
Like Gukesh now, a young Vishy Anand too faced criticism and was once dismissed by Soviet stars as a ‘coffee house player'
The latest salvo fired at Gukesh, right before the SuperUnited Rapid and Blitz Croatia tournament, came from Magnus Carlsen, the five-time world champion and the foremost authority on the sport. The world no 1 questioned the reigning classical world champion's credentials in the faster time controls of rapid and blitz, saying that he would approach the three games against him as if he were 'playing one of the presumably weaker players in the tournament'.
His reasoning for this was: 'Gukesh hasn't done anything to indicate he's going to do well in such a tournament. It remains to be proven that he's one of the best players in such a format. This is a very strong field that we have. Players like Gukesh have a lot to prove. In the course of 27 rounds, things usually show.'
Throughout the world championship battle in November and December last year, Carlsen cast a constant shadow on the battle between Ding Liren and Gukesh with his scathing analysis of the games and the players' decisions on the board. At one point, he remarked: 'This looks like the second round or third round of an open tournament, not a world championship.' He wasn't the only former world champion constantly providing no-holds-barred critique of Gukesh's moves at the Singapore event. Vladimir Kramnik, the curmudgeonly former world champion, famously declared that it was the 'end of chess as we know it' on the day Gukesh made history by becoming the world champion at the age of 18.
It must be noted that some of the critique is understandable. Before the recently-concluded event in Zagreb, Gukesh had limited rapid and blitz experience. And each time he ventured out of the comfort zone of classical chess, like at Freestyle Chess events, he suffered. But the criticism of Gukesh seems a little too direct, in-your-face. Maybe a little like the Australian cricket team under Ricky Ponting sledging their opponents.
The teenager himself doesn't care much, though. As verbal knives continued to be sharpened against him after he became world champion, Gukesh coolly responded to the criticism by saying: 'When you reach the World Championship, you are bound to face criticism, and people are free to say whatever they want.'
He's taken the same approach over the past few months. After Carlsen's comment about treating him as one of the weaker players in the field at Zagreb, the Indian responded: 'I understand why (Carlsen) would think so, my rapid and blitz results in the past have not been great. But nobody knows what's happening behind the scenes. Only I know that.' Gukesh had a hint of a smile when he said that. Just a day before, he had handed the world no 1 a defeat in the rapid format after all.
The criticism that Gukesh has been getting in the past one year is nothing new. Just over four decades back, in the start of the 90s, when another young buck from Chennai was on the rise in the sport, he too would get acerbic comments from Soviet Union players, who thought that they had a monopoly on success in the sport.
'In 1991, at my first international tournament, in Reggio Emilia in northern Italy, a Russian grandmaster condescendingly told me I could at best be a 'coffee-house player' because I had not been tutored in the Soviet school of chess,' Viswanathan Anand had written in an article for TIME magazine in 2008.
Of course, 1991 was the year that Anand beat Soviet Union stars like Garry Kasparov, Anatoly Karpov, Gata Kamsky and Viktor Korchnoi. He won the Reggio Emilia title as well that year, leaving behind nine Soviet players like Kasparov and Karpov. That Reggio Emilia event started in 1991 and ended in 1992. And over the course of the tournament many things changed. The Soviet Union disintegrated into many different nations. And Anand went from being described as a 'talent' by the Soviet players to being called other uncharitable things. Because now the boy from India who played classical games at blitz pace was a problem.
After nine of them saw the only non-Soviet player emerge as the champion at Reggio Emilia, the Soviets pulled out their old playbook: to undermine the player and his achievements. Reggio Emilia was a Category 18 tournament, which back then meant that it was an event with the strongest field ever assembled. After Anand's win, Karpov tried to talk down the strength of the event itself, by saying, 'The thing about categories is that, I never find that very interesting.' A sentiment he probably wouldn't have shared with the world had he won the event.
As Anand recently recollected in a conversation for the New In Chess podcast, a few months after that event he was in Dortmund for a tournament and had dinner with another non-Soviet player. Anand told him how Korchnoi had been saying that 'Anand doesn't think but just plays some tricks'. At this, the other player is said to have remarked, 'Korchnoi praises me to the skies. That's because he beats me all the time. You should enjoy it (the criticism) while it lasts.'
Anand said that while people around him were offended by the comments being made about him, he was not too unnerved. 'I'd done it myself a few times to others,' he recounted on the podcast.
