Asian Indoor Games: Indians brighten medal prospects

After the fourth and penultimate round, India was placed in the medal-bracket of three sections — women, men (Under-23) and women (Under-23).

In the men section, where India is represented by Surya Shekhar Ganguly and G. N. Gopal, the team was placed sixth.   -  GETTY IMAGES

India stayed in the hunt for at least three medals out of four events in the rapid chess competition of Asian Indoor Games here on Monday.

After the fourth and penultimate round, India was placed in the medal-bracket of three sections — women, men (Under-23) and women (under-23).

However, in the men section, where India is represented by Surya Shekhar Ganguly and G. N. Gopal, the team was placed sixth. After the fifth round, where the Indian men face formidable Chinese rivals, the top four will move into the semifinals. The two losing semifinalists will be awarded bronze medals.

In the women section, the duo of Padmini Rout and Tania Sachdev was placed third behind leader Indonesia and China. Should second seed India defeat third seed Indonesia — conqueror of favourite China — in the fifth round, it will ensure a place in the semifinal.

In both sections of Under-23, India was looking good to return with medals.

The standings (after four rounds):

Men: 1-2. Turkmenistan, Vietnam (6 game points); 3. China (5.5); 5-8. Iran, India, Qatar, Uzbekistan and Bangladesh.

Women: 1. Indonesia (7 game points), 2. China (6), 3. India (5.5), 4. Kazakhstan (5).

Men (Under-23): 1-2. Turkmenistan, India (6 game points), 3-4. Vietnam, China (5.5), 5. Philippines (5), 6. Tajikistan (4.5).

Women (under-23): 1. China (7.5 game points), 2-4. India, Kazakhstan, Vietnam (5.5), 5. Indonesia (4.5).

Support Sportstar


Dear Reader,

Support our journalism — where text and pictures intermingle so seamlessly — and help us scale up your experience as the world changes around us. Your contribution is vital to our brand of uninfluenced, boots-on-the-ground reportage that’s worth your while. Clickbait sensationalism is not for us, but editorial independence is — we owe it to you.