If you have disabled Java for your browser, use the Site Map (linked in the header and footer).

Chessville
logo by
ChessPrints

Advertise
with
Chessville!!

Advertise to
thousands
of chess
fans for
as little
as $25.

Single insert:
$35
x4 insert:
@ $25 each.

From the
Chessville
Chess Store

From the
Chessville
Chess Store

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.

2)      Several things then happened all at once in the Summer of 2007, including you becoming accused of not as much impersonating, but satirizing another Board member, Mr. Sam Sloan, resulting in a civil suit brought against you and fellow Board members by Mr. Sloan.  You have previously denied any complicity with the anonymous satirizations, hereafter called the False Sam Sloan or FSS, – do you have anything to add or detract from your statement?

I said it before and I have no problem repeating it:

I had nothing to do with it and I have no idea who did it.

Some people have time for this juvenile game.  I do not.  I have more than enough chess activities on my plate.  And if I have something to say, I will say it.

For Mr. Sloan to claim that Susan and I need to resort to this kind of tactic to defeat him in the election is similar to claiming a Grandmaster would need Fritz or Rybka to defeat a 1200-rated player.

Everyone can judge Mr. Sloan’s credibility for themselves.  This was one of his statements in his filing: “Prior to the start of this disinformation campaign, Sam Sloan enjoyed a sterling reputation as an investigative reporter and was held in the highest regard by the World Chess Community.”

This is an outrageous and bold-faced misrepresentation.  The fact is, this is a man who is a convicted felon who has little respect for the law and who has little respect from the chess community.  He has little respect for the truth and reality.  He has filed countless frivolous lawsuits against the USCF, dozens of its members and other parties.

This is a man who proudly bragged of having inappropriate sexual relationships with young females.  This is a man who posted many naked pictures of some of these young ladies on his website.  This is a man who posted articles about raping women without getting caught.  I have no problem stating the facts to the public.  I do not need to hide behind anonymity.

The conclusion of the report is way off, and it can easily be proven on my end.  I am not going to discuss the details publicly as I plan to take actions against everyone who is involved with this.  It will be discussed in due time and in the appropriate forums.  Some people obviously have very good imaginations and they would rather destroy chess to satisfy their ego instead of doing positive things for our sport.

I am curious to know how “independent experts” can definitively state their conclusions without even speaking to me or Susan.  How could independent experts come to definitive conclusions without knowing all the evidence and facts from all sides?

These are some of the glaring points that the USCF would like the world not to know:

-         The moment this report came out, both Susan and I asked for permission for our own experts to examine the full data.  We were told no repeatedly since September 2007.  What are they hiding?

-         We gave the Board majority and their attorney information and evidence to track down the real FSS.  They refused to look into it.  Why?  Are they afraid that they it will come back pointing at someone from their camp?

-         In the meantime, friends and allies of the Board majority leaked out confidential information.  One of these leaks is about the Board allegedly giving consent to a scheme to have the insurance company contacted to drop us as clients so we have to pay for legal fees ourselves instead of by the insurance company.  The idea is if we have to pay big legal fees for ourselves, we may not be able to afford top-notch defense attorneys.  Is this legal or ethical?  The Board knows full well that this is absolutely true.  If this is not true, I would like to see the Board publicly denying this.  They have not denied this at all.  So what does this say?

-         The Board majority also allegedly had discussions about involving Susan’s children in this mess, using information from past false allegations.  They are literally interfering with Susan’s custody situation.  Is this what Board members are elected for?  If this is not dirty and disgusting politics then what is?  Again, can the Board majority publicly deny that they have never discussed investigating matters involving her children?

-         Some members of the Board majority leaked out our confidential information (the information we were asked to give to the Board and their attorney) to Mr. Jerry Hanken for his allegedly “unauthorized negotiation” with Sam Sloan.  Is this legal and ethical?  Who gave Jerry Hanken our confidential information?  Was the USCF-paid attorney made aware of this before the unauthorized negotiation took place?  And some of the confidential information the Board leaked out showed up in Sloan’s response to the motion to dismiss.  Only the Board majority and their attorneys know about this.  So how did Sloan get it?

