Fair enough. I really think the easiest way to initially increase participation is to increase the number of sections. I also have a question about age brackets…are all of the 59 year olds perpetually in one bracket?
Sorry, but I’m not buying what you claim to be selling. I went to a couple of national sources for Development Directors of non-profits, and their counsel on what the job entails differs from yours, counselor. Funny - I guess they don’t know their own industry. Or maybe . . .
Reporting to and in partnership with the Executive Director (ED), the Development Director (Director) will spearhead development efforts as XYZ Nonprofit continues to grow. A new position in the organization, the Director will have the opportunity to build the development function.
Responsibilities
Develop and execute XYZ Nonprofit’s annual fundraising plan
Secure financial support from individuals, foundations and corporations
Manage the implementation of Raiser’s Edge and oversee staff responsible for data entry and gift processing
Develop and maintain ongoing relationships with major donors
Creating and executing a strategy for a large sustained base of annual individual donors
Overseeing organization of special events
Developing and tracking proposals and reports for all foundation and corporate fundraising
Having more than one section might be advisable to draw more entries. While some might like the idea of playing some legendary GM, many older players with class ratings would rather have a chance to score 50% or better in a section and have at least some chance to get a prize. In some previous formats, the GMs, who paid no EF, were playing for a stipend to go to the World Senior Championship along with the other prizes. A friend of mine who played in one of those events did not like being one of the bunnies to be bashed. He was very discouraged and told me he would not go back. A section for amateurs, more in tune for lower rated class players might draw better. For example, an U1800 or U1600 section.
I understand what he went through. Many older players do not have the nerves or stamina they once had. When they have to play really up in class, they do not find it very much fun to be blown off the board by a player who is still doing well in big tournaments. These older players are fine within a range, but crack up when forced to play up several classes. The type of open tournament that is OK for me as a NM is terrible for them as many of them are already on their floor ratings and have gravitated to playing only in class tournaments. Getting beaten up for three or four rounds out of six is not what they contemplate as a good time.
Unfortunately, because of the middling range of entries in past events, it is difficult to plan for a two section or multiple section event. The numbers do not justify going beyond one section. The tournament is a based on entries event with the prizes not fully guaranteed. That is not a factor in its favor either.
Veteran South Carolina Master Klaus Pohl, who has played in Senior Opens in both SC and GA, once told a friend of mine something to the effect that we should have an open section for senior events because “at this age anyone can beat anyone”. Now if the number of players dictates otherwise, that’s a good problem to have, but I’m inclined to agree with him.
Roles and responsibilities, Brian - explain where your claims for responsibilities related to the US Senior Open tournament fit into those listed above. Obviously, everybody on a ‘team’ works together, but your claim appeared to be that hiring a development professional was going to be the key to advancing your vision of this tournament. That’s muddled thinking.
Roles and responsibilities, Brian - explain where your claims for responsibilities related to the US Senior Open tournament fit into those listed above. Obviously, everybody on a ‘team’ works together, but your claim appeared to be that hiring a development professional was going to be the key to advancing your vision of this tournament. That’s muddled thinking.
[b]Randy, it’s very clear that all you’re really looking for here is a fight and not finding constructive solutions that will grow the US Chess brand and increase membership/participation. Virtually all of my comments/suggestions on this thread have had nothing what-so-ever to do with the hiring of a professional development/fundraising person. Suggestions have been made regarding expanding participation at the Senior Open by creating more categories; siting the event (for a period of several years or just one year at a time) in a centrally accessible market(s); using at least one existing business partner to provide branded materials to raise brand awareness with give away or lost cost accessories (chess boards, chess bags/totes, shirts); finding a multi-year sponsor with a senior synchronicity (AARP, pharmaceuticals, perhaps the insurance industry). All of this can be done in the short term without hiring a development/fundraising professional. What it will require is an EB and ED who are interested in and committed to finding ways to accomplish these objectives by sharing such a vision with staff and volunteers and charging them with the responsibility of making the vision concrete.
