'Unreal to win gold every time': Captain Srinath Narayanan after Indian Chess Olympiad silver

Srinath Narayanan, captain of India’s silver medalist team in the Open section NEW DELHI: “Don’t blame me for keeping the order on the board in limbo. I had it on the chess results right from September 1.” The message, though posted with a playful emoji from Srinath Narayanan’s own social media, the moment the Indian board’s order for the 46th Chess Olympiad was released, was the first sign of how closely one particular decision was being watched.In the weeks leading up to the team’s departure to Samarkand, no topic dominated chess circles more than the absence of world champion Dommaraj Gukesh from the first three boards.Olympic boards are divided by strength and as the reigning world champion, Gukesh has always been the default choice for Board 1, exactly where he sat during India’s gold-clinching campaign in Budapest 2024.But this time a series of poor results reduced his rating to the point where he was remarkably only the second-lowest rated player in the Indian squad, ahead of Vidit Gujrathi. Gukesh was four when the board’s order was finally made public.Earlier this week. India came home with silver, one place below the gold they had won two years ago.Captain and coach Srinath Narayanan sat down with TimesofIndia.com after the tournament and went through the decision that defined the build-up, the flashpoints that decided the campaign and why he has no interest in calling it lost gold.

How Gukesh’s board four was secured

The decision itself, Narayanan acknowledged, was never taken lightly.“It was a tough decision. I thought about it for a really long time. I consulted with a few people like Pentala Harikrishna (India’s 6th grandmaster) who I look up to and also my assistant coaches,” he recalled. “I spoke to all the different players and also thought about it for a couple of weeks before I came to the final decision.The clearest signal came from an unlikely source, the Grand Masters tournament in Chennai earlier in the year.“Arjun (Erigaisi), Nihal (Sarin) and Gukesh played there (in that tournament),” explained Narayanan. “Arjun totally belonged there and fought for the top spot. Nihal also played some pretty good chess.”Gukesh, on the other hand, struggled and finished last on home soil.“The Chennai field was pretty strong, similar to what you’d face on board 2, not quite board one, all around 2700. It was a high-pressure board, and even though Gukesh showed some signs of playing really good chess, he had a very tough time overall. I was hoping this would be the tournament where Gukesh would come back to form,” because Chennai didn’t help him get to 2.0. he added.The Grandmaster further explained the scenario and likened the process to physical rehabilitation. “When someone goes through that bad form, they recover mentally, almost like when you come back from a physical injury. You can’t just start pushing yourself with the most demanding physical tasks right away; you have to build up to it. Gukesh had to build up to that mentally as well.”In Samarkand, Gukesh played ten matches, drawing two and winning seven, before losing in the final round to Hungary’s Gleb Dudin.

With a view of Sindarov

With Gukesh set to defend his world title against challenger Javokhir Sindarov later this year, the biggest subplot of the Olympics was always what this bout meant.Despite losing in the final round, Gukesh won the silver medal on board 4. Narayanan sees this as reason for optimism.“I think Gukesh is in a much better mental space after the Olympics because it was probably his first really good tournament in a long time,” added Narayanan.“It will be tight, not as one-sided as the ratings reflect. Javokhir comes in with a lot of confidence and that could change if Gukesh gets a good result early. He also shows an incredible amount of preparation against other opponents, but in the (World Cup) match, that will be neutralized.”“Both players see everything the other has. There are factors going against Javokhir at the moment, but they can even out during the game. I think it will be a very close, very interesting game.”

Life inside the camp

As the conversation turns from Gukesh to the silverware-winning campaign, a simple question arises of what the weeks in Samarkand actually looked like from the inside.“It was a great experience. We feel very privileged just to be part of such a unit,” Narayanan said with a smile. “There’s a lot of fun with every player and everyone really cares about each other. This is the team we have for many members from 2022. There’s a lot of trust and confidence in each other.”Describing how hectic the schedule was, Narayanan continued, “There was a lot more playing time and preparation time involved. We played for about five hours every day and prepared for almost four hours.”“But in the free time we got, we played outdoor sports like padel. There is a padel court in the hotel complex, which was very convenient. We also went on team walks together.”

