2007 U.S. Chess Championship Brilliancy Prizes

Mig has reported on the winners of the fan-sponsored brilliancy prizes at his website. Third prize of $200 went to GM Gregory Kaidanov; second prize of $500 went to GM Alexander Shabalov (also the clear winner of the 2007 U.S. Chess Championship ("Men’s"); and the big first prize of $1,165 went to GM Julio Becerra. I confess, prior to this championship I hadn’t heard of Becerra but I’ll be paying attention from now on! You can read about the reasons determining the awards at Mig’s site. For those of you who weren’t following the story, Mig originally put up a challenge at his website – he staked up to $500 out of his own pocket and challenged chess fans to match the amount. Many fans rallied and contributed. A total of $1,855 was collected, including Mig’s $500. Mig said this in his May 26, 2007 post: Thanks to everyone who donated and participated. It went far beyond my expectations and might even make inroads into new sponsorship models (actually old ones, just online now) for chess in places like the US where it's not really considered a sport. Museums, concerts, and other cultural events across the US are supported by enthusiasts. Why not chess? In the old days there would be subscriptions taken up for everything from tournaments to medical bills for Grandmasters. More on this topic later. I am interested to see what "more on this topic later" means.

2007 U.S. Championship-8

Hola darlings! Well, it's over for 2007. GM Alexander Shabalov won the U.S. Championship ("Men's") with 7.0/9 by winning the last game (Round 9), 1/2 point clear of defending Champion Alexander Onischuk. The chess femmes didn't fare so well. Contrary to my expectations, IM Irinia Krush did not make 4.5 and thus, did not earn a spot in the Women's World Chess Championship zonal event for which the U.S. has three spots. Therefore, all three spots will now be determined in the upcoming 2007 Frank K. Berry U.S. Women's Chess Championship. Well well well! Does that mean that Krush will now play in the July Women's Championship? Stay tuned. Perhaps there is some other way for her to qualify for the zonal? I don't understand all this chessly stuff, that's for sure! My suspicion is that the powers that be keep this all deliberately obscure on purpose :) Here are the final standings for the chess femmes: (24) IM Irina Krush (2488), 4.0; (32) WFM Iryna Zenyuk (2229), 2.5; and (36) WFM Chouchanik Airapetian (2188), 1.5. And now, the Brilliancy Prize Fund that Mig raised over at Chess Ninja/Daily Dirt, over $1800, will be distributed in a manner I find somewhat strange (why aren't they equal?) - but hey, I only contributed $25, to winners to be determined by a combination of recommendations from the regulars who post there and two IMs who volunteered to help him out on the matter. The top brilliancy prize will be at least $1000.

We Don't Get No Respect

A comment made this morning over at Susan Polgar's blog caught my attention - Chessbase doesn't have any coverage on the U.S. Chess Championship. I checked it out this morning (8:54 a.m. CST) and - sure enough - nary a word. I then checked Chessdom, another website that is (I believe) run by Europeans and - no mention of the U.S. Chess Championship there, either. That's rather insulting. It's like the people who are running these "chess news websites" are saying to American chessplayers - you don't count, you're peanuts, you're pathetic and not worth the megapixels to report on you. But if they're "chess news websites," shouldn't they report on all the important chess news? Maybe they think we Americans are pathetic players not worthy of their exalted attention, but there are people out there who want to know whats going on in the U.S. Championship and they're not getting very current news from either the MonRoi website (the "official" website) or the USCF website. I'm reading Michael Aigner's blog (he's playing in the U.S. Championship) and Dylan McClain's New York Times blog. Susan Polgar is also reporting results and round match-ups seemingly before they're posted at the MonRoi site, lol! Good for her. Crowthers' The Week in Chess is reporting U.S. Championship results and updating on a daily basis. Thank goodness for the Brits! I report on all news that I can find on women chessplayers and women's chess and I don't care where the tournaments were held, what websites I find the information at or what newspaper the articles were published in. To the guys who are running Chessbase and Chessdom - isn't it about time you started treating American chessplayers and events with the same respect that I, a news operation run by me, me and only me, afford to all women players, whatever their country of origin? Geez!

2007 U.S. Championship-6

There's been a lot of interesting reading at Susan Polgar's blog and Mig's Daily Dirt blog lately. I read some things last night that explain a great deal with regard to certain posts I've read at both blogs, and need to clarify some statements I made in my prior entries here about the U.S. Chess Championships. First, Mig made it clear that AF4C did not "withdraw" from running (and getting sponsorship lined up for) the U.S. Chess Championships. The contract between AF4C and USCF had expired at the end of 2006; his statement was the first time I'd seen this explained. AF4C and USCF could not/did not reach a new agreement; this was in January, 2007. Second, Mig also made it clear that Eric Anderson (one of the founders of AF4C) had pledged to contribute $25,000 to USCF for the 2007 Championships, but before the contribution was paid the actions of a certain board member who posted on the USCF forum that AF4C was publishing pornography on its website (see comments in 2007 U.S. Chess Championship 2 and 5) led to Mr. Anderson reconsidering making a contribution to USCF while that certain person is on the Executive Board. No contribution has been made; therefore, the statements I made about the USCF and the $25,000 were incorrect. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The upcoming election for four seats on the USCF Executive Board is certainly fraught with drama. A few days ago Susan Polgar felt it necessary to impose moderator controls at her blog (frankly, I'm surprised she didn't do it much sooner - she has a much higher tolerance threshhold than I do, obviously). Then, she opened up a continuing topic about what's going on with the USCF and the upcoming election for Executive Board members. Reading some of the stuff posted there has been an education, to say the least. A lot of people post anonymously, which bothers me. I know it's silly to be bothered by such a thing since a person could call himself anything and make up ten different identities and post under all of them anyway, so why not just be anonymous? It could even be worse - I've seen one instance at Mig's blog where a poster was using a name made deliberately almost identical to the name used by a well-known chessplayer and making posts while "pretending" to be the well-known chessplayer. That's disgusting, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I've seen that kind of crap go on for years at the yahoo finance message boards, why should there be any less idiots on chess message boards? I don't know why I continue to be amazed at the level of venality that seems to exist in so many people (particularly on the internet), but I do continue to be amazed by it. Hmmm, I wonder what that says about me? Hopelessly naive? Hopelessly stupid? May the Chess Goddess smite all venal chessplayers (or venal people pretending to be chessplayers) who think they're being "terribly clevah" with the Chess Yips. One of the funniest things I read at Susan Polgar's blog this afternoon was a post done by "anonymous" stating that USCF should NOT moderate its forums, but if there must be a moderator the guidelines should be the least restrictive possible, because "Everybody who participates in that forum is a paid-up member of the USCF. It turns out that the ratio of social misfits and, worse, sociopaths is high amongst chessplayers, and therefore the forum is not very decorous." So, everyone knows that a lot of chessplayers are sociopaths (more sociopath chessplayers than sociopaths in the general population, I gather) and, therefore, why would anyone ever expect a chess forum to be conducted with decorum and civility? Ohmygoddess! I couldn't make this stuff up! I don't know how this election will turn out. My best guess is that the vast majority of USCF members who can vote in the election don't read the stuff at USCF forums or places like it and could give two hoots about chess politics, per se, but they do recognize Susan Polgar's name and will vote for her (and hopefully the slate of candidates she is backing) based on her standing in the game and her ability to get backing and prizes for scholastic tournaments. What could happen is that people vote for SP but not for her slate, and she ends up on the Board with people who have gone out of their way to try and ensure that she wouldn't get elected! Ohmygoddess!