What is very clear to me, Randy, is that you’re more interested in negatively locking horns and fighting with me over my suggestions. I have no interest in engaging with you on that level. Do whatever you and the EB care to do. [/b]
Brian, if you would accept the fact that not everything that erupts from your keyboard is the gospel truth, we wouldn’t have these little flame outs. Go back to the post in question, I pointed out that ‘A lot of what you want is fine.’ It was purely over an issue of roles and responsibilities where I disagreed with you. Period. Even provided with an example of a third party listing of roles and responsibilities for a development director, you chose to basically suggest that black and white is really all just grey. Sure, whatever.
I’m happy to discuss constructive suggestions, but when the suggestions are not constructive, I will also note that.
Your constant sarcasm and ascribing to me arguments I have not made make it a waste of energy to attempt discussing anything with you. I’m not the only member here who has come to that conclusion. I won’t be engaging with you very much , if at all, in future. Best of luck building US Chess in it’s (c) 3 incarnation. My efforts will continue on the local level. If US Chess can find a way to truly support that, great. If not, the game will be played regardless.
Whatever - what you describe as ‘sarcasm’ looks more like a pointed disagreement with your conclusion. As for ‘ascribing’ to you arguments you didn’t make: seriously? I disagreed with your claim that a development director would have significant involvement in tournament planning and implementation and provided a clear example of their roles and responsibilities - which you then sought to deflect with claims of it being a team game. What did I ascribe to you that you didn’t say?
Meanwhile, you and your claim of (unsubstantiated) members who have come to your conclusion is also tiresome. Make your own points - why do you feel the need to buttress them with claims of a ‘silent majority’ aligning with you?
Gee, all I wanted was the T-shirt. I did not expect to be quoted in a forum pillow fight.
In many of the running events, tennis tournaments, and other stuff I have participated in over the years, the only memento left is the T-shirt with the name of the event and the year. They spark memories of good friends and what we went through to earn the shirt. I have memorabilia and a t-shirt from the HBC Classic in Minneapolis and some old shirts from World Opens. I do not recall that a shirt was made for the Senior Open in Nashville. I have some other bric a brac Nashville souveniers and a refrigerator magnet for the state of Tennessee, but no shirt.
The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
Of the big lake they called ‘gitche gumee’
The lake, it is said, never gives up her dead
When the skies of November turn gloomy
With a load of iron ore twenty-six thousand tons more
Than the Edmund Fitzgerald weighed empty
That good ship and crew was a bone to be chewed
When the gales of November came early
In deference to Gordon Lightfoot’s sentiment, I’ll pass - but please send me a postcard, Bill.
I once did a deposition of a Federal inmate in the corrections facility in Duluth. Felt sorry for the guy. He was Israeli and had been imprisoned in Louisiana or Alabama when the deposition was originally scheduled. Got a call at 4pm the day before telling me he had been transferred and they would get back to me as to where he would be…Duluth. Transferred him in on a cold January night in the South, but nowhere near as cold as where he went. Duluth and that area isn’t really bad if you stay inside and just play chess and watch films and ice hockey and curling on TV.
This thread was only recently brought to my attention. Senior Chess was at one time near and dear to my heart, and a subject about which much was written on both of my blogs. I had hoped to play in the recent South Carolina Senior in which twenty-five players participated, which was won by Life Master Klaus Pohl, a fine victory over many “younger” players. I did not play because the cut-off date for a cheaper hotel room rate was a month prior to the event and it slipped by because of other, much more important developments in my life. Although I regret not playing I do not regret having to pay double for the same room. The earlier round time and time control was much more in line with what I, and most other Seniors whom I interviewed years ago, would prefer, hence the decent turnout.
I am astonished that anyone in their right mind would even consider having yet another Senior Open on a cruise ship after the most recent poorly attended tournament with GM Walter Browne and the midgets. The fact that it is being discussed shows how out of touch are some Senior members of the USSCF.
Here are only a few articles concerning what frequently occurs on a cruise ship:
Many articles and films can be read and seen pertaining to the lawless nature of a cruise ship. Many employees have a violent criminal history, as has been brought out recently, and some “cruisers” have been murdered by employees of the ship. It seems that not a month goes by without some cruise ship having some kind of problem. Some ships are not in port long enough to be cleaned properly before heading out of port again with new potential “victims.”
Here is a link to my blog post of September 20, 2014 titled “2014 USCF US Senior Chess Embarrassment.”
[/b]