Image from plate to plate

Praggnanandhaa, who led the team on Deck 1 to an individual bronze, received more praise from his captain than his scorecard alone suggested.“His score (6.5/10) still didn’t quite reflect the level he was playing at. He created chances in almost every game, quite a few draws that could have been wins. But the quality of his play was really high. It never looked like Pragg was in danger of losing. Even when he fought a few times in slightly worse positions, in terms of body language, it was the Indian coach who pushed him.Erigaisi’s tournament was really two tournaments in one. The latter (5.5/10) started with a loss and ended as the savior of the Indian team.“The first two rounds were quite shaky for him. Taking them out, his results and game were quite high,” Srinath told the website.“There were some easy conversions, like against Uzbekistan B, where if he had won, his score would have been much better. Against Germany, he was the one pushing, he tried very hard, but he couldn’t quite win it. So it was frustrating in terms of results, but in terms of the quality of his play, he showed he belongs at the highest level.”Nihal Sarin’s tournament had the biggest impact on the team’s overall trajectory, for better or for worse.His second-round win against Indonesia, Narayanan pointed out, was what put India in the clash with Uzbekistan.“We had to play Uzbekistan in the sixth round because Nihal won in the second round against Indonesia. He was the only winner,” the Chennai-based grandmaster added.The same player was then at the center of the most painful moment of the tournament.

Challenges and how the team overcame them

The real test came in the sixth round when Nihal blundered his queen in winning position against Nodirbka Yakubboev. Losing, Narayanan does not shy away from calling the decider.“That game decided the match and the tournament. It was almost like the final before the final because it was pretty clear that it was going to be either Uzbekistan or India. Uzbekistan had momentum on their side. A win against them would have changed it completely,” said Srinath bluntly.According to him, what the team went through was more of a routine than a big hit.“It really helped us to have a united team spirit, to support each other. Everyone was there for Nihal that day. It also helped that we had a rest the next day, we could recover together, spend some time playing different games and playing something outside really helped.”Those rituals, Narayanan explained, predate this tournament entirely, as he continued, “We had a team walking ritual and a team eating ritual that we do no matter what, and a man-of-the-match ritual during team meetings. We implemented all of that in the 2024 Olympics. Having those routines really helps to counter the positives and the negatives because it can help us all get through a tough day. a good night’s sleep because there was no game.”The captain had two moments left.“Gukesh’s draw in the eighth round against Mahammad Muradli. He (Gukesh) had a very big advantage (against Azerbaijan) and Uzbekistan lost their match. We saw a window of opportunity and it was very painful for Gukesh to miss that win,” recalled Srinath.And then the final round. “In the first 90 minutes, it was clear that Gukesh’s position was bad. The only other board we could hit was Arjun’s, but Gukesh was in a more winning position than Arjun in my opinion. So that was also key.”Every success story comes with challenges. And so Narayanan doesn’t let these moments define the story.“In hindsight, even if both results had gone our way, it is unlikely to have changed the standings, we would have drawn with Uzbekistan and had a worse tiebreak,” he told TimesofIndia.com.

Silver won or gold missed?

It’s a question that will follow this campaign and Narayanan has clearly thought about his answer.“It’s really important to remember that we won silver instead of missing out on gold because it’s unrealistic to win gold every time. There’s no rational reason to have such expectations. There are other teams that are incredibly strong, invest and train as much as we do. It’s roughly 50-50 between those teams. Uzbekistan is one such team and their age group, equally professional players are highly motivated like us,” added Srinath.“We didn’t come to this Olympics in the best shape. Our players were probably at their peak around 2023-24, a period when we had four players in the quarter-finals of the World Championships, won one Grand Swiss and had three of those players in the candidates. We played clearly the best chess in that period.”“Considering we weren’t in our best form and still got silver, it shows how much depth and skill we have that at our best we’ll win gold by a big margin. But even if we’re not in our best form, we can still win silver. It shows how good a team we are.”