Where do we stand? (Part I)

Jinson Johnson on way to 1500m gold in Asian Games_Photo by G. Rajaraman.

The best-ever medal haul by India in an Asian Games has understandably sent the country into jubilation mode. Tweeple have run out of superlatives in describing Indian success. Internet sites have kept track of every medal that the country earned through the fortnight, discussed medal chances on a daily basis and analyzed India’s long-term priorities and goals.

Not unexpectedly, there is discussion in the media and on the internet and forums about India’s chances at the Tokyo Olympics two years from now in the backdrop of this “outstanding” success.

“It gives us an idea about where we stand,” said Somdevdev Varman on television as the tennis star, a double gold medallist in the 2010 Games, and a former Davis Cupper, discussed the peformances with Olympian hockey player Viren Rasquinha about what lay ahead.

So, where do we stand?

With a bunch of teenagers ready to storm the world scene, especially in shooting_notwithstanding the disappointment for 16-year-old pistol shooter Manu Bhaker in these Games_with a javelin thrower (Neeraj Chopra) already in the 88-metre bracket, and with a World junior champion in the women’s 400m (Hima Das) breaking barriers as though nothing was beyond her, not to speak of the established stars, the picture looks rosy.

Yet, it would be logical to tread cautiously as the authorities assess India’s chances. It is easy to raise expectations and then lament once reality strikes you at the Olympics. It is encouraging, however, to note that all the authorities, barring perhaps a few federations have worked determinedly in this exercise of pushing forward for Olympic success during the past couple of years to achieve the primary target in the Asian Games, that of winning the country’s best-ever medal collection.

Can this success convert itself into Olympic medals? It may, it may not. So many factors go into the winning of an Olympic medal.

Static slot in medals table

India has not improved its position (8th) in the medals tally from the last time in Incheon. The medals have increased, gold from 11 to 15 and silver from 10 to 24. The total of 69 medals bettered the 65 won by India in 2010. The highest gold collection of 15 in the inaugural games in 1951 at home was also equalled.

India earned its record medals from 18 of the 36 sports it had entered. The other 18 included a 49-member squad in canoeing and kayaking that drew blank.

It may be pointed out that 1951 had only 11 nations including the host competing and this cannot be compared to today’s Asian Games of 46 OCA members and “African imports” in countries like Bahrain and Qatar or the presence of Central Asian Republics like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. While this is true, it is also pertinent to observe that the inaugural games had just six sports discipline compared to 40 in the present edition and only 169 medals were given away compared to 1552 in Jakarta and Palembang.

It is   disturbing to view India’s unchanged position in the medals table amidst the euphoria created by the unprecedented medal haul. India was 11th in Beijing 1990 with just one gold, eighth in Hiroshima 1994, ninth in Bangkok 1998, eighth in Busan 2002, eighth in Doha 2006, sixth in Guangzhou 2010 and eighth in Incheon 2014.

The top three having been China, Japan and South Korea (not necessarily in that order for second and third), since 1978 (China entered the fray in 1974 in Teheran and was third then behind Japan and Iran), India has languished behind countries like Iran, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and North Korea in various editions. Kazakhstan fared poorly in boxing this time. The sport having given that country six gold last time, could not manage to provide even one gold on this occasion.

A host country having an advantage is understandable. Like Iran in 1974, Thailand in 1978 and 1998 or Indonesia now (14 of its 31 gold medals came from the popular local martial arts sport, pencak silat, and a few others from other new additions to the programme). But it is time India firmly established itself as the No. 4.

Interestingly, if one takes only Olympic sport for the 2020 Games, India comes No. 4 with 14 gold and 21 silver in this edition of the Games compared to 14 gold and 15 silver for Iran and 14 gold and 20 silver for Uzbekistan. Chinese Taipei, now seventh with 17 gold will only have 11 gold.

It is pertinent to note here that Uzbekistan claimed four gold medals in the Rio Olympics, three in boxing and one in weightlifting after having won no gold in these two disciplines in the 2014 Asian Games! A history of a strong background in a sport helps but Asian Games success need not necessarily convert into Olympic medals nor can reversals in Asiad be considered as definite precursors for Olympic failures.

