Candidate Chess: Vaishali, Divya Deshmukh save Indian embarrassment Praganandha should now act Chess news.


Candidate Chess: Vaishali, Divya Deshmukh save Indian embarrassment Praganandha should now act.
Vaishali, Divya Deshmukh, and Praganananda (Photos by Michael Valoza and Yvonne Ness)

NEW DELHI: As the FIDE Candidates Tournament crosses the near-midway mark of its 14-round marathon, a kind of intensity has begun to fill the Mediterranean air. For the Indian contingent, however, the narrative is divided between a desperate scramble for relevance in the open section and a resurgence, if somewhat erratic, in the women’s category.While Uzbekistan’s Javakhir Sundarov is currently playing a version of chess that seems light years ahead of his peers, leading the Open section with 5.5/6, the Indian challenge, led alone by R Praganandha in the relevant category, appears to be stuck in second gear.

look

Nihal Sarin Exclusive: Candidates’ 2026 predictions, Anish Giri’s ‘Darvish’ tag, and more #Chess

In the women’s section, Vaishali Ramesh Babu and Divya Deshmukh was able to secure a crucial win with the black pieces in Round 6 at the Cape St George’s Hotel and Resort in Cyprus on Saturday, although those victories were due to his own clinical play as much as his opponents’ eliminations.Sandroof storm continues.In the open category, the gap between the leader and the chasing pack is growing into a chasm. Sandrov’s dominance is so absolute that a world championship match against De Gokesh later this year looks inevitable.Fabiano Caruana is second with 4 points, 1.5 points behind the leader, while India’s only hope, Praganandha, is weak with 3 points.Analyzing the round, veteran grandmaster Praveen Theapse noted that while Praganananda showed intent against Hikaru Nakamura, the execution fell short of a decisive blow.“Pragnandha played quite enthusiastically against Nakamura, he was black, but he kept complicating the positions. However, Nakamura managed to find the right moves and the game ended in a repetition of moves as both players were forced to repeat, otherwise they would have been in an inferior position. It was a well-fought, but uneventful game without a time draw”. Game of the day However, the real story remains Sandroof, who eliminated Wei Yi with surgical precision. Thipse was effective in his definition, marking a clear distinction between Uzbek and the rest of the field.“The best game of the round was between Wei Yi and Sindarov. In a very strange positional battle, Sindarov beat him easily. Wei Yi looked better, but in fact, Sindarov has been better for a long time. The quality of the game is completely different, completely different class,” Thipse explained.

Javakhir Sindarov (photo by Michel Walsza)

Javakhir Sindarov (photo by Michel Walsza)

If Sundaroff continues like this, he is bound to win the tournament with a round or two to spare. Although Karvan have been playing consistently and strongly, Sandroof is just a different class in this tournament.”FIDE Candidate Round 6 Results – 4 April 2026Open the section.

  • Fabiano Caruana 0.5–0.5 Andre Espinco
  • Hikaru Nakamura 0.5–0.5 R Pragnananandhaa
  • Anish Gray 0.5–0.5 Matthias Blübaum
  • Wei Yi 0–1 Javakhir Sandarov

Fortune favors disorder on the part of women.On the women’s side, India finally gained some momentum, although the critical lens remains on how those points were earned.Vaishali and Divya have now joined the chasing pack behind leader Anna Mozichak (4/6 points). Vaishali’s encounter with Katarina Ligno was a rollercoaster where the Indian opted for aggression at the cost of structural integrity.Thipse observes, “Vishali tried to complicate matters at the expense of positional privileges. “It was not clear whether she was better off with a move of 20. When he offered the h5 pawn (on the 22nd move), it was a risky decision. Ligno could have taken it with 24.Qxh5 instead of 24.Rc1, which turned out to be a bad choice.” According to Thipse, Vaishali’s persistence only paid off as Ligno retreated into a shell.“Vishali continued to play aggressively, and Ligno played passively. By move 29, Vaishali offered a bishop sacrifice (…Bxh3) that could not be taken,” he noted. “With move 32, he sacrificed the same bishop in a different position (32…gxf3) to fully expose the king position. Ligno eventually had to give up with move 47, but the game remained on a knife’s edge for a long time.”Divya’s great escapeDivya Deshmukh’s win over Bibisara Assaubayeva salvaged a late game after a similar script followed a similar one. Employing his favorite Cambridge Springs defense, Divya found himself in a rare variation previously seen between Magnus Carlsen and Vincent Kemmer.“The position was initially equal, but Bibi Sara did the right variation on the 15th step, giving her a slight advantage. At this stage, Divya started drifting. She was in dire straits from move 24 when Bibi Sarah broke the kingside,” Thipse commented. However, the Indian was given a lifeline by a string of unforced errors from the Kazakh player.“Bebesara chose to attack with the queen instead of the knight on move 26. 26.Ng4 gave him a big advantage, but he played 26.Qe3. Then came a series of unforced, unforced errors: 27.c5,28.c6. These moves were inferior to his first game. Finally, Divya got a chance to outwit him after 46 moves to win with strategy and tactics.”Despite Saturday’s favorable result, the Indian camp will be wary. If Pragnandha is to hold off Sindarov’s juggernaut, and if the women are to overtake Mozychuk, the reliance on opponent errors will have to be replaced by the clinical dominance displayed by the tournament leader at the moment.FIDE Candidate Round 6 Results – 4 April 2026Women’s section

  • Zoe Gen 0–1 Anna Muzyczyk
  • Tan Zhongyi 0.5–0.5 Aleksandra Goryachkina
  • Katrina Ligno 0–1 Vaishali Ramesh Babu
  • Bibisara Assaubayeva 0-1 Divya Deshmukh

Round 7 Pairing – 5th April 2026

  • Open Section: Espinco vs. Wei Yi; Sandroof v. Anish Giri; Blübaum v. Nakamura; Praganananda v. Caruana.
  • Women’s Section: Mozychick vs Isaubyfa; Divya vs Katrina Ligno; Vaishali vs. Tan Zhongyi; Gorychkina v. Zoe Jnr.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *