20 Questions with Paul Truong

These are my in-laws at our wedding reception in Orlando, Florida during the National K-12

Chessville Plays 20 Questions with Mr. Paul Truong
Interviewed by Phil Innes

Following our previous interview with you here at Chessville which covered your life and events to about 2005, bring us up to date on current perspectives.

1) Many journalist colleagues and others in chess, were surprised that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar should have run for the USCF Board when it seemed that they were achieving very much independently of that, or any other organization. What prompted you to seek a Board seat?

The USCF has floundered for a number of years in some key areas. The federation struggled badly to adapt to the rapidly changing chess world and fell way behind in the Internet age. In addition, the USCF has never had anyone with our experience and expertise. We know that we could help turn things around. The USCF needs new leadership with clear a vision for a better and more efficient USCF, and not so preoccupied with petty and destructive politics.

That is why we decided to make this big sacrifice for the sake of the USCF and U.S. chess. The most stunning fact is there are a lot more tournament chess players in the U.S. who are NOT USCF members than ARE USCF members, and the leadership was unable to change this. But very little has been done to change this.

However, we are also realists. We knew before entering the race that some of the long-time chess politicians will do everything they can to stop us. Unfortunately, we did not expect the revolting level some are willing to stoop to.

The full interview can be read here.

Q & A

Question by dietchess:

"the more important question is why we have two differing accounts from Mr. Bauer and GM Polgar."

Mr. Bauer believes in his lawyer. I believe in the facts. I also believe in a fair process. I stand by my statements and I intend to pursue this matter. As I stated before, this matter will not end once the Sloan lawsuit is dismissed or concluded. The board majority will have a lot of answering to do to the USCF members. I am not going to play their games. Their actions and political games of some members of the board majority caused the federation to be in this horrible position.

Here is the summary of what I stated:

1- We asked the board not to include Bill Goichberg in the sub-committee at the last board meeting in Crossville. Things would have gone a lot smoother and faster if Bill was not in the sub-committee. The reason is clear. Since there are a lot of potential legal issues involved in a number of possible cases, we consider it a direct conflict of interest for Bill to have privileged information. He should not be privy to them. We told this to the entire board. In fact, we feel that a full investigation should have been made about this matter which affected many USCF members. The board ignored our request and went ahead to form a committee of five members (including Bill Goichberg) AFTER we left the last board meeting in Crossville. We still ask Bill Goichberg to step down from the sub-committee.

2- For the best interest of the USCF due to the serious legal situation, we recently asked Randy Bauer to step down from the sub-committee due to his clearly documented mistake with the NY Times which caused severe problems for multiple parties, including the USCF. Randy agreed to step down then changed his mind after the board majority convinced him to stay on.

3- We requested the same access to the USCF database as the contractors so that our own experts can examine the validity of the data as well as matching IPs of suspicious posters. Our repeated request was ignored. What are they hiding?

4- We pointed out a handful of suspicious handles and postings directly related to this case to the attorney and other board members. We asked them to investigate. This request, and others, have also been ignored or denied. Are they afraid that it will point to one of their political buddies?

5- There should also be an investigation regarding how non-board members can obtain confidential board information to spread out false rumors for various purposes. If the board majority gives us consent, we can prove the source of the leaks. Joel Channing and Randy Bauer did not leak out confidential info as far as I know.

6- We asked the board to authorize ALL (not some or what they want to pick and choose) correspondence in the confidential BINFO from August 2007 to be released to the public. This should include the correspondence of all seven board members, the ED, the attorneys, and all parties relating to this case. This will clearly show the misconduct of the some members of the board majority as well as pertinent information relating to this investigation. The board majority clearly wants to hide the facts from the USCF members.

7- We asked the board to grant us consent and immunity to release all information and board member correspondence and NDAs related to this case. We recommend that ALL confidentiality clauses be waived in order to make the case clear and in order to expedite its conclusion. We propose to show all USCF members any evidence we have of who leaked what to whom, who made what deals under the table and for what reasons, etc. We give consent to the board and their attorneys to publish all information they have about us relating to this case. Everyone can then decide who is clean and who is not.