-         The USCF has spent at least $50,000 (I suspect a lot more) in insurance, deductibles and legal fees in my estimation.  The legal fees and damages can run up to a few hundred-thousand dollars, meanwhile there is no money to fund the US Olympiad teams or future U.S. Championships.  Is this political witch hunt in the best interest of the USCF and its members?

3)      Another event in the Summer of  2007 was the creation of the Susan Polgar Institute for Chess Excellence (SPICE).  Can you explain the scope of the Institute, its plans and goals, both for USA and as an international entity?

The mission of SPICE is to:

• promote chess as vehicle for enriching education;

• serve as the global center for chess research, education and development;

• support and promote competitive chess at the college level;

• recruit outstanding undergraduate and graduate students.

We have had an incredible start.  Things will get even better in the near future.  We want to work with all other colleges, universities, researches and everyone who has similar goals and interests.  Since this is a monumental move for the chess community, I will discuss SPICE a lot more in another independent interview.

4)      After some eight months have now passed, what activities are underway towards the initial goals you set for yourselves, and who or what else determines your activities, such as the University itself, or partners elsewhere?  After attending the Chess and Education Conference, CISSCOM, in Aberdeen, Scotland, where some 1,100 mainstream educators attended, does SPICE intend to create a similar venue or event here in the USA?

5)      Returning to the cause of question #2 above, much seems to stem from the activities of Mr. Brian Mottorshead, a consultant to USCF.  Do you have any ‘history’ with Mr. Mottorshead, if so, where and when, and what happened?

I have never met or spoken with Mr. Mottershead.  I have no idea who he is or what he does for a living.  I know nothing about him except for his conduct, performance and behavior in the past year as a contractor for the USCF under Hal Bogner’s company.  Susan and I loudly complained about his conduct, performance and behavior to the Board back in September of last year.  His “investigation” was launched right after our complaint took place.  The clear time-line will be outlined in an appropriate forum.

6)      Mr. Mottorshead appears to have consulted with USCF on matters of informational technology.  There appears to be no Board memorandum instructing him to make this investigation into the FSS, nevertheless the issue arose if he should do so.  Can you say who at USCF gave Mr. Mottorshead permission and under what, if any, written instructions?

My understanding, according to Bill Hall and Bill Goichberg, is after Mr. Mottershead claimed that he had launched his “investigation” without any approval from the USCF, he told Mr. Bogner, one of the principles of Chess Magnet School, USCF President Bill Goichberg and USCF ED Bill Hall about what he did.

Even though this clearly violated the NDA (non disclosure agreement), none of these three individuals stopped him.  In fact, the entire matter was hidden from the other Board members for around a week or more.  We only found out because Mr. Mottershead bragged about it publicly.

Mr. Mottershead stated that he was “encouraged” to finish “his investigation” and put his findings (again without the full Board authorization as none of us was aware of this except President Bill Goichberg) in a written report for the ethics committee.  This was documented in writing by President Goichberg, and USCF ED Bill Hall and Mr. Bogner clearly defended the actions of Mr. Mottershead.

Mr. Mottershead then decided to bypass the USCF procedures and the USCF ethics committee and took matters into his own hands.  He once again violated his NDA by releasing his finding to his friends and then the public.  Everything has been documented and will be presented in appropriate forums.

7)      The two possible resolutions to Mr. Mottorshead’s report appear to be that either you are found to be the perpetrator of the FSS material by legal inquiry, or that you have been impersonated so that you appear to be the author of the material.  Do you have a technical understanding of how such an impersonation could be achieved in a general sense; how it could be achieved with USCF materials or records; and also [the current legal suit permitting your answer] what flaws it contains?

