| Invitational
Selection Committee Blunders? By NM Leland Fuerstman ---In the final round, Ardaman offered a quick draw to Shamilov in order to secure the Title and the cash!? Unfortunately for him, Shamilov refused the Draw, and to Ardaman's chagrin, went on to win!--- Recalling the Charlotte Chess Club's time honored credo, "kick em' when they're down," I feel compelled to dispute an obvious attempt to dispel the neglect and confusion which accompanied the recent 2013 North Carolina Invitational. As previously stated, there was absolutely no mention of the event on the NCCA website prior to it's conclusion? Of course, no explanation of invitation, images, personal information, games or other interesting anecdotes were shared on their website after the event, either? (I understand that the games are now posted on the past president's personal website; Why not the NCCA's website?; Hey, help em' out here!). It is difficult for some to understand how anyone should do anything other than apologize!? While traveling up the winding and bumpy road to mastery in 1984, there were two important tournaments in North Carolina which were very special to every strong player vying for a Title. The first was the North Carolina "Closed" Championship or "State Championship" and the second was the celebrated North Carolina Invitational! In 1984, I actually received an invitation "in the mail," notifying me that I had been invited to the most prestigious chess event of the year! I was elated!! (I actually went 2.5-.5 on day one defeating Expert Charles Alden, NM Leroy Taylor and Drawing SM Greg Samsa and lost 2 very close games on Sunday to Expert Bernard Schmidt in Rd:4 and NM Neal Harris in Rd:5 and narrowly missed winning the Title!?) From my recollection, (where is Robert Singletary when you need him?!) the criteria to participate included having played at least 24 games in at least 6 events which had been published in the "Carolina Gambit Magazine," which would be the NCCA website now. (that's only 2 games per month!) In addition, it was necessary to have lived in North Carolina and been a paid member in good standing for at least 6 months! (apparently, being a member of the NCCA is no longer a requirement?) When recently asked about the Invitational, CCC NM Pat Sciacca said, "what invitational." And, not too surprisingly, that was the identical response from NCCA President Rudy Abate?? Thank goodness, at the very last minute, the always altruistic ex-V.P. Dr. Walter High promptly volunteered to provide his home as the venue for the 4th year. However, I am told that he had nothing to do with selecting the players who participated. But, this is just where the problem begins. According to the bylaws, the Board of Directors and the President should have ahead of time decided upon the candidates who would be invited. During this meeting, the Secretary/Treasurer would naturally verify the invitee's membership status. Next, some "hand me down" "word of mouth" scheme which is not exactly specified in the Articles of Incorporation nor written anywhere else would be considered whereupon outright arbitrary decisions would be made to decide who would play!? -- This year's invitees included the past Invitational Champion, the State Champion and other "lower finishers" chosen from the State Championship tournament? Because the top finisher(s) chose not to participate, someone came up with the hair brain idea that they should dig one level deeper to players who finished just below the winners? (what if those players didn't want to play? ... should you dig even deeper and end up with a couple of 1700 players?) Then, the list of high rated players would kick in and the remaining candidates would be chosen from that. The idea to dig down into the next level of finishers in the state championship was ridiculous and should never have been implemented. However, according to LM CM, who went to great effort to explain things to everyone on the NCCA "Forum" in order to calm the troops, this false logic is the reason why the two lowest rated players were allowed to compete? As usual, in his zeal to come to their defense, he neglects to do proper research in order to verify his claim. Among other things, he forgot to include 16 year old upstart Expert Tianqi Wang (2172) from Charlotte, who finished =2nd-4th place in a tie with Peter Suich of Tennessee and, of all people, LM CM each with 4 points at the state championship!!? However, in FM CM's "Forum" post, I see no mention of an invitation having been extended to Mr. Wang nor of his refusal to accept it?! (It has since been reported that Wang was contacted, but declined the invitation?! Some speculate that if he had more than just a couple of days to consider his answer and prepare, he would more likely have agreed to participate in the most prestigious event of the year!) The annual "Invitational" is a sacred event designed to celebrate and show respect to the very best players in the state! Just being invited is an honor in of itself! Including an exceptional 16 year old like Expert Tianqi Wang would have provided for a very interesting event! To water it down by allowing the wrong player(s) to participate, conversely denying that right to a deserving player(s), is a double question mark?? However, this should in no way cast any aspersion upon Experts Shamilov and Timmel who promptly accepted their invitation without prejudice, nor the benevolent offerings and tireless work of Dr. Walter High! It is curious how the NCCA President has gone to such great lengths to promote his "all girls" event (G45, D5??) the very existence of which should be debated, and completely disregarded the most important event of the year; the Invitational. As has already been stated, one glaring technical problem was, SM Miles Ardaman was not even a member of the NCCA during the entire "chess season" nor was he a member when he was chosen to participate nor even after he received his check for tying for 1st Place?? In addition, NM Josh Mu was not listed as a member, either? Even the current by-laws relating to the "Invitational" refer to "members this and members that." Why the President didn't have the Sec/Treas. verify their membership credentials is unforgivable and negligent. But, worse, not formally inviting a properly vetted list of candidates violates proper protocol. A concise 2013 list of qualified invitees should have been published for all to see; regardless of whether they wished to participate, or not. Then, you can look for replacements. -- Such negligence waters down the value of the event and lends less credence to it's very purpose and existence. The Problem: In deference to NCCA officers whom some may have accused of not following the rules, the real problem is, the current rules are inadequate and unclear. The NCCA Articles of Incorporation was a hastily composed generic document which did not include specific bylaws describing the details of how each responsibility should be carried out. It desperately needs to be significantly revised or completely replaced. --- Regardless, it appears as if the President hasn't actually ever read it? All of his decisions are being made arbitrarily without the democratic discussion, recommendations or input of any other members or officers neither on the front page of their website nor their "Forum?" Years ago, we had physical meetings and spoke on the phone. Nowadays, even though they have a variety of the most sophisticated communication devices at their disposal, for some reason, no one seems to be documenting anything. By documenting, I mean posting the discussion of all business as well as all financial information on their website (which some people actually refer to as the "Gambit"? Such definitions need to be defined more clearly). The past few administrations have flatly refused to allow any member to observe the financial records of their so called non-profit organization. Since then, the organization seems to have morphed into nothing more than a private business controlled by the same "good old boys" who continue to enjoy the monetary rewards... The existence of the current administration is a result of a totally apathetic membership of whom 11 members out of 200+ showed up at the annual meeting to vote... accompanied by an attorney with a clipboard full of proxies to make sure that his slate of candidates won... well, you get what you deserve. I remain, NM Leland Fuerstman Charlotte Chess Club: 83 players strong!! |