8- We asked the board to investigate the leaks of confidential board information to Jerry Hanken who used my confidential evidence and info to negotiate with Sam Sloan while the lawsuits against multiple parties are ongoing. Did the board majority authorize this? Did the board majority authorize this? Did the board majority seek permission from the USCF attorney prior to this negotiation? If so, did he authorize this? Will the board majority publicly admit or deny that this negotiation took place? Obviously someone from the board majority leaked confidential information to Sam Sloan (directly or indirectly) because he is using some of this confidential information (which only board members and the USCF attorney would know) in his response to the motion to dismiss. The board refused to investigate their own wrong doing.

9- Who authorized the board majority and their attorney to investigate completely false charges against my husband and me which relate to my divorce / custody case? It has absolutely nothing to do with this investigation. I find their conducts appalling. How did this even come up for discussion? This is my personal business and it has nothing to do with the USCF. Is this what board members are elected to do? Did the board majority use USCF money for this? Will the board majority publicly admit or deny that they tried to involve my personal situation into their political game?

10- I have reasons to believe that the board majority also tried to interfere with my legal case. We fully cooperated with the attorneys assigned by the insurance company and there was no problem. I strongly believe that board majority authorize a discussion / conversation with the insurance company to purposely try to persuade the insurance company to drop the coverage for Paul and me. Is this legal or ethical? Obviously, it did not work in spit of their wish. If it is not true, will the board majority publicly deny this? So far, they refused to deny it.

As of the evidence, after I faxed it to the USCF attorney, I received an email confirmation immediately that it was received. I was under the impression that it was enough as it is quite conclusive to show serious flaws with the conclusion of the Mottershead report. The board majority said more than a month later that it was not enough. However, they also clearly asked me to ONLY communicate through their attorney but their attorney never once asked for additional proof.

If the board majority strongly believes in their case, let them pursue it. If they have nothing then apologize and move on. But they are doing neither while the federation continues to suffer.

I will not come back to the USCF forum until it can be run properly. Paul and I were two of the most frequent posters there until it became a nasty and vicious political forum. I also cannot approve spending over $50K for various expenses relating to the USCF forum while the USCF finances are in horrendous shape. If Mr. Bauer feels that the 10 points I made are false, I would challenge Mr. Bauer to publicly deny my allegations and state his facts on all 10 issues.

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar

Q & A with Paul Truong - Part 1

This is Mr. Jim Wilkinson, Chief of Staff of the US Treasury Department.

Q&A with Paul Truong (Part 1)

Q: In your opinion, who are some the most qualified candidates in this election?

A: Quite a few. Susan obviously would bring the most positive exposure, credibility and much more to the USCF. Mikhail will be a major asset for the USCF due to his ability to promote, organize and raise revenues for chess. Randy is very competent in what he does. Jim is my friend and he can also bring a lot to the table.

I have never met Stephen but he has excellent credentials. However, his skills can be helpful for the USCF with or without him being elected. I am sorry that we missed each other at the recent National Open in Las Vegas. Don also has a lot of experience but I think it is time for a new direction with the USCF.

Q: In which areas can you help the USCF?

A: A lot actually. Even though my strongest area would be management, I am not for micro-managing. Managing the USCF is the ED’s job. What I can bring is my expertise in Marketing, PR and Promotion. I can help find unique ways for the USCF to gain revenue sources which have not been tapped. I can also help bring the USCF membership level up. Another important area would be professionalism. These areas are badly needed.

Q: Bill Goichberg sent a very questionable election post card to the USCF members. Can you comment on that?

A: What can I say? I was shocked when I heard about it and I was even more stunned when I read it. He can say whatever he wants about me. But to put Susan Polgar in the same category as a convicted felon like Sam Sloan? Is that appropriate for a USCF President? What he said is completely false and he knows it. I am not sure why he did what he did but it's unfortunate that he did.