There are a lot of technical issues which will be brought up in due time and in proper venues.  As I said in one of my previous answers, why was the USCF so afraid to allow our experts examine the data?  What have they been hiding since September 2007?  We made this request right away back in September 2007, and our multiple requests have been denied each and every time.  All I can say is a lot of rules and procedures were clearly and blatantly violated and this matter will not just end here after the Sloan case is dismissed or finished.  We will present a series of clear misconducts by the USCF, its officers and contractors in various appropriate forums.

8)      Some questions pertaining to yourself, and allying with the FSS material, relate to your history.  Can you tell us which companies you have worked with, what roles you played as consultant with them, and also to restate your academic and chessic qualification.

Due to some security issues as well as my NDA with various parties, I can only make this generic.  After college in 1987, I worked for a number of multimillion and multibillion dollar corporations in the capacity of Marketing Manager, Senior Marketing Manager, Assistant Branch Manager, Branch / Regional Manager and VP of Marketing.

I was these companies’ youngest Manager, Senior Manager, Branch / Regional Manager and VP.  I was also the top producer in every operation I managed.  Some of my duties included recruiting, interviewing, hiring, training, marketing, promoting, and PR.  After around 15 years of having an incredibly hectic schedule, my traveling commitment became too much.  Therefore, I decided to retire from the business at the end of 2001.

I am a USCF Life Master and my rating has never dipped below 2200 since I broke the 2200 mark in America when I was around 15-16.  I am also a FIDE Master, and my peak FIDE rating was around 2400 in the mid 1980s.  I won four national junior championships (under-21) in South Vietnam and five overall national championships.  Of course South Vietnam in the 70’s was not a chess power house but I am still proud of what I achieved.

When I came to America, I started the second half of 9^th grade in northern New Jersey, then went to college for four years in Westchester County on full chess / athletic scholarship.  My main major is in Computers, but I also have minors in Marketing and Business.  I never actually worked in computers on a professional level because I enjoy Marketing a lot better.

9)      Some other Grandmasters who have obtained Board seats, or other positions at the USCF, have not fared very well; in fact none of them have a good report of the experience, especially not GM Larry Evans, who had Pinkerton’s Investigations set on him by the Board, and was [unsuccessfully] sued for $10,000,000 by a Board member!  Do you think you have become a proxy target for your partner, GM Polgar, since you both threaten to destabilize existing relationships at USCF by making it grow?

Promoting chess positively and effectively is not the hardest task.  To change the status quo of the USCF is another story.  If the Board majority had allowed us to utilize our expertise and do what we were elected to do, the USCF would have been in much better shape in many ways.  But some of the Board majority never wanted us to be elected or do good things for the USCF.  It is about personal power and control for some people and not the best interest of the USCF.  But we do not have the votes to make this positive change.

10)  You, and Susan Polgar, have also questioned the basis of relationships surrounding USCF in terms of contractual responsibilities, and performance issues by contractors.  [Editor: see, e.g., USCF's Book & Equipment Deal with Chess Cafe.]  Can you describe what concerns you most in these respects?

A number of contracts were awarded without fair and open bidding. They were awarded unfairly.  In some cases, they were done purely for political reasons.  Some contracts were written in ways to avoid scrutiny until it is too late.  And the people who made many of these decisions do not have the expertise to decide on the right candidate / contractors.  And even after we pointed out some glaring cases of waste and incompetence, no action has been taken.  The USCF has wasted so much money (over $100,000 in just the last year or two) for little results.  The same thing could have been done for less than $20,000 and perhaps even for free.

11)  The current state of play seems to be that Board members Paul Truong, Joel Channing and Susan Polgar, voted that the USCF Board open up all information pertaining to these issues, so that the members themselves could decide ‘who was clean and who was not’, to utilize Susan Polgar’s phrase.  Four other Board members voted not to do so, thereby restricting your ability to publicly clear your name from the negative associations of the FSS material.  What further recourse do you have other than to take to the courts and sue for access?  The Board itself seems to have removed your marketing title without opening the issue to members – and thereby without ‘trying’ the issue in a courtroom or with the members themselves.  Is that within their jurisdiction, either according to USCF’s by-laws, or laws relating to a 501 non-profit?

