines the case, applies
the rules, makes the call.
This is not to say that this rule is a good one, and it must seem harsh to our
young chess player.
I understand Mr. Klem to have a valid point in reporting his story if the
child, and parent of the child, were *deliberately* misled.
May I assume, at least, that the investigation was initiated by a board
member, or known to board members? Who was this?
3) Regardless of the status as resolved in a court in Nevada:USCF my
understanding is that there are still 1,600 (from 1,700) "divorced" chess
players in Nevada, including much of the State's chess management. Mr. Klem in
a previous exchange seemed willing to identify items that could be arbitrated
with USCF - has their been any response from USCF - any further ideas on arbitration?
hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu
: Tom Klem wrote:
: (see long post 3:04 14 July 1999)
: 1) What is the current situation between Nevada and USCF?
: I understand that there was a recent court ruling, but do not know the extent
: of the ruling and who may talk about it.
: 2) Is it known who initiated the USCF investigation of Mr. Vaughn and are its
: instructions available as a public document? Otherwise I feel that Mr Klem has
: made several statements which have gone unanswered, but which seem worthy of
: an answer.
: It IS the duty of chess officials to investigate and rule on players and
: ratings - and as I understand it, Carol Jarecki made a correct call on the
: school attendance issue. She is a referree - she determines the case, applies
: the rules, makes the call.
: This is not to say that this rule is a good one, and it must seem harsh to our
: young chess player.
Generally, the _school board_ decides who can play what where, when the
underlying entity is a public school. IE if a school doesn't have a debate
team, the school board will often allow a student to participate on the
debate team of another school, if that school has one. This is not uncommon
at all, and is a matter of school-board policy.
I'm not sure that the USCF ought to have the ability to say "you are not
allowed to play on the team for this school." when the school-board is
generally given that right by law. Perhaps USCF might adopt a policy
to do this, but I would suspect that they would instantly see participation
drop quite a bit in school districts where this is board policy.
: I understand Mr. Klem to have a valid point in reporting his story if the
: child, and parent of the child, were *deliberately* misled.
: May I assume, at least, that the investigation was initiated by a board
: member, or known to board members? Who was this?
: 3) Regardless of the status as resolved in a court in Nevada:USCF my
: understanding is that there are still 1,600 (from 1,700) "divorced" chess
: players in Nevada, including much of the State's chess management. Mr. Klem in
: a previous exchange seemed willing to identify items that could be arbitrated
: with USCF - has their been any response from USCF - any further ideas on arbitration?
My only concern would be the 'high-handed' approach taken in the school
issue above. If a school board gives a kid permission to do something,
it seems somewhat inappropriate for the USCF to say "sorry, no can do."
IE what would be the reasoning to deny this kid participation? Isn't
participation what the USCF is all about? Or am I missing something.
--
Robert Hyatt Computer and Information Sciences
hy...@cis.uab.edu University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213 115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station
(205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
Sam Sloan
in 1995 and 1996, or 3-4 years ago.
This matter was made an issue in the 1997 election campaign, during
which Vaughan and Klem distributed Zugzwang magazine which contained a
copy of the subject letter to all USCF voting members.
After declaring that he had the election virtually sewed up, the
Vaughan candidate only received 7 votes.
This matter was also extensively litigated in the courts. Estimates
vary but all parties agree that the USCF spent between $20,000 and
$100,000 fighting the Vaughan litigation through the courts.
The litigation was finally concluded last year and now Vaughan faces
contempt and imprisonment if he repeats his past misdeeds.
I have received private e-mail which indicates that Vaughan also
engaged in the manipulation of the ratings of children as a way to
artificially inflate his own rating in Florida years before he first
moved to Nevada.
At this late date, any suggestion that there be "arbitration" of this
matter is rediculous.
Sam Sloan
On Wed, 14 Jul 1999 16:23:20 -0400, Phil Innes <in...@sover.net>
wrote:
>Tom Klem wrote:
>(see long post 3:04 14 July 1999)
>
>1) What is the current situation between Nevada and USCF?
>
>I understand that there was a recent court ruling, but do not know the extent
>of the ruling and who may talk about it.
>
>2) Is it known who initiated the USCF investigation of Mr. Vaughn and are its
>instructions available as a public document? Otherwise I feel that Mr Klem has
>made several statements which have gone unanswered, but which seem worthy of
>an answer.
>
>It IS the duty of chess officials to investigate and rule on players and
>ratings - and as I understand it, Carol Jarecki made a correct call on the
>school attendance issue. She is a referree - she determines the case, applies
>the rules, makes the call.
>
>This is not to say that this rule is a good one, and it must seem harsh to our
>young chess player.
>
Tom Klem
>in 1995 and 1996, or 3-4 years ago.
>
>This matter was made an issue in the 1997 election campaign, during
>which Vaughan and Klem distributed Zugzwang magazine which contained a
>copy of the subject letter to all USCF voting members.
>
>After declaring that he had the election virtually sewed up, the
>Vaughan candidate only received 7 votes.
>
>This matter was also extensively litigated in the courts. Estimates
>vary but all parties agree that the USCF spent between $20,000 and
>$100,000 fighting the Vaughan litigation through the courts.
>
>The litigation was finally concluded last year and now Vaughan faces
>contempt and imprisonment if he repeats his past misdeeds.
>
>I have received private e-mail which indicates that Vaughan also
>engaged in the manipulation of the ratings of children as a way to
>artificially inflate his own rating in Florida years before he first
>moved to Nevada.
>
>At this late date, any suggestion that there be "arbitration" of this
>matter is rediculous.
>
>Sam Sloan
>
Phil Innes
> I'm not sure that the USCF ought to have the ability to say "you are not
> allowed to play on the team for this school." when the school-board is
> generally given that right by law. Perhaps USCF might adopt a policy
> to do this, but I would suspect that they would instantly see participation
> drop quite a bit in school districts where this is board policy.
Yes - I can understand that the rule was created to stop players from kiting
around and being in a team-of-convenience. But this is harsh on this young
player, who can't play on any team! And is some sort of prodigy(?)
(((snips)))
>
> IE what would be the reasoning to deny this kid participation? Isn't
> participation what the USCF is all about? Or am I missing something.
Also.
Sam Sloan
general these are open Swiss events and all kids get to play. Nobody
is excluded, but if at least four kids are from the same school they
are counted as a team.
The local school board would have nothing to say about this because
these child players are traveling to national events.
It would clearly be unfair to have four kids from four different
schools be allowed to compete as a team against players from just one
school.
An issue has been raised concerning home schooling: At one time,
children who were being home schooled could not compete as a team for
the obvious reason that if this were allowed a team of four
grandmaster kids who did not even know each other and were not even
from the same state could compete as a team against kids who were all
really from the same school.
Carol Jarecki's ruling was undoubtedly correct that if Jordan Butler
did not attend the Meadows' School for classes, he could not play as a
member of the Meadows' School chess team.
Coincidentally, the Meadows' School is the school of Patrick Hummel,
the one and only Nevada kid who ever really made master.
http://www.64.com/cgi-bin/ratings.pl/USCF/12620977
Patrick Hummel's USCF rating is now 2455 and he is only 14. Yet, Stan
Vaughan banned kids from the Meadows School, including Patrick Hummel,
from competing in chess events. This was one of the reasons why the
tournament director certifications of Stan Vaughan and Tom Klem were
stripped.
Sam Sloan
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 06:49:21 -0400, Phil Innes <in...@sover.net>
wrote:
>(((snips)))
hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu
: (((snips)))
:> I'm not sure that the USCF ought to have the ability to say "you are not
:> allowed to play on the team for this school." when the school-board is
:> generally given that right by law. Perhaps USCF might adopt a policy
:> to do this, but I would suspect that they would instantly see participation
:> drop quite a bit in school districts where this is board policy.
: Yes - I can understand that the rule was created to stop players from kiting
: around and being in a team-of-convenience. But this is harsh on this young
: player, who can't play on any team! And is some sort of prodigy(?)
Note that local school boards do _not_ take this action "lightly". IE
the have been many cases of abuse, to the point that every such case is
generally looked at through a microscope.
IE in the South, football is king. And you can imagine what would happen
if this isn't controlled... All the good players would migrate to the
school with the best players/coach, to better their chances of college
scholarships due to better visibility.
It simply seems to me that local school-board issues are local school-
board issues, not something for USCF to dive into. And _particularly_
it seems bad to drive off a potential member after he has been granted
the legal right to play at a school by the local board.
Want to bet this kid turns into a big ICC supporter?