My professional references were always available to the USCF or for any credible sources. Bill knows this. In fact, one of the USCF staffer did verify my references. I consented of course. I have nothing to hide. However, I am not going to publish them for all to see. Why should I do this while no other candidate was asked of this? I have to protect my former employers as well as myself from unethical and destructive people. There are too many unprofessional and problematic people who are willing to do anything to harm others. Even though I do not work with these companies anymore, I still have many friends there and some of them are sponsors to chess. In fact, I was the ONLY candidate who insisted on having every board member / candidate furnished a verifiable resume. I was told no by Bill Goichberg and Bill Hall last year at the US Open in Oak Brook. They said it was illegal to do so. Therefore, it is wrong for Bill to be disingenious to the USCF members, especially as the USCF President.

My marriage was never a secret. Our friends and families knew about it. Thousands of people knew about it. When Bill asked Susan if we are married, she wrote a lengthy email explaining the reason why she didn’t publicize it in the media and she chose to tell people personally. This was not my decision. It was hers and I have to respec it since it was a matter of life or death to her and her kids. She copied other board members and some other candidates. Knowing this, Bill decided to mislead the USCF members for political reasons. It was very disappointing. Having said that, I still respect Bill for everything he has done for chess for many decades. But if I feel that he is wrong, I will say so.

Q: Why didn’t Susan or you respond to the countless vicious attacks and false accusations by some people on the USCF forums?

A: Do you think it would help if we responded? Does it really matter what we say? Most of these people have never met or know us. We do not have time to keep going back and forth with these people. Both Susan and I were active in the forums until legal threats and insults started and the AUG was abandoned. I believe that it was highly inappropriate for board members to vote to change the rules in the middle of an election.

Q: Why do you feel that you must be elected to be able to help the USCF?

A: Actually, I can help US Chess and the USCF even if I am not elected. I have done it for 5+ years already. But it would be in a different role. I can do a lot more if I am a board member, especially because no other candidates have my specific skills. These are the things I cannot do if I am not a board member.

Q&A about chess and the USCF

Q: How do you feel about college chess and tournament chess?

A: I strongly believe that college chess is a critical bridge between scholastic and adult chess. If we can successfully promote college chess, we will retain many more scholastic players and transition them to adult chess. Otherwise, our USCF adult membership will continue to decline and our sport will be in big trouble.

I have mixed feelings about the various types of tournaments. Many players of all levels enjoy the competition. However, if I were an amateur player, I am not sure that I would spend up to $400 for entry fees, plus another $1,000 in expenses, to play in a tournament with very little chances of recouping the money. I prefer other types of tournaments.

I think club, local and state tournaments are just as fun and very good for chess. If I want to have the feel of big time competition by playing alongside grandmasters, I believe an event like the annual National Open in Las Vegas would be ideal. This has the feel a big Swiss event. However, the entry fees, meals and hotel costs are very reasonable and there are plenty of free side events, such as lectures and game analysis, etc. There are also tons of other fun and exciting things done by the organizers.

Chess as a sport has plenty of room to grow. But all types of chess such as scholastic, college, adult, correspondence, Internet or military chess must co-exist. Therefore, it is vital that we must find the right formula to help our sport grow.

Q: What is going on with the USCF election?

I decided to run in this election because I owe it to my sport to make things better. The USCF is in bad shape. It has been run for years as an amateur hobby organization. We have board members who micro-manage and make political policies, instead of sound business policies in the best interest of the game.It is operated very inefficiently and there is too much waste. The problem is that many board members do not have the expertise or experience that is needed. The USCF has lost millions of dollars in recent years and it has lost money in nine of the last eleven years. In any normal company, every single board member would have been dismissed long ago.

I am hoping to make serious changes to help US chess and the USCF. I have some of the most qualified people willing to help me, including my husband, who is a premier chess marketing, promotion and PR person in the United States. Several other professionals such as Dr. Mikhail Korenman (an incredible chess organizer and promoter for scholastic, college, adult and professional players) and Randy Bauer (a very experienced and successful financial person) are also willing to help.

I am willing to work with every qualified person for the best interest of chess and the USCF. I welcome the cooperation of other chess leaders. But I am not willing to compromise my personal integrity and the welfare of this federation. The best interest of chess should always come first, before personal interests and accolades.

If I win, I expect to be able to help US chess and the USCF a great deal. But I need a strong team with the right experience and expertise and that is why I recommended Mikhail (Korenman), Paul (Truong) and Randy (Bauer).

