The following was posted on Chess Ninja website by Mig Greengard:
The last post from San Diego… The last blunder of the US Championship turns out to have been made many months ago. As the saying goes, to err is human but to really screw things up you need a computer. Due to an error in an Excel spreadsheet formula used to calculate the prize fund distribution, the itemized prizes add up to around $20,000 more than the prize fund of $253,600. (They didn’t count the top two women’s prizes.) This wasn’t discovered until they were writing out the checks after the tournament ended. (I could hear the groans and forehead smacking coming from the next table.) This meant there was no way to tell the players until the closing reception when the checks were being handed out. Most of the prizes were 11% lower than listed, although of course the actual prize fund was not changed at all.
The four finalist prizes had been publicly announced and could not be changed. The other 60 were then adjusted to the correct figures and rounded up to the nearest hundred, increasing the total by about $600. Of course the players don’t just look at the total prize fund, they look at the prizes they think they might win, especially the night before they get their checks! The other top money makers “lose” the most; Ibragimov and Kamsky going from 11,600 to 10,300. The lowest prizes are 2000 instead of 2200.
Many of the players were annoyed, a few more than that, although it didn’t seem to sour the closing party much. (Photos soon.) The organizers here had no authority to exceed the prize fund or to bounce checks a la FIDE. (AF4C prez Erik Anderson wasn’t here due to personal reasons.) Both the correct total amount and the incorrect distribution are in the player contract, but I hope nobody goes legal about this. Nobody knew what they were getting until the night before and I doubt anyone spent the full expected amount before finding out the next day. On the other hand, there’s a casino nearby.
Since they have been up front about taking the heat, and since everyone will ask, I’ll go ahead and name the names of chief arbiter Robert Tanner and AF4C liason and press dude John Henderson as the ones in charge of falling on their swords for the blunder. They stress this had nothing to do with AF4C or NTC. Both are stand-up guys and it’s a shame they have to suffer so much for what was basically a typo they failed to catch until the last minute. The prize fund is the prize fund and it didn’t change, but perception is important and clearly many of the players feel like they lost money, at least at first blush. Had someone noticed before the tournament began it would have been no big deal. And I wonder how quickly the players would notice if the distribution added up to LESS than the prize fund! ….
Basically, this is what happened:
An error was made long ago while calculating the individual prizes. This error was not caught timely and the individual prizes were posted on the official US Championship website.
This error was only discovered while the organizer was writing checks this past weekend. The question now is:
Should the organizer reduce the amount to match what they meant to pay out?
or
Should the organizer take the heat and pay out the extra money since it was their error?
What do you think?
This was my public statement:
Dear all,
I may not agree with Mr. Erik A. when it comes to the format of the US Championship and I spoke out against it. However, I think the AF4C has done a good overall job with the US Championship and I thank them for supporting chess in this country. I also thank Mr. Erik A. for taking that giant step in saving the US Championship.
He is a professional businessman. I am confident that he will fix this situation properly. He took the heat and paid out the mistakes last year even though it was not his direct fault. There is a very good chance that he would do the same this time.
Let’s give him a chance to rectify this situation before jumping all over the AF4C. I agree that the players should not take the heat because it was not their faults. This has always been one of my biggest battles with the USCF.
I also know Robert Tanner and John Henderson. They are good guys but they simply blundered badly even though it was not done intentionally. No one can feel worst than them right now. There is no need to keep pounding on this fact. I am 100% sure this will not happen again.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
www.PolgarChess.com
www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
Posted by: Susan Polgar at March 14, 2006 10:29
I guess all those people who say all the good things chess teaches children will have to exclude math from now on.
This has all been hashed over at Mig’s blog ad nauseam, as you well know. I’m a tournament acquaintance of Robert Tanner and I know he’s a “good guy”, and I’m sure the other’s are as well; but a contract is a contract, signed, sealed and delivered.
As I indicated in Daily Dirt I hope it doesn’t have to proceed to the courts, but on the other hand Susan if you had signed a contract and was then shorted 11%, I wonder how amiable you would be about it? Business is business!
One last thing, in your statement you indicated that “There is no need to keep pounding on this fact”. That being so, why did you bring it up here…now? I am calling you on this one.
“Business is business!”
Are the organizers a business?
Anonymous,
Don’t be NAIVE, when a contract is signed you better believe…it’s business.
I’m not being NAIVE. Contracts are formed between persons. In the case of a corporation a corporation is legally regarded as a person: therefore businesses can form contracts because businesses are people (according to the law).
