Magnus Carlsen's triumph in the world chess championship tussle with fivetime world champion Vishwanath Anand in Chennai reinforces the fact that there are no certainties in all forms of sport.
Here was a Norwegian youngster making a seasoned contestant look so totally out of his depth.
Reports of his 'blundering' moves were unheard of.
Vishy didn't just seem normal.
The Norwegian youngster reminds me of Mohammed Lafir of Sri Lanka, who won the world billiards title in Mumbai.
Neither before his triumph nor after that has there been any sign of billiards or snooker being played in that island country. How Lafir grew up to become a world champ will remain a mystery. Maybe Norway will find followers of chess seeking such distinction as Carlsen.
Vishy, certainly, need not get gloomy over the Chennai performance, regardless of the result. It is only a few who have had to their credit, winning the world title as many times as he has. It is only a negli gible part of this country that is known to encourage chess as a form of competitive sport.
Soviet Russia dominated the world championship scene for a long period is well known. How they managed that is the country's secret. Right from Mikhail Botvinnik, their names were familiar to sport followers in general.
No reason was ever given for their domination.
That a Norwegian youth -he is only 22 -has won the world title may tickle them, but domination in any sport is periodical.
Who could have visualised Czechs winning the Davis Cup again, considering the long-time domination of USA and Australia.
Incidentally, Jaroslav Drobny was the only Czech who had ever won the Wimbledon singles title, in the early 1950's. He was a left-hander, if memory serves me right; and WW II compelled him to move to England.
?
?