The change in tone from his rivals did come with realisations. 'It was at this point that I realised that 'talent' is a word people use to describe you when they want to express good-hearted empathy. It merely reflects that you are not yet a threat to their dominance or their prize fund flow. It's when they trash-talk you — like they did after my surprise coup in Italy — that you know you're respected. Maybe even feared,' Anand wrote in his autobiography 'Mind Master'.
The 'coffee house player' jibe — used for someone that's not professional about the sport and experiments a lot — wasn't the only pejorative that Anand heard about himself in his earliest days. He's been paid some creative backhanded compliments. Like when Anatoly Karpov, after the 1998 World Championship, told a journalist, within crystal-clear earshot of the Indian and his wife Aruna: 'Vishy's a nice guy. But he just doesn't have the character for a big win.'
This 'nice guy' stereotype is also something that all Indian world-beating prodigies like Gukesh, R Praggnanandhaa and Arjun Erigaisi today can be accused of. Fabiano Caruana recently noted how the new generation of players (spearheaded by the Indian trio) were playing 'at their level, but he didn't find them scary yet.' (As an aside, Caruana, a player with the most stable quality of chess without too many fluctuations recently lost thrice in three games to Gukesh at the SuperUnited Rapid and Blitz tournament).
In his autobiography, Anand spoke about this 'nice guy' stereotype: 'There are people who thrive in an atmosphere of combat, tension and conflict, but that hasn't been my strongest suit. Generally, my best results come when I am happy and my mind is not occupied with external diversions. This has perhaps led people to assume I am a pushover,' Anand wrote.
Anand also pointed out that when he became world champion in Tehran in 2000, the chess world was 'dismissive' of his first world title. 'I wasn't entirely certain whether they adopted this stance to get me ruffled or they genuinely believed that I was undeserving of this distinction.'
All of these emotions — being praised as a talent and then being trash-talked publicly, avoiding verbal conflict, seeing the world be dismissive of his success — that Anand experienced in the early 90s, Gukesh is probably feeling now. And just like Anand was advised in 1992, the best thing for the teenager to do is to enjoy the criticism while it lasts.
Amit Kamath is Assistant Editor at The Indian Express and is based in Mumbai. ... Read More
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
10 minutes ago
- First Post
Barcelona legend Xavi rejected by AIFF technical committee due to high cost: Report
Barcelona and Spain legend Xavi was among the coaches who applied for the Indian men's football team head coach position, according to a report. However, his name was not considered by the AIFF. read more The possibility of Xavi being very costly forced AIFF to cancel his candidature. Image: Reuters Barcelona great Xavi was among the applicants for the head coach position of the Indian men's football team, it has been revealed. However, the name of the former Spanish World Cup winner was not selected by the All India Football Federation (AIFF) technical committee, as it was deemed that his services would be unaffordable. The AIFF technical committee has from a long list of 170 candidates on Wednesday to replace former Bule Tigers coach Manolo Marquez, who left his job after defeat to Hong Kong in June. The names of Jamshedpur FC coach Khalid Jamil, former India coach Stephen Constantine and Stefan Tarkovic, who coached the Slovakia national team in the past, will now be forwarded to the AIFF Executive Committee, which will pick the coach for the Indian men's football team. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Xavi rejected by AIFF due to high cost The technical committee did not entertain many prominent names, including that of former Liverpool legends Robbie Fowler and Harry Kewell and former Blackburn Rovers manager Steve Kean, among others. Now, a major revelation has been made that former Barcelona player and coach Xavi had also applied for the job. This was confirmed to The Times of India by AIFF's national team director Subrata Paul. 'It's correct that Xavi's name was there,' Paul told TOI. 'The application was emailed to the AIFF.' As per the report, the AIFF technical committee did not consider Xavi's name due to the possibility of a high cost that his appointment may lead to. More from Football 'Even if Xavi was genuinely interested in Indian football and could be convinced to take up the job, we would need a lot of money,' a member of the technical committee told TOI. It's well known that Xavi occasionally follows the Indian Super League (ISL), something that he disclosed a while back in an interview with The Athletic. 'I sometimes (follow) the Indian League because many Spanish coaches are there,' he said. As a player, Xavi won eight La Liga titles and four Champions League trophies. He also won two European Championships with Spain, besides winning the 2010 World Cup.
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
10 minutes ago
- First Post
Zak Crawley hits back at Shubman Gill's allegations, says he enjoyed the on-field spat: 'Good chance to put it back on them'
England opener Zak Crawley and India Shubman Gill were involved in a heated spat during the third Test match at Lord's. The English opener has now opened up on his version from the day. read more Zak Crawley has denied claims that he was late in taking strike on Day 3 of Lord's Test vs India. Image: Reuters England opener Zak Crawley has hit back at Indian captain Shubman Gill over allegations that in taking strike on Day 3 of the Lord's Test, leading to an on-field spat between the players of opposing teams. Crawley clarified that he followed the process on his part and wasn't aware that he was late by 90 seconds. Gill and Crawley were involved in a heated debate as India tried to cramp as many overs as possible in a seven-minute window towards the end of Day 3 in the third Test at Lord's, which the visitors eventually lost by 22 runs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's strategy was to make the England openers face at least two overs with the new ball under decreasing light and hope for a wicket, but the batters took their own sweet time as only one over was bowled by Jasprit Bumrah. Crawley denies coming late to bat Crawley, who was also hit on the gloves by a Bumrah delivery during that over and called for a physio, had also pulled out of a delivery earlier in the over. All this was seen as a time-wasting strategy by the Indian camp as Gill got involved in a verbal altercation with Crawley. The Indian captain clarified his aggressive behaviour before the start of the Manchester Test, adding that while he is not proud of what happened, the on-field spat was a result of unnecessary delaying tactics by the England openers. Crawley has refuted Gill's claims that he deliberately walked out late to bat, saying he just followed the umpires. 'No, it wasn't intentional. I sit in my spot until the umpires go out. I walked out when I saw them go. I wasn't aware we were 90 seconds late, but fair enough,' Crawley said. Crawley enjoyed spat with Gill The 27-year-old Crawley, who smashed 82 on Day 2 of the fourth Test in Manchester, helping England finish the day on 225/2, added that he enjoyed the verbal argument with Gill. 'I've always enjoyed that part of cricket, to be honest, especially when you're batting. There's two of you against eleven and they're desperate to get you out, and they're chirping you,' he said. 'Most of the time, I'd probably let it slide, and then other times, I feel like it's a good chance to put it back on them. I loved that little eight-minute passage. No-one stepped over the line. I thought everyone was in good spirits. It was just competitive cricket, and I really enjoyed it,' he added. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Crawley also raised Rishabh Pant for having the courage to come out to bat with a fractured toe on Day 2 of the fourth Test. 'Not many people in the world would be able to come out and bat like he did on one foot,' he added. England are 133 runs behind after two days of play in the fourth Test at Manchester after England were bowled out for 358. They also lead the five-match series 2-1.


NDTV
10 minutes ago
- NDTV
Ricky Ponting Tears Into Shubman Gill, Doesn't Even Spare Jasprit Bumrah After Flop Manchester Show
Former Australia captain Ricky Ponting offered no clemency while directing India's dreadful execution of plans with the ball on the second day of the fourth Test against England at Old Trafford in Manchester. Even though the conditions offered less help to India than their counterparts, they were severely hampered after missing the trick with the new ball. The Indian seamers strayed off their lines, leaking runs heavily, allowing England's opening pair, Ben Duckett and Zak Crawley, to jump all over them and cause a constant headache for captain Shubman Gill. Ponting was left unimpressed with India's tactical ploy. In his ruthless verdict, Ponting expressed his discontent with the decision to hand the new ball to debutant Anshul Kamboj ahead of mainstay Mohammed Siraj. While Bumrah kept a lid on England's scoring rate, Kamboj was hammered relentlessly. "They got scored off on both sides of the wicket, didn't they? You know, we broadly talked then about how they bowled to Pope. I think they were tactically off as well. I don't think Kamboj shouldn't have taken the new ball. Yeah, I didn't like that from the start. And he was, I mean, and Duckett's five of his first six boundaries were behind square leg side. So they got it tactically wrong there," Ponting said on Sky Sports. Ponting didn't spare Bumrah for charging at English batters from the Anderson end, while the other bowlers thrived from the Statham end, which deepens India's tactical off-game. "I think even watching now, Bumrah, I think, is bowling from the wrong end. All the wickets, most of the wickets, have fallen from the Statham end. And he's done most of his work bowling from the Anderson end. So they've been, they were off execution wise. And I think tactically have been off a little bit as well," he concluded. After India crawled to 358, Duckett (94) and Crawley (84) raised a 166-run opening stand, before Jadjea delivered the fatal blow. Jadjea lured Crawley to commit to a drive shot away from his body and gave away an outside edge to KL Rahul. Kamboj then robbed Duckett of a century by picking up an edge to wicketkeeper Dhruv Jurel, scalping his maiden Test wicket. England finished the day with 225/2, trailing by 133 runs.