:
: (((snips)))
Tom Klem
Sam Sloan wrote:
>I do not know the specifics of this case,
(snip)
Finally a glimmer of truth. Sam doesn't know the specifics of the case. God.
>Carol Jarecki's ruling was undoubtedly correct that if Jordan Butler
>did not attend the Meadows' School for classes, he could not play as a
>member of the Meadows' School chess team.
>
Duh, Sam, ya done it again. Jordan could care less about the Meadow's
school. He was getting a zone variance for the Championship Fong Elementary
Team. A team that Hunter College feared so much, their powerful allies made
common cause with Stan Vaughan's enemies to destroy them.
Also, the Meadows School is not part of the Clark County School System at
all. It is a private, highly regarded and accredited school system. All the
more tragic that they were duped by Dan Conver into sandbagging and lowering
ratings without the USCF ratings' committee's approval. The politicians,
once again, took it on themselves to 'monkey' with the ratings.
>Coincidentally, the Meadows' School is the school of Patrick Hummel,
>the one and only Nevada kid who ever really made master.
>
There would have been alot more if you bozos had let Vaughan achieve his
dream. Estimates of 5,000 members of the Nevada State Chess Association,
Inc, are NOT out of line for the results which we were getting before Dan
Conver, Allen P Magruder, Carol Jarecki, Robert Ferguson, Ken Horne, and a
whole host of other USCF Bigots got nervous. Nervous about the politics and
nervous about the results.
>http://www.64.com/cgi-bin/ratings.pl/USCF/12620977
>
>Patrick Hummel's USCF rating is now 2455 and he is only 14. Yet, Stan
>Vaughan banned kids from the Meadows School, including Patrick Hummel,
>from competing in chess events. This was one of the reasons why the
>tournament director certifications of Stan Vaughan and Tom Klem were
>stripped.
>
You keep telling the lie, don't you Sam. You are a real piece of work. The
children were not banned. The coach and the team were banned from playing in
NSCA, Inc events as a team because of the sandbagging scandal. Get it Sam?
Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get
it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it
Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam?
Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get
it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it
Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam?
Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get
it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it
Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam?
Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get
it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it Sam? Get it
Sam? Get it Sam?
If Sam Sloan gets even one vote, I would seriously question the competence
of that voter. Of course, there may be a sympathy vote for him, because he
really is pathetic.
Tom Klem
"All I ever wanted was a nice game of Chess, and an HONEST election!"
Eric Schiller
riddled with inaccuracies and he has so little grasp of the facts of
the situations that it is a meaningless gesture. But this latest post
is such a good illustration of Sloan's
"I-don't-know-the-facts-but-I'll-just-make-them-up" policy that it
should serve as good notice of what can be expected from him.
Contrary to his post:
1. Phillip Wang is a Nevada master, over 2300. He is playing in the US
Cadet next week. He is #4 on the Age 15-16 list.
2. It has been a long-standing practice in the Pan Am Intercollegiate
to allow teams to filled out by additional players. At least it was in
the 70s and 80s, when I played regularly. I believe the combined
teams, created to offer opportunities for schools with few
chessplayers to compete, were not eligible for prizes. Harold Winston
or Tim Redman would know.
Not only are we treated to Sam's misrepresentations on the newsgroup,
but, despite repeated requests from many people, he will not remove a
name from his mailing list. He sends me three copies of most of his
crap. Sam doesn't know how to use the Internet, though he considers it
a requirement for the policy board.
Once, Sam was a decent chess journalist, now he is just blowing hot
air. Pity.
Remember, Sam never checks any of his facts, no matter how easy this
might be, and reading his posts is definitely a caveat emptor
situation!
I'm sorry that I felt a need to crosspost. Sloan won't keep his sludge
confined to rgcp. The best way to avoid seeing his posts all over the
place is to add his address to your kill file for all groups but rgcp,
assuming you want to read what he posts here.
Eric Schiller
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 12:13:57 GMT, sl...@ishipress.com (Sam Sloan)
wrote:
>I do not know the specifics of this case, but I believe that in
>general these are open Swiss events and all kids get to play. Nobody
>is excluded, but if at least four kids are from the same school they
>are counted as a team.
>
>The local school board would have nothing to say about this because
>these child players are traveling to national events.
>
>It would clearly be unfair to have four kids from four different
>schools be allowed to compete as a team against players from just one
>school.
>
>An issue has been raised concerning home schooling: At one time,
>children who were being home schooled could not compete as a team for
>the obvious reason that if this were allowed a team of four
>grandmaster kids who did not even know each other and were not even
>from the same state could compete as a team against kids who were all
>really from the same school.
>
>Carol Jarecki's ruling was undoubtedly correct that if Jordan Butler
>did not attend the Meadows' School for classes, he could not play as a
>member of the Meadows' School chess team.
>
>Coincidentally, the Meadows' School is the school of Patrick Hummel,
>the one and only Nevada kid who ever really made master.
>
>http://www.64.com/cgi-bin/ratings.pl/USCF/12620977
>
>Patrick Hummel's USCF rating is now 2455 and he is only 14. Yet, Stan
>Vaughan banned kids from the Meadows School, including Patrick Hummel,
>from competing in chess events. This was one of the reasons why the
>tournament director certifications of Stan Vaughan and Tom Klem were
>stripped.
>
>Sam Sloan
>
>On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 06:49:21 -0400, Phil Innes <in...@sover.net>
>wrote:
>
>>(((snips)))
>>> I'm not sure that the USCF ought to have the ability to say "you are not
>>> allowed to play on the team for this school." when the school-board is
>>> generally given that right by law. Perhaps USCF might adopt a policy
>>> to do this, but I would suspect that they would instantly see participation
>>> drop quite a bit in school districts where this is board policy.
>>
>>Yes - I can understand that the rule was created to stop players from kiting
>>around and being in a team-of-convenience. But this is harsh on this young
>>player, who can't play on any team! And is some sort of prodigy(?)
>>
Chesspride
>to allow teams to filled out by additional players. At least it was in
>the 70s and 80s, when I played regularly.
Mr. Schiller....
Maybe so...but for the last 10 (?) yrs....for the Pan Am....all players had to
be matriculating students at the same college. No extra persons....who are not
attending the college...can count toward a particular "team's" standing.
Plus....the debate here was about K-12 students.
The same goes for "team status" at the National Scholastics...
Individuals may play...but for their results to count against "team standings"
they must be attending the school in question.
Eric C. Johnson
Adamski
<nos...@chessworks.com> writes
>I don't usually bother replying to Sloan's posts because they are so
>riddled with inaccuracies and he has so little grasp of the facts of
>the situations that it is a meaningless gesture.
> Remember, Sam never checks any of his facts, no matter how easy this
JGraham
>
> >2. It has been a long-standing practice in the Pan Am Intercollegiate
> >to allow teams to filled out by additional players. At least it was in
> >the 70s and 80s, when I played regularly.
>
> Mr. Schiller....
>
> Maybe so...but for the last 10 (?) yrs....for the Pan Am....all players had to
> be matriculating students at the same college. No extra persons....who are not
> attending the college...can count toward a particular "team's" standing.
Eric Johnson is correct. It is not really correct to say that everyone
did it then and everyone does it now. It is against the rules in chess
as it is in every intercollegiate sport, and it is very unfair to
teams who choose to follow the rules.
Jerry
Phil Innes
>
> Sam Sloan wrote:
> >I do not know the specifics of this case,
>
>
> Finally a glimmer of truth. Sam doesn't know the specifics of the case. God.
>
Why is it Tom, that there is no other response to your questions but from the
litigous Sam Sloan? Why does Sam even write "when he knows not..." since I am
reasonably sure that it is not for the purpose of discovering anything.
I think that you defend your friend against what you conceive to be a callous
disrerard of justice. The rest of us can only wonder what the situation is,
since there is no coherent retort. I applaud your attempt to speak to the
issue without resort to abuse.
For the time you must content yourself with philosophy - it builds character -
such oppression.
You have said your piece - is there no will elsewhere to mend the rift - to
offer an explanation? On the face of it, I must think that Mr. Klem is the
abused party, and the party indifferent, and indifferently honest.
Phil Innes
Sam Sloan
1996. I was greatly impressed with him, especialy since he is almost
completely self-taught. Our game was a draw.
I promised to write an article about him and he even gave me an
annotated game of his, but I just never got around to writing it.
I still have the game. It is on my desk here somewhere.
