| Kevin L. Bachler 2005-01-15, 5:46 pm |
| In article <cs8b760ert@drn.newsguy.com>, Kevin L. Bachler says...
quote:
>
>Tim,
>
>You might recall that on several occasions I have posted two points:
>
>1. Scholastic members participate in tournaments for a different reason than
>adults, and therefore get something different from their memberships --
>specifically what they get out of it is -- for the most part -- team
>participation and representation of their school. I further argued that this
>impacts the pricing of these memberships. I recall that this concept was fairly
>universally attacked on RGCP. Sounds like some people have come to agree with
>it. It is key.
>
>2. The USCF scholastic "program" is not a "program" at all. It is a membership
>pricing. The result of item 1 and the lack of a program is that there is
>nothing done to mainstream scholastic members into adult chess over time. I
>suggested a number of ways to do this. One is to create "family-oriented"
>events, where parents would be happy to take their children. Another would be
>to develop college programs; this could include college internet leagues, league
>sponsors, and the national office working with colleges to encourage them to
>interface or have community chess clubs on campuses, improving the resources to
>individual players. This is the type of program best done by a national
>organization, I think. But again, we can't have scuzzy chess players or the
>Nebraska naked guy show up on their doorstep if we want this to be successful.
>
BTW, my opinions above make me less popular with many scholastic people also.
That's why I always thought it funny when people labeled me a scholastic guy,
because clearly many of the scholastic people would not.
Another example: In Illinois I think that scholastic (and high school) players
should have to be ICA members to play in the state scholastic championship.
That opinion is not liked by a lot of people. My general feeling though, is
that this is an extra value provided by the state association. State
association membership should be perfunctory. If there were cots requirements
for any other child activity for something comparable, you wouldn't see Little
League, or soccer, or anyone else say "we aren't going to charge it..."
And, of course, to the extent that we get a dollar commitment to state
associations, that helps grass roots efforts. And to the extent that these
players get state magazines, and find out about adult tournaments, that could
help to mainstream them.
--
Kevin L. Bachler
|