When you are guaranteed at least 4 votes out of 7, I guess everything is “legal”.  There is nothing the Board minority can do.  The majority chose to purposely disregard so many USCF procedures.  Once the Sloan lawsuit is finalized or dismissed, the Board majority will have a lot of answering to do.  Whichever venue they choose is their business.  They kept invoking the word “fiduciary duty”.  I believe that some of them have clearly neglected their elected duties and they are creating serious problems for the USCF.

12)  To echo the first question above – since you are arguably the best chess promoter the USA has ever had, after eight months is your current function as USCF Board member something that helps or hinders you to promote chess in this country?

I never stopped promoting chess or the USCF in general.  I never had a chance to get started for the USCF.  Promoting chess is not a high priority to the USCF.  In order for me to help the USCF, I need to be allowed to do my job and not be bogged down with all the nonsense.  Even when I proposed Marketing and PR ideas, no one cared.

13)  About one year ago you informed various friends and acquaintances that you and Susan Polgar had become married.  Why did you keep this information private at that time?

We did not keep it a secret.  We just did not blast it in the AP news.  We chose to wait for the appropriate time because we planned to have a big celebration with both our families together (our parents have never met) and invite our friends from all over the world.  This is supposed to be our special occasion and it had nothing to do with the USCF.  We informed many of our friends and both our families knew.  We also informed Texas Tech University.

It is none of anyone’s business but our own as to when we should announce our marriage.  It is our special occasion and it is solely our choice.  USCF President Bill Goichberg and Sam Sloan decided to “break the news” in 'National Enquirer style' for political reasons, and there goes that.  I expect that from Sam but I was and still am quite disgusted with what President Bill Goichberg did.

14)  You are now undoubtedly the most famous chess couple in the USA, and draw a lot of media attention.  After the recent National Geographic program about GM Polgar, are there any new media projects in the pipeline?

Two possible movies and a number of unique chess promotional / fundraising events, mainstream style!  Once the deals are sealed, I would be happy to announce them.

15)  And here is the BIGGEST question of all!  Given that the duo, Polgar and Truong, have together already achieved an International Institute for the study of chess, and on-going mainstream media attention seemingly greater than all other chess news together, it frankly puzzled many commentators when you applied for USCF Board membership.  USCF has never achieved either of those targets, nor ever seemed likely too.  Do you agree that USCF resolutely hunkers down to what is essentially a sort of maintenance role in chess, rather than a building or promoting one?

To be honest, I have no idea what is the goal or plan of the USCF Board majority other than trying to survive financially.  I see no effort to promote the USCF positively and properly.  I see very little effort in turning the USCF into a strong, healthy and viable organization.  I also see very little light at the end of the tunnel for the USCF unless the Board majority will do the right things to save this federation.

Some people spent more time arguing about a dollar or two in membership dues increase or decrease than making the USCF stronger and better.  There is a much bigger picture out there and we are not taking advantage of it.  The Board majority is continuing the long failing path instead of steering this federation toward success and prosperity.

16)  So – to put the most directly consequent question to you – what on earth are you doing there?  Why don’t you and Susan resign and do, as you have demonstrated, what only you can do?

There is a still a remote hope that the Board majority will wake up and realize that the USCF needs improvement in many areas and allow us to help.  The USCF members who voted in the last election overwhelmingly believe in Susan’s vision and gave us the privilege to serve this federation and make it better.  We cannot let our supporters down.  We have to try to do our best.  But the fate of the federation squarely lies on the Board majority as they have the votes to make or break things.  Unfortunately, it has been the Bill Goichberg show so far.  His decisions caused this Federation to be in its current financial crises.

The price that we have to pay so far is there are people who actively try to make us lose our jobs by contacting Texas Tech and spreading vicious and malicious lies.  They are insulting us daily on various places.  They are calling Susan by all sorts of horrible and disgusting names.  But these people have direct and top-level access to some members of the Board majority.  And what have some of these people done for chess?  Virtually nothing!  Welcome to the USCF politics.  The status quo continues!