In assessing any team in relation to its Olympic prospects based on what was achieved in the Asian Games, it is also necessary to understand the strengths of a team. Iran won its Rio Olympic gold in weightlifting (2) and wrestling (1), sports in which it has been traditionally strong at the Asian and global levels.

In this context, it is important to analyze India’s medals in Jakarta towards Olympic success. And the top-most medal-earner happens to be athletics, 19 medals in all. Can Indian athletes bag medals in the Tokyo Olympics in 2020? Say three to four medals?

Yes, it is possible says Arpinder Singh, the gold medal winner in triple jump, the country’s first gold in the event since Mohinder Singh Gill, now based in the US, took it in 1970.

Such optimism coming from a leading athlete in the country should be encouraging as administrators draw up plans towards ‘Target Tokyo’ and the Government prepares to chart the course for Olympic medals two years from now.

But, we have to be realistic, too, in assessing our strengths in athletics. At this point, only javelin thrower Neeraj Chopra, who threw to a national record of 88.06m that placed him at sixth in the world lists for the season, looks to be true world-class and a medal contender in 2020.

Contrary to what is being constantly projected, it is not necessary for Chopra to enter the 90-metre club that the Germans dominate at this stage, for him to be in contention for a medal in Tokyo. Personal bests need not always be matched in big championships. It would be beneficial to get into the 90-metre bracket for the confidence it can generate in the young superstar before Tokyo but he can still be a contender if is consistent in the range of 87-88m.

Who else apart from Chopra?

Apart from Chopra, not many appear to be in contention at this point when it comes to Tokyo calculations. Things can change of course. As Arpinder has pointed out, Hima Das (400m), Dutee Chand (short sprints) and Jinson Johnson (middle distance) could also be among the contenders. He does not rule himself out. It must be mentioned sprint medals are invariably beyond the reach of Indians. 

Now that the IAAF has drawn up a new qualification system, based on world rankings in the main, qualification itself would be tough, especially in the sprints. Rankings will take into consideration the quality of the meet and it will no longer be dependent on some meet in some location in the world where a few countries get together and "achieve" qualification marks in many events. The IAAF is yet to announce the detailed qualification system with qualifying marks but has stated that such marks would be utilised only in "exceptional" cases and the broad selection would be based on world rankings to be re-introduced from next year. The upper limits in each event have already been determined, for example 56 each in sprints in either section, 40 each in both hurdles in each section, 45 each in steeplechase and so on.

Though Tokyo is still far away, it is a good time to look at where our athletes stand, as Somdevdev Varman opined in that TV discussion.

The chart below should provide a fair assessment about India’s current strengths and where our athletes are placed in relation to world’s leading performers:

SB: Season Best, PB: Personal Best; NR: National record; DQ: Disqualified. Lists up to Sept 2, 2018;
Rio '16-6th pl: 2016 Olympics-6th place                                                                                                 

 It is all well to target medals, but it is essential to look around to see what the prospects are, even at this early stage, so that preparations can be aimed towards bridging that gap.

If nine of the events in Jakarta had seen no ‘African imports’ (mainly from Nigeria, Kenya and Morocco) representing Qatar or Bahrain, India would have converted its silver (and one bronze) into gold, thereby enlarging its gold collection in athletics to 16. But then, transfer of allegiance is all too common nowadays and Asia will have to accept it.  If nothing else, these African athletes, good in a variety of track events, do help improve Asian standards.

Most of us remember Saif Saeed Shaheen (formerly Stephen Cherono) who shifted his loyalty from Kenya to Qatar in 2003. He still holds the world record in the 3000m steeplechase, at 7:53.63, set in Brussels on September 3, 2004.

Athletes seek transfer from other countries and regions, too, from Ethiopia, Kenya, Cuba and Mexico to the US, from Nigeria, Mozambique, Tunisia and Morocco to Italy, from Ghana and Ethiopia to the Netherlands and so on. Such transfers take place in other sports also though much lesser in numbers.

 (Contd in Part II)