Mother knows best

To be focussed on your sport is not the same thing as being selfish. Many years ago, Anand characterised chess players as monomaniacal introverts, quickly adding that he was not of that mould. That was very clear to anyone meeting him, however briefly. Anand was, and continues to be, the quintessential Indian sportsman 8212; intelligent, well-mannered, self-effacing, but with a strong sense of his Indianness. Two themes meet in him for besides being an individual champion in a country that has few champion teams, he was nurtured by a parent, his mother. Indian champions usually owe more to their parents than anyone else, a fact that has never been properly acknowledged. Mothers play the role of coach, driver, trainer, nutritionist, travel agent, manager. In Anand8217;s case, his mother Susheela Viswanathan played these roles cheerfully, but we8217;ll come back to that later.

The obvious question is: Why are we so much better at individual games than at team games? Has it got something to do with national character? Cricket, where a mere ten countries play at the Test level, must necessarily be an exception to most theories on Indian sport. To explain its popularity, despite only occasional success will need a whole book. We are uncomfortable in team situations, where our success depends on the work of other players and vice versa. The scope for politics is also far greater within team games. Bishan Bedi, the great Indian spinner, and a team man in a team sport has this story to illustrate national character: On a cargo ship exporting crabs, some boxes didn8217;t have covers. quot;Won8217;t these crabs simply climb over the top and escape?quot; someone wanted to know. quot;No,quot; came the reply. quot;These are Indian crabs. As soon as one begins to climb and reach near the top, the others pull him down.quot;

Whenever we win in cricket or hockey, it is the norm to say that victory was made possible by quot;team effortquot;. It is only natural to presume therefore that losses come about because of a lack of this team effort. Even the Pandavas couldn8217;t win at Kurukshetra despite having good on their side and perhaps a better team, without resorting to occasional chicanery. Great opponents like Drona and Karna fell to what would be called gamesmanship today. Historically, the refusal to be team-men by the likes of Sirajudaullah probably hastened the advent of British rule. With the weight of myth and reality on their shoulders, Indian sportsmen seldom shone as team players.

The parental8217; theme needs elaboration. The stories of Susheela introducing the six-year-old Anand to chess and fanning his interest in it are already part of the folklore of Indian sport. When she questioned a move Anand made in the final against Shirov in Tehran, it seemed natural, as natural as Anand8217;s reaction: quot;Mother knows best.quot; Susheela takes her place among the great mothers of sport: Mrs Grace, the mother of the Grace brothers WG, EM and GF; the mother of the Mohammad brothers in Pakistan, Hanif, Mushtaq, Sadiq; Mrs Connors, mother of Jimmy Connors; Klara Kasparova, mother of Garry who took his mother8217;s name; Maggie Amritraj, mother of Anand, Vijay and Ashok. The world crown, in some ways, is as much Susheela8217;s as it is Anand8217;s.

That seems to be the secret of India8217;s successes in individual sport: The interest shown by parents. Krishnan had his father T.K. Ramanathan to thank, as did his son Ramesh. In the early years, Maggie Amritraj worked just as hard as her sons, one of whom, Vijay was a weak child, an asthmatic to boot. She ensured the boys trained, played, attended school, took part in the right tournaments, toured, drove them around. Such was her influence that it is said she even decided in later years who the national champion would be when Anand met Vijay in the final. The more gifted Vijay was asked to lose on at least one occasion. Maggie was also the driving force behind the Britannia Amritraj Tennis scheme which produced Asian and even Grand Slam champions. With her soft-spoken husband Robert by her side, she did more for Indian tennis than produce three gifted children. She gave it a future. Prakash Padukone8217;s father Ramesh was a good club player, and an organiser of badminton events in Bangalore. He ensured thatPrakash and his older son Pradeep played the game regularly. Leander Paes continues to turn to his father, Vece, for guidance.

In team games, the role of the federations and associations assumes greater importance because only such bodies can think and act for a large number of players. The role of the parent, therefore, is limited, and in some cases even detrimental to success if the parent is blind to everything else by the career of the son or daughter. There is too, the danger of revenge served cold. At least some of Mohinder Amarnath8217;s problems in mid-career were caused by petty officials trying to get their own small backs at his father, Lala Amarnath.

While the rest of the country pays well-deserved tributes to Viswanathan Anand, therefore, let us also salute his mother Susheela, and through that, all the mothers and fathers who sacrificed so much to produce champions. We might have struggled in individual sports just as badly as in team games without their special interest in their special children. It is useful to remember this when officials from the sports federations and government officials and bureaucrats all jostle for attention in the wake of a champion8217;s triumph. Mother knows best; but more importantly, she knows right from the beginning.

Stories of Susheela introducing six-year-old Anand to chess and fanning his interest in it are already part of the folklore of Indian sport