Q: What are some of the changes that you would like to see within the USCF?

a) Improve its respectability, integrity, efficiency, professionalism, image and reputation.
b) Set up a state of the art marketing, promotion and PR system to help bring in additional revenues and sponsorships.
c) Establish a sound and balanced budget to ensure the viability of the entire federation.
d) Increase the cooperation and support for adult, scholastic, collegiate, correspondence and military chess, which in turn will raise the membership level and lead to more revenue.
e) End chess politics and make every decision based on what is in the best interest of chess and the federation and not for political reasons.

Q: What is your short and long term vision for the USCF if you are elected?

This is an excellent question. There must be short and long term goals for this federation to succeed. Here are the twelve critical areas that must be improved in order for the USCF to grow and prosper.

1. Building a strong membership base via grassroots marketing, promotion and strong structural support for the local clubs, affiliates, organizers, volunteers and supporters. We need to develop a high level of mutual respect and cooperation among these groups.

2. Building a strong membership recruitment plan with excellent incentives for organizations to partner with us. There are more active players who are not members of the USCF than there are USCF members. Many of these players do not see the benefits for joining the USCF. This has to change. We must get our message out much better. We must also work with our partners to offer our members and potential members more value and greater benefit for their money.

3. Building a strong support system for scholastic, college, adult, tournament, correspondence, Internet and professional players. As we have seen over the years, adult and college chess suffers from the lack of a cohesive plan to retain scholastic players. We must also recognize that there are many more Internet players than ever before, but we cannot ignore our correspondence or professional players. It is vital to the health of this federation that we have communication and joint effort between all of these membership groups.

4. Building a strong and respectable image and reputation for the USCF. Without this, we cannot get support from the private sector or local, state, or federal government. Any of these agencies and organizations can do a background check on the USCF and this is the chief reason why we keep losing one sponsor after another. We cannot have incompetent and unprofessional people leading this federation. We need to bring in people with proper experience, expertise, energy and passion for chess along with strong records of success.

5. Building a strong, sensible and cost sensitive marketing, promotion and PR project. It does not have to cost tens of thousands of dollars to be effective. I have proven that with the Susan Polgar Foundation. It can be done if we know how. Too many people are bickering about dollars and cents while throwing away opportunities to increase revenues through sponsorships, grants and other avenues.

6. Building a sound and fiscally responsible budget with minimal waste. The savings from the inefficiency alone can fund many additional projects to help the USCF. We must build the USCF into a viable organization. This federation is not running at an optimal level right now.

7. Building a strong relationship and partnership with countless other chess organizations nationwide and worldwide. We need to unite to win. Constant political wars and infighting will only harm chess and the USCF. As a leading federation in the world of chess, we should lead by example and work with everyone to better our sport.

8. Building a strong relationship and partnership with countless volunteers and supporters to help improve many current weaknesses of this federation. There are plenty of people who are willing, ready and able to help, but they are not being utilized properly because of chess politics.

9. Building a strong relationship and partnership with kindergarten, elementary, middle and high schools, as well as colleges and universities across the country to promote chess and education. We also have to work with parents of home-schooled students, in addition to organizations that represent them.

10. Building a strong relationship and partnership with countless companies around the world to promote chess and all its benefits. They want to promote their companies, products or services and we want their sponsorship. It is a win-win situation for both sides.

11. Building a strong communication channel with all members, volunteers, supporters and sponsors, etc. We need to get our strong and positive message out to the people.

12. Building a strong business vision and plan. We need to run this federation like any successful and reputable company. All business decisions must make sense financially or help this federation in one way or another. We cannot make business decisions as a way to reward our political supporters.

We have the numbers and strength to be a competitive and viable organization. All we need is to take advantage of the opportunities and change our approach to running this federation. Instead of saying why it cannot be done, we have to be willing to sit down and figure out what it would take to make things happen for the best interest of chess and the USCF. Just as in a chess game, we must be able to maximize every single advantage and improve every weakness.

But the most important thing is to vote! Let your voice be heard! Together, we can turn around this federation and build it into a strong and viable organization!

More questions and answers can be found here.