Live events - an elevated discussion
Posted By: Rod In Response To: USBGF: Can we elevate the discussion? (Keene)
Date: Friday, 19 July 2013, at 4:58 p.m.
In Response To: USBGF: Can we elevate the discussion? (Keene)
Bill Davis wasn't thrilled with the USBGF from the start. [NOT a criticism - Virtually no one has given the game as much as Bill has over the years.]
He probably foresaw what I did, what Chiva did, what David and Keene are looking for, and what anyone who knows how any other federation operates.
The ABT and the USBGF need to merge (with Bill still running the entire subsumed ABT as he does until he no longer wants to and possibly the live competition circuit being permanently named for him) or the USBGF needs to push the ABT out with high quality, sponsored, money added tournaments. It has to happen to give real value to the membership - there is very little reason to join if the "real" meaningful competitions are not run by the USBGF - and we all know that the ABT is what counts, in this respect.
If Bill was fearful that the USBGF would fail (and I'm staying away from being negative here), there could be an agreement in place whereby the ABT was simply renamed and run as though it belonged to the USBGF until such time as Bill retired or the USBGF failed. Compensation could be included. There could then, reasonably, be a USBGF operations surcharge for each player at an event - small, like $1 for novices, $2 for intermediates and $5 for open players, which would generate about $8,000 / year.
Since, in one fell swoop, you'd get all of meaningful tournament backgammon in one fell swoop you create an organization that not only everyone wants to join but one that everyone needs to join.
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.