17)  Some of the things you attempt seem as impossible as the Giants beating the Patriots in this year's Super Bowl.  What’s the next Mission Impossible?

The word impossible does NOT exist in my vocabulary.  I have not failed in anything I set out to do.  My goal is to increase the popularity of chess in this country by many-fold.  It will happen with or without the cooperation of my fellow Board members.

18)  After removing yourself and your family from the Metro New York area to the wilds of Texas, albeit, SPICE is located on the biggest [?] campus in the USA, what major adjustments have you and the family had to make?

Very little actually!  Susan and I love Lubbock, Texas and our kids also love the city.  We love the lifestyle, the weather, the hospitality, our jobs, etc.  And everyone we met have been super nice, from the Provost, Senior Vice Provost, President, Chancellor, the Deans, Professors, university staff, the Mayor, the folks from the Convention & Visitor’s Bureau, etc.  Just everyone!  We feel very welcome here.

This is exactly the environment we wanted to raise our children in, in a city which is big enough but still maintains a personal touch.  Everything we need is here and the cost of living is incredibly low.  We actually can sit down and have family dinner nearly every night instead of the hustle and bustle of the big city.  Life is short, and we fully treasure something as small as this.

Definitely not by continuing to do what the USCF is doing right now.  There is absolutely no incentive for young players to try to become the best, other than their love for the game.  Even Bobby Fischer said this in an interview with Dick Cavett in 1971.  Chess makes no sense financially for many playing professionals.

That is why so many young talented players dropped out.  They have to face the reality of the real world.  From my own generation, only Joel Benjamin and Ben Finegold are still relatively active.  This is why college chess is so important.  This is the bridge to allow young players to get an education while honing their chess skills.  The perfect examples are Alex Onischuk, Yury Shulman, Pascal Charbonneau, and many others.

20)  Here you are; fleeing for your life from Vietnam because your father worked with the American Embassy there; surviving [just!] as a boat-person; making your own fortune in the USA; successfully promoting the strongest chess advocate ever in Susan Polgar; then marrying the gal!  Your life already seems to be a drama in four surprise acts. In five years time how would you like Act 5 to have gone?

Taking chess to the many levels above where we are today.  I have big dreams for our sport.  I have big marketing success in other fields.  Now I want to do it for the game I love with a passion.  Why don’t you ask me the same question five years from now and then I can clearly show you what I am able to do.  Talk is cheap.  It’s best to show by results.

Susan Polgar and the Truong Family

A traditional closing question at Chessville is:
What question would you most have liked to answer, but were not asked?

You mean you did not ask everything yet??  One of the questions that people are afraid to ask is what makes the relationship between Susan and me so special on both a personal and professional level?  In other words, what made us click in such a magical way?

First of all, we have been friends for over 20 years.  We developed mutual trust and respect for each other.  We know each other's strengths and weaknesses better than anyone else.  Therefore, we work together to compliment our styles and abilities instead of against each other.  There is absolutely no ego between us.

Susan is more comfortable in her role of the leader and ambassador, and I am more comfortable in my role as the advisor and strategist, both on the chess Board and in business.  I can also say that one of the keys for our success is our ability to communicate with each other.  We also have fun in what we do.  We value our principles, ethics and integrity a lot more than money.  Another word, we cannot be bought.  Other important factors include our common vision and passion for chess.

Chessville appreciates Mr. Paul Truong for his candor and passion,
and for his cooperation in the production of this interview!

Index of Other 20-Questions Interviews

search tips

The
Chessville
Chess Store

Chess

 

Reference
Center

The Chessville
 Weekly
The Best Free
Chess
Newsletter
On the Planet!

Subscribe
Today -
It's Free!!

The
Chessville
Weekly
Archives

Discussion
Forum

Chess Links

Chess Rules

Visit the
Chessville
Chess Store