Twisted Conflicts

By Charles D. Unruh

The OCF organized a professional tournament in Tulsa over Labor Day Weekend at the same time of Charles Jr.’s LDMO honoring Ed Hutchens. Tom Braunlich spearheaded their event and had a few observations and critiques on page 39 of the OCQ October bulletin.

Charles Jr. and I had a great time at our LDMO and ignored the OCF tournament owing to the fact that not every USCF player in good standing was welcome in their event. Unfortunately, the OCF must find someone or something to smear, vilify or blame and Tom did his best to twist the facts in what is becoming a quarterly pastime.

Instead of my biases, please read Tom’s message and the following four emails that are alluded to in Tom’s article. Charles Jr. plans to hold another independent tournament on Labor Day 2006 and all USCF players are still welcome. Our most humble apologies for the windowless playing hall as reported by Mr. Braunlich. Ed Hutchens deserved better, but it was not in my college boy’s budget. I’m sure that Ed didn’t mind for he was a member of the Dayton Chess Club that met in a windowless room in the downtown library thirty-five years ago. At the windowless Dayton Chess Club, Ed would play chess with his friends and give the youngster Chuck Unruh a few chess lessons.

From the OCQ October 2005 issue.

Tom Braunlich

Conflicts- I need to say a quick word about this. When I saw last April that the OCA had “reserved” one day of the Labor Day Weekend on their clearinghouse calendar, I wrote a polite email to Chuck Unruh, Sr. suggesting they avoid that date as I was planning a big event then that had to be on a 3-day weekend. He sent back a rather rude response, calling me a member of an organization “that condones violence and discrimination.” The OCA board voted to go forward deliberately with a conflicting tournament on the same date in Tulsa even though a two-day Swiss can be held on any weekend, not on the rare three-day weekends that the NAO or OCFest needs. I imagine they are happy that they were able to draw away from us a few players, somehow thinking that undermining a unique and innovative historic tournament is a good thing for Oklahoma Chess. This comes on the heels of their brazen attempt to bring baseless ethics charges against all OCF officers at the US Open in August! The OCF will simply continue producing great events, and let the OCA continue having its hackneyed weekend swisses at the windowless motels along the interstate.

On 5/3/2005 Tom.braunlich@cox.net wrote:

POLITE EMAIL 1

Hi Chuck,

How are you?

I've got a quick question.

Last night I received a tentative Chess Clearinghouse Schedule email from Harold Ball. I noted that you had reserved the date of September 3.

I have been working for several weeks on my first foray into chess organizing in Oklahoma. It is a major tournament which I have already committed to for Labor Day Weekend, September 3,4,5, In TULSA. This is a pretty big event, with lots of innovative features. I am tying up the lose end details to send out the TLA for Chess Life this week, and I was going to copy this to Harold for the Clearinghouse.

My hope is that this event will be successful and become an annual event, in which case next year when the North American Open moves back to Labor Day weekend I can move my event to Memorial Day weekend.

I want you to know this is no attempt to deliberately conflict with the date you reserved. In fact, I'm hoping that since your plans are apparently for a one-day event that it might be something you could move, or perhaps a scholastic event that doesn't conflict. My event is 7 rounds and thus of course cannot be moved, as it requires a 3-day weekend, and in any case I'm already committed to the hotel here.

Anyway, I hope this is not a serious problem for you and am sorry if it does.

Best Regards,
:-)TOM BRAUNLICH


On 5/4/05 Chunruh @AOL.com wrote:

“RUDE?” EMAIL 2

Hello Tom,

Good to hear from you. Life is very good, and thanks for asking.

I took notice that your proposed tournament is your debut in Oklahoma tournament directing and organizing. I also believe that you support a chess organization encrusted in vile actions toward some of the chess public and other chess organizers. I sincerely hope this is your neutral tournament.

The USCF still looks toward the OCA State Chapter Affiliate to support chess without discrimination or violence.  If your direction is to include all chess players without OCF or OCA political requirements, then I would relinquish the scheduled one day event. Otherwise, my event is the only tournament that welcomes all USCF players.

I am scheduling several future tournaments and would enjoy working toward a more cooperative format.  I can assure you that my administration will make room for serious USCF Oklahoma tournament directors that do not condone violence or discrimination at USCF chess tournaments.