However, although it is true that he lives in Nevada, he was not in
any way connected with Stan Vaughan. Obviously, I should have said
that Patrick Hummel is the only Las Vegas kid ever to have really made
master. Philip Xiao Wang lives in Reno.
As to Eric's complaint that I sent him a letter three times today,
again, this does not refer to my list but to the DDillinger list which
was created by Mr. Dillinger and not by me.
I was not aware that collegiate teams were allowed to include players
from other schools. If that is true, then my 1963 team of the
University of California at Berkeley really did win the US
Intercollegiate Championship in spite of the fact that Tom Dorsch was
not really a student there.
Sam Sloan
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 17:17:36 GMT, nos...@chessworks.com (Eric
Schiller) wrote:
>I don't usually bother replying to Sloan's posts because they are so
>riddled with inaccuracies and he has so little grasp of the facts of
>the situations that it is a meaningless gesture. But this latest post
>is such a good illustration of Sloan's
>"I-don't-know-the-facts-but-I'll-just-make-them-up" policy that it
>should serve as good notice of what can be expected from him.
>
>Contrary to his post:
>
>1. Phillip Wang is a Nevada master, over 2300. He is playing in the US
>Cadet next week. He is #4 on the Age 15-16 list.
>
>2. It has been a long-standing practice in the Pan Am Intercollegiate
>to allow teams to filled out by additional players. At least it was in
>the 70s and 80s, when I played regularly. I believe the combined
>teams, created to offer opportunities for schools with few
>chessplayers to compete, were not eligible for prizes. Harold Winston
>or Tim Redman would know.
>
>Not only are we treated to Sam's misrepresentations on the newsgroup,
>but, despite repeated requests from many people, he will not remove a
>name from his mailing list. He sends me three copies of most of his
>crap. Sam doesn't know how to use the Internet, though he considers it
>a requirement for the policy board.
>
>Once, Sam was a decent chess journalist, now he is just blowing hot
>air. Pity.
>
>Remember, Sam never checks any of his facts, no matter how easy this
>might be, and reading his posts is definitely a caveat emptor
>situation!
>
>I'm sorry that I felt a need to crosspost. Sloan won't keep his sludge
>confined to rgcp. The best way to avoid seeing his posts all over the
>place is to add his address to your kill file for all groups but rgcp,
>assuming you want to read what he posts here.
>
>Eric Schiller
>On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 12:13:57 GMT, sl...@ishipress.com (Sam Sloan)
>wrote:
>
Tom Klem
Sam Sloan wrote:
(snipperage---tip of the hat to the ol' professor :)
>
>However, although it is true that he lives in Nevada, he was not in
>any way connected with Stan Vaughan. Obviously, I should have said
>that Patrick Hummel is the only Las Vegas kid ever to have really made
>master. Philip Xiao Wang lives in Reno.
>
[very loud buzzer]
Wrong again, Sam 'Shamema tell em what I feel' Sloan.
Philip played on Stan Vaughan's Nevada All Stars (about 30 kids) 1996 All
America Cup team from Nevada. I know, because I picked the young lad up at
the airport in Arizona.
By the way, the USCF harangued Philip to try and attempt to force him from
the team. They called him night after night to try to 'persuade' him.
What is it with you USCF scum?
To Philip's great credit, he kept his word and played for the Nevada team
placing in the top ranks of the tourney.
Disregards to Sam (I know he won't even pay attention anyway)
Regards to the rest,
Tom Klem
Sam Sloan
Stan Vaughan and Tom Klem to take credit for Patrick. They are among
the most vocal critics of Stan Vaughan.
Sam Sloan
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 20:46:36 -0700, "Tom Klem" <the...@lvcm.com>
wrote:
>
>Sam Sloan wrote:
>
>(snipperage---tip of the hat to the ol' professor :)
>
>>
>>However, although it is true that he lives in Nevada, he was not in
>>any way connected with Stan Vaughan. Obviously, I should have said
>>that Patrick Hummel is the only Las Vegas kid ever to have really made
>>master. Philip Xiao Wang lives in Reno.
>>
>
>
Tom Klem
Sam Sloan wrote:
>The Patrick Hummel family deeply resents the persistent efforts of
>Stan Vaughan and Tom Klem to take credit for Patrick. They are among
>the most vocal critics of Stan Vaughan.
>
Yeh, they're really not the most gracious or grateful people I've ever heard
about (according to you Sam). Wonder why that is?