If the organizers are a business, then the money that the players can be awarded is capped at the value of business, and it is not unreasonable to wonder if the US championship has already wiped out most of the companies assets, because you have to remember that the TOTAL prize fund did not change.
If the organizers are not a business, then the players may be lucky as they can sue Robert and John, and if they own a house (not an unreasonable guess) then you certainly will get $20,000. It doesn’t make any sense, but that’s the way the law works, just as that’s just how contracts are.
You can’t see the forest for the trees. Unless this was to become a class action suit and it won’t, tell that to each claimant presenting their contract to a small claims court judge, use that argument as a defence. The judge would most likely not lol in your presence, but I’m sure he/she would be amused. As far as “according to the law”, back to the books kid.
Anonymous, If that 2nd reply was yours also, then we’re close to the same page. If not, then I stand by what I say.
“use that argument as a defence.”
It’s not an argument or a defense. It’s how things are set up:
http://sbs.smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/article.php?mcid=1&scid=60&aid=6964
One of the primary advantages of incorporation is the limited liability the corporate entity affords its shareholders. Typically, shareholders and directors are not liable for the debts and obligations of the corporation; thus, creditors will not come knocking at the door of a shareholder or director to pay debts of the corporation. In a partnership or sole proprietorship the owner’s personal assets may be used to pay debts of the business. Maintaining the limited liability of a corporation requires that the shareholders and directors follow all the rules of governance, including holding annual meetings and maintaining meeting minutes, which is why we offer corporate forms disks and corporate kits as part of our complete incorporation package.
This is a sad day for the AF4C. The problem with organizations like AF4C or Kasparov Chess Foundation is the founders do not spend time to monitor things on a daily basis. They have people who do things and unfortunately, they hired incompetent people.
Enough is enough! What you just presented is not applicable in any manner to the case at hand. You are literally looking at this from the perspective of a corporate law issue. If any of these people were to enter this in small claims, the verdict would be rendered according to personal property issues, which are outside the auspices of a corporation. Understand!
Why you Americans like money and hot-dogs so much? Of course all who made the mistakes should be sued until they’re bankrupt. Are you joking with us the chess players?? Gim’me my money, or go to jail!!!
Have you read the “Report of the World Players’ Council to the 73rd FIDE Congress”? It has some info on corrupt chess journalists.
http://www.msoworld.com/mindzine/news/chess/web_round/web_round19.html
Polgar is suing FIDE for the women’s World Championship title as well as monetary compensation. “FIDE decided to prevent Polgar from defending her title, back in August of last year. FIDE has declared the challenger, Ms. Xie Jun of China “Women World Champion” without a fight. The case is being heard at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, in Switzerland. FIDE has until May 30, 2000 to submit their defense documents.”
What happened with this suit? Why did Susan quit FIDE like Fischer did?
http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/archives/the_anna_hahn_memorial_tournament.htm
A lot of crap in here. Makes you ill to read.
Susan. Friends with Mig? You got’ta be jokin’! He’d sell you out as soon as you become a dirty story. Don’t sink in his dirt.
(As I indicated in Daily Dirt I hope it doesn’t have to proceed to the courts, but on the other hand Susan if you had signed a contract and was then shorted 11%, I wonder how amiable you would be about it? Business is business!)
No, I would not sue the organizer for a few hundred / a few thousand dollars. However, I would never play in that event again.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
Everyone seems to forget they are paying out the total prize fund advertised. The devil is in the details. But I don’t think anyone attended the event planning on winning the exact amount of the 18th place prize.
Susan,
I appreciate your diplomatic approach, but you didn’t answer the question I proposed. Also, I’m sure that many of the participants are not in the same financial situation as yourself.
It is extremely difficult making a living at chess in this country, but no one wants to live under an overpass while trying. From that perspective, 11% can be substantial.
Also, to those of you who find fault with Mig’s Daily Dirt. Yes, it definately can get down and dirty there (to an extent), probably why it’s called daily dirt. But quite frankly, with all due respect to Susan’s, it is currently the most informative chess blog on the internet. There are many people there who express in an articulate and informative manner, information and ideas about improving the status of chess in this country. And Tommy, if you’re reading this, I agree that duif is the best.
Susan, I apologize. You did answer a question that I had presented to you. It was an answer to the 2nd question that I was anticipating.
ct, what was the question? 🙂
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
Susan,
It’s lost its significance now. 🙁