Best Wishes,

Chuck

No other LDMO messages until 9/15/2005 when Chunruh@aol.com wrote and copied Tom:

REQUEST FOR 2006, EMAIL 3

Hello Mr. Ball,

I spoke to my son last weekend and we respectfully request a tournament posting for September 2nd and 3rd for the 2006 Labor Day Memorial Open. The tournament is an independent event organized by Charles M. Unruh.  Please use my e-mail listing as the contact information.

We would welcome Tom and his sponsors to once again host the Professional Okie Fest Invitational for the same weekend in Tulsa.   

Thank you,

Chuck Unruh

On 9/15/2005 Tom.braunlich@cox.net wrote:

TOM’S RESPONSE, EMAIL 4

I see Chuck.

I guess you were gleeful with the amount by which you were able to intentionally undermine one of the most innovative and best tournaments in Oklahoma history, and naturally you are anxious to do the same damage to my tournament again next year with another conflict. This can be your only reason for again reserving a 3-day weekend for a 2-day tournament, when any other weekend would do just as well, (whereas an important event like the NAO or OCFest  requires a 3-day holiday weekend).

Fine -- keep you dinky little hackneyed boring events. This is apparently your vision for chess in Oklahoma -- to return it to the days when chess here was just as bad and boring as it is in Arkansas. In the meantime the OCF continues to move forward with professional chess organization.

Tom

Some thoughts on these emails and message:

(1) The OCF has little respect for the needs of other chess organizers, yet expects sympathy for their schedule… an issue of extreme ego and superiority complex. The reference to the clearinghouse is misleading. Harold Ball runs the USCF clearinghouse for the benefit of all USCF Organizers. Reserving a date with the Clearinghouse to avoid conflicts is recommended by the USCF to be the first step in the process of organizing a tournament, not the last step.

(2) Tom spent thousands of dollars to attract professionals for his vision of Oklahoma Chess. Our vision did not compete with his professional views. We believe that the majority of chess players come to tournaments to see their friends and enjoy the game. It is my opinion that per dollar and effort spent, our hackneyed view easily wins the hearts of people and their lasting friendship.

(3) Tom is willing to accept the evils of discrimination for the “perceived” betterment of lock-step Oklahoma chess. However, our vision and that of the USCF does not condone the practice.

(4) Most chess players and their families have very busy schedules and the trend is to decrease the days necessary for a chess event. The LDMO was on purpose a two day event as to allow the average chess player a holiday with his or her family. I think that Oklahoma Chess had a record day for Father-Son (Daughter) players at this year’s LDMO.

(5)Tom forgets that there are no real professional Oklahoma players. Some think about playing professionally, but I hear that even a well known Grandmaster is looking for steady work.

(6) Tom blames the OCA for his conflicts. The OCA can not support his tournament by USCF mandate owing to the discriminatory nature of the OCF actions and printed exclusions. The OCA will not interfere with OCF events but simply chooses not to recognize them in our communications.

(7) There is a false charge that OCA attempted to bring baseless ethic charges against OCF Officers. The USCF requires a $25.00 filing fee when lodging an ethic’s complaint. I am the President of OCA and know of no formal OCA ethics action or a $25.00 check to USCF to start an ethic’s complaint. The only reason to include this defense on Page 39 must have been based on rumor and the apparent OCF paranoia about the ethic’s of their past actions.

(8) A management difference appears in Tom’s statement “ the OCA board voted to go forward deliberately with a conflicting tournament.” The OCA did not and could not vote regarding the LDMO going forward, since it was an independent event.

The myopic and controlling nature displayed by OCF’s management should not be confused with their dedication to chess. They believe so strongly in their vision that some of my old friends and tournament chess players are at odds with my administration and desire nothing short of a complete purge and overthrow. However, every June the struggle for ideas is always open at the ballot box and the Policy Board encourages all members to vote in the upcoming elections.

Please note that the OCA is not at war with the OCF. The OCF management ideas and discriminatory actions clash with our vision for Oklahoma Chess and the standards of the National Organization. Given the opportunity, we will continue to seek common ground with our Club Affiliate.

My above opinion and critiques are only published on OCB internet version. The printed OCB is reserved for information more relevant to the game of chess.

Chuck Unruh, OCA President