Tom Klem
Tom Klem
Phil Innes wrote:
>Tom Klem wrote:
>>
>> >I do not know the specifics of this case,
>>
>>
>> Finally a glimmer of truth. Sam doesn't know the specifics of the case.
God.
>>
>
>Why is it Tom, that there is no other response to your questions but from
the
>litigous Sam Sloan? Why does Sam even write "when he knows not..." since I
am
>reasonably sure that it is not for the purpose of discovering anything.
>
I assume that since I'm telling the truth, there is really very little they
could do by answering. In the psychology of politics, to ignore an opponent,
marginalizes that opponent. "Must not be too important, nobodies getting
excited"
As far as Sam goes, he is a fan of Bill Goichberg. Plain and simple. Bill
Goichberg is the jerk that really has the most to gain by keeping Nevada in
the stone age (of membership levels). If there are no valid USCF members
here, then there is no danger of a competing tournament springing up within
six months (either side) of one of his. The whole idea is ridiculous, I
know, because none of us ever intended on blocking Goichberg or competing
with him in any way. We were all extremely happy with the tournaments
themselves, the large number of skittles rooms (before the poker playing
fools invaded), etc, and the chance to rub elbows with people from lots of
other places. I guess Bill's paranoia was fueled by Magruder, whose
despicable politics of hatred, bigotry and jealousy are the real cause of
the problems in this State. Magruder is truly a man who knows how to do
nothing. The only thing he is good at possibly, might be licking boots.
>I think that you defend your friend against what you conceive to be a
callous
>disrerard of justice. The rest of us can only wonder what the situation is,
>since there is no coherent retort. I applaud your attempt to speak to the
>issue without resort to abuse.
>
The main point is not Stan Vaughan, although it would be easy to get that
impression. Nevada should be a smoldering example of why the USCF must adopt
OMOV or die. Had OMOV been in place when Magruder decided not to have
elections for six years, the outcome of the pro-Goichberg forces in the
federation would have been very different. Had the players had the vote and
the power to remove those who frustrated them at the national level, the
politicians would have thought twice about backing someone who never held an
election in six years, and who had hundreds of opposers (very small
percentage of whom were children) in the state. When the politicians have to
count noses, they very quickly realise, it's in their best interest to do
what is best for the membership. Not behave in the shameful ways in which
they have.
It is true that in the beginning of this, I did try to clear Stan Vaughan's
name and reputation. When I first met him, and after I'd gotten to know him
for about a year, it struck me as a terrible waste of talent. First of all,
Stan's tournaments were always civil. Magruder/Conver's were often not. The
management style of Magruder/Conver was always confrontational, Vaughan was
always a consensus seeker, and mediator.
I watched lots of players scream and yell at each other at Conver's
tournaments, in fact he screamed and yelled at me when I asked him a
question about the 14h clock rules (which he really doesn't understand).
Totally different tournament experience at Vaughan's affairs.
>For the time you must content yourself with philosophy - it builds
character -
>such oppression.
>
"Sic semper tyrannus"
>You have said your piece - is there no will elsewhere to mend the rift - to
>offer an explanation? On the face of it, I must think that Mr. Klem is the
>abused party, and the party indifferent, and indifferently honest.
>
As long as the politicians know that they can control with 19 votes the
entire state of Nevada and use it as they wish, there will never be a
settlement here. Chess will continue to stagnate, people will be upset and
frustrated, and the USCF will fail---not only here, but elsewhere because of
their methods.
It has been my position that peaceful defiance might take a long time, but
in the end, will succeed because people eventually realize what has been
lost, what could have been gained, and why they should have helped/responded
to the problem in the first place.
Also, while my boycott of the federation has no way to be measured (IE: the
USCF will lie to pretend that it is having no effect), I have received
plenty of email and support from many players on the Internet regarding my
actions.
Really, OMOV is the only way to solve this. At the risk of sounding
repetitive, when the politicians know that they will be held accountable,
they will act very carefully indeed and afford everyone who needs it, due
process.
Just following the laws of the State of Nevada, and the bylaws, policies and
procedures of the Federation would have avoided the loss of 1,600 +/-
players. That is the point of the bylaws, isn't it? To provide a vibrant,
shining, ethically clean system of governance, where right is right and the
playing field, like the chess board, is level.
Tom Klem