If winning the National Championship does not help a player make the national team, what exactly is the value of becoming India's national champion?
Strange, it may seem. But it is true. The two Indian chess teams for the upcoming Olympiad at Samarkand in Uzbekistan do not have the national champions -- Pa. Iniyan in the Open category and P V Nandhidhaa in the women's category.
And interestingly, the Open team has the world champion D Gukesh, who has not won the Indian national title even once.
Not that the Indian national champions are very weak. Iniyan has a rating of 2,609, while Nandhidhaa, who has won two consecutive national titles in 2025 and 2026, has a rating of 2,223.
And they can beat any top player in the world.
Curiously, it is said that one of the reasons for India's top-rated players not playing in the domestic circuit is the fear of defeat and, in the process, losing rating points.
For the past several years, the Indian chess team for the Olympiad has been based on the players' global ratings and not their ranking in the National Championship.
And senior players and others have started to question this anomaly.
Why Have The National Championships If The Champion Is Not Valued?
"For many years there is no selection for the Olympiad. The top six players from the Nationals used to represent the country in official tournaments, like Asian, Commonwealth and Olympiads. They have a selection committee now, which decides the team. If you observe most of the team members don't play in India at all," said International Master Ravi Hegde.
"The current National Champion is not a member of the Olympiad team. Earlier when the National Champion was a member, he was given two or three games out of 13," Hegde said.
"The point I am making is, why have a National Championship if the National Champion is not valued and respected,?" asked Hegde.
With India winning the major titles in the international chess field -- two world championships, world junior titles, gold medals in the Olympiad -- Open and Women -- and Commonwealth titles, it is time to give importance to the National Champion and the National Championship, senior players and former administrators said.
According to them, an Indian team without the national champion is not based on a good principle.
The people shared their views on the team selection process for the coming 2026 FIDE Chess Olympiad in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, where the two Indian teams are the defending champions.
Ratings Decide The Team
For the past several years, the Indian chess team for the Olympiad has been based on the players' global ratings and not their ranking in the National Championship.
As per the All India Chess Federation (AICF)'s selection regulations announced earlier, the final team will be selected on the basis of the three-month average rating of May 1, June 1 and July 1, 2026.
'The players need to play at least 9 games in the last six months (February, March, April, May, June and July 2026 FRLs -- FIDE Rating Lists) prior to selection date to consider for selection,' stated AICF.
The system gives a clear and measurable criterion for selection. But it also means that winning the National Championship does not by itself provide a player with a place in the national team.
"To make playing in the Nationals compulsory would be the correct, principled decision but there is a risk of all top players boycotting the event together as most of them are no longer comfortable playing in a Swiss League," senior Grandmaster Pravin Thipsay told this correspondent.
"The principally correct decision may lead to weakening of the team for one or two Olympiads and no one from the AICF would want that in their tenure."
"The AICF can hold a super National and allow an opportunity to talented but poor players to represent the country," Hegde said.
"Even when the India-2 team outperformed India-1 team in the Olympiad held in Mahabalipuram, near Chennai in 2022 (wherein teams India-2 and India-3 were chance qualifiers, being additional host entries), the criterion was kept the same," recalled Thipsay.
"Despite this eye-opening result in the 2022 Olympiad, the criterion remains the same," Thipsay added.
The 2022 Olympiad experience remains an interesting reference point in this debate. India had the opportunity to field additional teams as the host, giving several players who would otherwise not have been part of the main team a chance to compete at the highest level.
The performance of India-2, according to Thipsay, showed that ratings and established hierarchy do not necessarily tell the entire story when it comes to team performance.
It should also be noted that Indian chess players spend huge sums from their pockets to play in tournaments overseas to improve their rating points.
A large number of Indian chess players go abroad to play in rated tournaments owing to the lack of tournaments in the domestic circuit, for which the AICF and its affiliates should be responsible, and the fear of playing in India and losing rating points earned after spending a huge amount.
This has created a somewhat curious situation. Players need international tournaments to build and maintain their ratings, while the same ratings subsequently become a major factor in deciding who represents the country.
And the AICF is having a sort of free ride on the achievements of individual players by roping them to play for the country.
The question, therefore, is not whether ratings should be used. Ratings are an important and objective measure of a player's strength. The larger question is whether the National Championship should have no meaningful weight when the national team is selected.
Should National Champions Get An Automatic Place?
One unanimous view is that at least the national champion -- Open and women -- should be in the Indian Olympiad team rather than automatically qualified for some other global event.
A lower rated National Champion may bring down the average rating of the Indian Olympiad team which in turn would affect the seedings.
But the drop in the seeding may not be steep given the depth of Indian chess.
This need not necessarily mean that the national champion should replace the country's highest-rated players. A middle path could be considered, with the national champion getting a guaranteed place in the selection process or an opportunity to prove his or her strength against the country's top players.
That could give the National Championship greater relevance without compromising the objective of sending India's strongest possible teams to the Olympiad.
India is now a chess powerhouse, with an extraordinary depth of talent. That makes the selection of the five-member Open and Women's teams increasingly difficult.
But precisely because the country has so much talent, the significance of the National Championship and its winner cannot be brushed aside.
The two defending champion teams going to Samarkand may once again prove that the rating-based system works.
Arjun Erigaisi (2,759) heads the Indian Open line-up, with R Praggnanandhaa (2,750) on the second board. Nihal Sarin (2,718) is on the third board and reigning world champion Gukesh (2,703) on the fourth, with Vidit Gujrathi (2,697) as the fifth/reserve player.
After missing the Budapest Olympiad, Koneru Humpy (2,524) is back and will lead the Indian women team on the top board, followed by Divya Deshmukh (2,490), R Vaishali (2,489), Vantika Agrawal (2,399) and young player Savitha Shri B (2,375).
But the absence of both national champions has raised a question that the AICF may eventually have to answer: If winning the National Championship does not help a player make the national team, what exactly is the value of becoming India's national champion?
Venkatachari Jagannathan can be reached at venkatacharijagannathan@gmail.com
Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff
