ANOTHER National championship and another title for S. Vijayalakshmi. Indeed, it was as simple as that.
When Vijayalakshmi reached New Delhi for the National 'A' chess championship, she was confident, though she was not in the best of forms. Precisely, that gave Vijayalakshmi a pretty good reason to test her strength against those who had made her look vulnerable just a month back. Once the tournament got underway, one did not have to wait till the very end to find the winner. The nation's first Woman Grandmaster made it easier for all concerned. She was the queen with two rounds to spare!
The title was Vijayalakshmi's fifth - first after becoming a Woman Grandmaster - and helped her match the tally of the Maharashtra-trio of Rohini Khadilkar, Bhagyashree Thipsay and Anupama Gokhale. This fourth consecutive National title saw Vijayalakshmi break the long-standing record of Rohini who had claimed three in a row beginning from 1976.
Vijayalakshmi was particularly pleased with her performance this time since it came soon after her dismal showing in the Asian Zonal championship in Colombo. She had finished last among the five Indians, headed by champion Pallavi Shah.
But in the National championship, Vijayalakshmi topped while Pallavi struggled all the way and finished last.
Like Vijayalakshmi, younger sister Meenakshi once again proved better than the rest and retained her runner-up slot with an improved performance. Swati Ghate and R. Aarthie, seeded three and two, made the top-four bracket, followed by Bhagyashree Thipsay.
The way Vijayalakshmi went about her task, it did not take long for the other contenders to realise that they were, at best, fighting for lesser honours. Barring a friendly draw with Meenakshi in the second round, Vijayalakshmi scored seven victories in eight rounds. Vijayalakshmi's winning sequence left Meenakshi, the nearest challenger, two points behind. Meenakshi trailed, following defeats to Swati and Bhagyashree.
An uncharacteristic loss to Aarthie in the ninth round was a blow to Vijayalakshmi's pride but not to her chances. She returned with a vengeance and dismissed Saimeera Ravi and M. R. Sangeetha to take an unassailable 2.5-point lead with only two rounds to go. Lacking motivation after having sealed the title, Vijalakshmi blundered her way to defeat against Saheli Barua but signed off like a champion by brushing aside Bhagyashree.
"I needed this title to prove a point. I had fared poorly in Colombo, so I was determined to do well here. I was happy with the quality of my matches, though the aggregate could have been better," said the 21-year-old Assistant Manager (Finance) with Indian Airlines.
Meenakshi, seeded six, performed more consistently than some of the higher seeds. She did go wayward for a while but she got hold of the control levers in time. After successive losses to Bhagyashree and Nisha Mohota, Meenakshi survived a seemingly-lost position against debutant Harika Dronavalli in the 10th round. But thereafter, she scored three straight wins and remained in the second spot.
Swati, the reigning National 'B' champion, justified her seeding with a strong finish. After defeats to Nisha, Dolan Champa Bose and Vijayalakshmi, Swati gathered her wits and scored 4.5 points from the last five rounds for the third spot. After beginning her campaign with a comfortable victory over Bhagyashree, Swati was lucky to score over Meenakshi in the third round. But it was her gritty showing against Aarthie that helped her stay clear of the second seed.
Aarthie, thrice National 'B' runner-up, too, had her moments. This 20-year-old WGM norm-holder punished an off-colour Vijayalakshmi to catch the attention of everyone. This one-off victory should do Aarthie's confidence a world of good since her quality of play remains under scrutiny despite her surprise triumph in the World (under-18) girls' championship in 1999.
The championship was a good platform for Aarthie to prove a point or two. However, Aarthie failed to really get going with the black pieces. She lost to Bhagyashree, Meenakshi, Anupama, Swati and drew with Dolan and Sangeetha - all with black. On the other hand, she won all her seven matches with white for a respectable tally.
For the seasoned duo of once arch-rivals, Bhagyashree and Anupama, there was hardly anything to feel great about. Though Bhagyashree had victories over Meenakshi, Aarthie and Anupama, she suffered disappointing defeats to Swati and Saheli. After she was held by a determined Harika and later by Nisha, three straight victories raised visions of a good finish. However, Bhagyashree failed to get the better of Pratibha in the 11th round. Following a win over Dolan, Bhagyashree ran into Vijayalakshmi in the final round and tumbled.
