The claim for playing on top board always kept one K out of the team and Judit Polgar faced problems in the past when she was included in the men's team, though she is now eligible to don their second board on account of he Elo rating and probably top board if they decided to give weight to experience in favour of the young Peter Leko.

Olympiad, therefore, is a prestigious event in chess, probably as worthy as the World championship in the Fide calendar, and the absence of Viswanathan Anand will be conspicuous as he is one player the budding talents from all over the world would like to meet.

The argument that Anand'spresence will not make much of a difference to India's fortunes is illogical and can be sold only to the ignorant chess rabble.

There is no gainsaying the fact that Anand is a precious jewel for any top board in the World, the equivalent of Sachin Tendulkar if one were to compare roles. His very presence will lift the morale of the Indian team and give it the much needed confidence while playing strong teams.

The best example was the Novi Saad Olympiad in 1990 where the team played above its potential to finish 10th in a field of 110 or so. It could be argued that in Novi Saad, Dibyendu Barua was in sparkling form and even bettered Anand's rating performance.

It could also be argued that Anand alone can only play in one-fourth of the team's total games (one match consists of four games). But today, India have a team that is looking up with talented youngsters like Abhijit Kunte, who has two GM norms, and Krishnan Sasikiran, who will form a good supporting cast for Anand and Barua.

The grapevine has itthat Anand was disillusioned after India's average performance in the Manila Olympiad in 1992. One of the Indian players said Garry Kasparov taunted Anand during the course of the Manila Olympiad. Kasparov stated that he would not have to play Anand as Russia would not play India because of the wide gap in the score group of the teams.

That was the last time Anand donned the Indian colours in the Olympiad. Curiously, it was one of the rare cases when Barua played so poorly and it reflected on the final outcome.

Yet, if one compares India's standing in Manila with that of the subsequent editions in Moscow and Yerevan, the difference of 20 to 30 places in the Anand-less teams is too glaring. While in Chennai this June, Anand vehemently said he disapproved of the Olympiad format and vaguely suggested that this was the reason why he kept away from it.

He also favoured the World Team Championship in which the Continental champions played and so there was no risk of rating loss. But the underlying theme ofthe entire argument was that India should first of all qualify from Asia as the champions.

Now that India has the best backup force, is it too much if the country expects Anand to lend a helping hand in its quest to win the Asian team title ? Only Anand would be able to answer this question.