In comparison, Anupama's four defeats and five draws kept her out of contention. Her sixth-round victory over Aarthie was a good one but in the remaining seven rounds, she managed just 2.5 points.
Nisha Mohota, once the country's youngest Woman International Master, never really came close to justifying her fifth seeding. Three defeats in the first four rounds left her with too much of catching up to do. She redeemed herself with victories over Swati and Meenakshi but defeats to Harika, Saimeera and a draw with Pratibha proved costly.
Among the rest, Harika was the best. All credit to this Guntur girl who showed glimpses of her talent in what was her toughest championship till date. She proved that her qualification from National 'B' was no flash in the pan. The fact that this unrated girl beat three WIMs - Saheli, Nisha and Pallavi - besides holding Meenakshi, Bhagyashree and Anupama, underlines her stupendous performance. It must also be remembered that she almost beat Vijayalakshmi and Meenakshi before her inexperience surfaced. Still, four wins, as many losses, five draws and an eighth-place finish was a truly incredible performance by Harika, who is yet to celebrate her 11th birthday.
At the other end of the scale was Pallavi. She was expected to be among the front-runners but never really recovered from the first-round loss at the hands of Y. Pratibha as seven other players went on to defeat her. In fact, the last-round draw, an agreed one at that, helped Pallavi break the sequence of five straight defeats.
Pallavi was a victim of the high expectations following her triumph in Colombo. "I never expected to win the Asian Zonal since I had not prepared much owing to my exams. Though I am sad at doing badly in this championship, I am well aware of my lack of preparations," admitted Pallavi, who has had this uncanny knack of making the Indian squad in alternate years, in which the Olympiad is held.
Lastly, there may be several areas where the Indian women players need to improve. But none can question their fighting qualities. With their egos in place, these ladies refuse to offer a draw early in the game. As one of them said, "the question is, who will offer a draw? Everyone waits for the other to make an offer, which hardly comes. Certainly, our egos come in the way."
The fact that only 20 matches - out of 130 - ended in draws, substantiate the point. Of these, three came on the last day. Otherwise, not more than two matches ended in draws on any of the other days. Three cheers to the never-say-die spirit of these 'fighting' ladies.
Final placings (with tie-break scores, wherever necessary):
Women: 1. S. Vijayalakshmi 10.5; 2. S. Meenakshi 9; 3. Swati Ghate 8.5; 4. R. Aarthie 8; 5. Bhagyashree Thipsay 7.5; 6. Nisha Mohota 7 (3.5); 7. Saheli Barua 7 (3); 8. Harika Dronavalli 6.5 (4); 9. Anupama Gokhale 6.5 (3.5); 10. Y. Pratibha 5; 11. Saimeera Ravi 4.5; 12. M. R. Sangeetha 4; 13. Dolan Champa Bose 3.5 (2); 14. Pallavi G. Shah 3.5 (1).
"ANY sensible sponsor will join hands with the All India Chess Federation. But only once. After all, if a child gets its fingers burnt once, he or she will safely stay away from fire!"
These words, from a distinguished player, well and truly capsuled what the sponsors feel about dealing with the AICF. Even those, who once showed interest in associating themselves with chess, have now found the easier way out. They are all staying away.
If any proof was needed of the sponsors' reluctance, it was there for everyone to see during the National 'A' championship in New Delhi. It was here that the AICF's total lack of professionalism, diplomacy and foresight stood thoroughly exposed.
Nearly five months after the amateurish organisation of the World Championship in New Delhi last year, the AICF showed that it had learnt nothing. The short-sighted AICF, perhaps, blinded by the growing popularity of chess, seems in a hurry to kill the goose that is yet to lay the fabled "golden" eggs.
It is unfortunate but true. The AICF made a mess of a golden opportunity to show-case its premier event in the heart of the Capital. Though all the leading men and women of the country, except Viswanathan Anand and Koneru Humpy, were in the fray, there was no hype to attract the potential sponsors. Needless to add, there was no marketing of the event either. Still, the AICF wanted the sponsorship amount of Rs. 15 lakhs! This was clearly too much for any sponsor.
It is indeed surprising that, on one hand, the AICF maintains that the hosting of any National event is the headache of the staging association, but on the other hand, it ends up making it difficult for its own affiliate, as in this case.
Though the Delhi Chess Association was allotted the event by the AICF, H. Balagopal, the Managing Director of CDCS Eventspecific, was offered to host the event on behalf of the local body. And it was only due to this chess-loving benefactor that Amity International agreed to pay Rs. 2 lakhs on the penultimate day of the championship. But for this amount, the players would not have received their prize-money!
"I had 15 days to look for a sponsor. I contacted close to 80 of my clients but none saw the event worth Rs. 15 lakhs. There were sponsors, even Amity International, ready to pay around Rs. 7 to 8 lakhs but the AICF secretary (P. T. Ummer Koya) had made it clear that he would not settle for anything less."
Though the ever-evasive AICF secretary was unavailable for comment, R. K. Shukla, the AICF joint-secretary as well as the DCA secretary, said, "I could have organised the event in a grand manner at the cost of Rs. 10 lakhs. I did not need more." With this, it was clear that Koya had over-estimated the merit of the event.
Even as Balagopal offered his office hall for the championship, installed three air-conditioners for the comfort of the players, and spent nearly Rs. 1.25 lakhs, including Rs. 60,000 as operational expenses, Shukla spent his time worrying about ways to clear the room-bills (lodging only) of the players.
To the credit of the DCA, the players were given air-conditioned rooms (not a mandatory requirement) in a centrally-located hotel, which by the metro's yardstick, was not too far from the venue.
On the day of the inauguration, the AICF President, Dhruv Sawhney had told The Sportstar that it was only from a newspaper report that he learnt the championship was without a sponsor. "The joint-secretary (Shukla) never told me anything," he said. However, Shukla said that it was not true.
Though understandably defensive, Shukla rightly questioned the lack of interest of the AICF President in the National championship being held in his city. "Even for a moment if we assume that he was not told, what stopped him from helping us in getting a sponsor?" asked Shukla.
As it turned out, Sawhney chose to stay away from the championship. But on the final day, at the AICF's Central Council meeting, Sawhney agreed to shell out Rs. 3 lakhs for the championship. This amount helped in clearing the hotel bill and disbursing the players' allowance of Rs. 100-per-day, for 15 days.
Earlier, even before the first move was made in the championship, the DCA had come up with a 'novelty.' Despite cribbing about the lack of funds, it hosted a luncheon-inauguration at a five-star hotel and spent around Rs. 70,000 to 80,000. When asked how could the DCA indulge in such a luxury, Shukla said, "for the moment, the DCA has taken a loan from Sawhney. We expect the AICF to bail us out."
A cross-section of the players, who declined to be identified for fear of victimisation, felt that the same money should have been spent on getting a bigger playing hall at the hotel where they were staying.
Later, Shukla admitted that the money spent on the inauguration was a waste but not the expense of Rs. 60,000 on the closing function held over high tea. "That was our commitment to the sponsor. So we had to spend that much," was Shukla's reason.
But those who worked the hardest were the CDCS staffers. They continued their work as usual despite their work space being offered to the mediapersons as well as those working on the daily bulletins (containing moves of the matches played). Despite the inconvenience, the friendly staff did not flinch even once.
"After all, I had associated myself with this event and wanted to do my best for the benefit of the players," said Balagopal, a tough taskmaster with a passion for the game.
Yet, at the end of it all, Balagopal did not sound exactly pleased. "I think, the AICF should have been more receptive and should have conducted itself better. I felt sad when, in the closing function, no one remembered to acknowledge the efforts put in by my staff. Here, I would like to state that the AICF had agreed to pay 25 per cent of the sponsorship fee to my company. In other words, Rs. 50,000 should have been passed on to us. And honestly, I am not expecting it."
Balagopal was clearly hurt when the DCA took him for granted. It demanded certain things at the last minute without making any commitment to pay for them. These included an additional air-conditioner, installed as an afterthought on the eve of the championship and the back-drop, worth Rs. 18,000, for the closing function. Even the responsibility for printing score-sheets, invitation cards, supply of board-pieces, clocks, etc. was not taken up by the DCA.
But there were those who could not even afford to complain. The Chief Arbiter, Bharat Singh Chauhan, and his team of arbiters were not paid for the services rendered. "As per regulations, Chauhan should get Rs. 20,000 but we won't pay him that much," said Shukla and added, "at the most he will get Rs. 5000 and the other arbiters, Rs. 3000." But when? "I don't know," was his ready reply.
Still, what took the cake was Shukla's parting shot at the closing function: "All's well, that ends well."
Well, can anyone take that?
Comments
SHARE