Mission Plausible

How exactly does the Olympic Gold Quest function? And what it means for India’s prospects at the 2012 London Olympics

Prakash Padukone watching the men’s singles semifinals at the Commonwealth Games. Lee Chong Wei of Malaysia defeated India’s Chetan Anand in the first semifinal. The giant Rajeev Ouseph of England beat P Kashyap, the frisky little Indian, in the second. The umpire sat in a high chair at one end of the badminton net. The service judge sat in a low chair at the other end. Umpire and service judge faced each other. The difference in their altitude and their still, erect postures made them look like master and disciple.

Padukone, former All-England champion, was sitting behind the baseline. His hands were folded across his chest most of the time. Though 55, his arm muscles swelled under the half-sleeves of his beige shirt. A man of few gestures, he did not clap, only nodded if someone played an exceptional shot.

Padukone, not the umpire, was the real master in the arena, a figure who commands universal respect through his achievements and conduct.

“Prakash is as clean as a still lake,” says Geet Sethi. “I have very high regard for him.” That is why Sethi, former world amateur and professional billiards champ, went first to Prakash when he envisioned Olympic Gold Quest (OGQ), a non-profit mission he launched in 2006 to produce Indian Olympic medallists.

Since the 1998 Asian Games, the mismanagement of Indian sport had begun to frustrate Sethi. That edition of the Asiad was the first to have cue sports. Sethi was part of the Indian contingent and experienced the mess first hand. He got to hear of the problems again at the 2000 Sydney Olympics, where he was not a competitor but attended a dinner for the Indian contingent.

“After the Asiad, I wrote many articles about the situation. I was vociferous in my criticism,” says Sethi, a suave, age-defying 49-year-old in the Padukone tradition. “When in Sydney, I said to myself, ‘Is it good enough to just criticise? Let’s do something.’ I got back and instinctively flew to Bangalore to meet Prakash.”

Faith can move mountains. A telephone booth can turn Clark Kent into Superman. But for an air castle to turn into a real one, you need money. Padukone came on board, but it was not until Shitin Desai, R Ramaraj and Niraj Bajaj, men with financial muscle, signed up that OGQ could become a reality.

Desai is Executive Vice President, DSP Merrill Lynch (just saying “DSP Merrill Lynch” makes you feel corporate). Ramaraj is co-founder of Sify India and a venture partner at Sequoia Capital India. Bajaj is Chairman & Managing Director, Mukand, and on the board of several Bajaj companies. With three national table tennis titles, he is a sporting achiever too.

Now there are nine directors on the OGQ board, including Viswanathan Anand, who many rate as the greatest Indian contemporary sportsman along with Sachin Tendulkar. The board has seen the addition of Rakesh Khanna, founding partner, Ambit RSM, and Neeraj Bharadwaj, managing director, Accel Partners. All the money comes from the corporate board and a “few friends of OGQ”, which includes Rakesh Jhunjhunwala, the famous equity investor. The sportsmen on the board, though, have not put in their money. “They are knowledge partners,” says Sethi.

Viren Rasquinha, the former India hockey captain, is OGQ’s chief operating officer, handling its day-to-day affairs. He heads a four-member team that has Dr Nikhil Latey, director of sports rehab, Janit Desai, director marketing and operations, Vaibhav Tandon, head of research, and Vivek, who runs the OGQ website.

They are OGQ’s paid employees. This is heartening, since the concept of honorary positions has been an eternal detriment to the growth of Indian sport. Says Rasquinha, “I had another offer after I graduated from ISB (Indian School of Business, Hyderabad, where he did his MBA in marketing and strategy), but I turned it down. I found my calling with OGQ. It is a challenge to work on a mission like this. Gold medals are not going to grow on trees.”

Why are we talking so much about OGQ? It is a legitimate question. Here is the legitimate answer. There is greater interest in Olympic sports in India after the staging of the Commonwealth Games and the country’s promising performance. This, in turn, has provided an impetus to organisations like OGQ. Twelve of India’s 38 gold medals in New Delhi were won by five athletes under the OGQ umbrella. Gagan Narang, Omkar Singh and Vijay Kumar won multiple golds in shooting, Saina Nehwal and Suranjoy Singh won gold in badminton and 52 kg boxing, respectively. Though Suranjoy got a walkover in the final, he was the favourite to win.

While India has other sports development programmes, OGQ’s mix of sporting credentials, corporate professionalism and zero scam quotient makes it an enterprise you can invest your faith in. They may not be perfect. Journalists questioned their selection of one athlete openly at a conference at the Cricket Club of India in Mumbai last year. But OGQ’s strategic intent seems worthy of its lofty name.

“If anyone doubts how we spend the money we collect, they only need to look at the credibility of our members and founders,” says Rasquinha, while shuttling from one meeting to another in New Delhi, the horn of the car audible on the phone.

But while sports fans are familiar with OGQ, they would like to know more about the nitty-gritties and what the country can expect at the 2012 London Olympics. Talk is fine, but people would like some numbers. What, for example, are the amounts the foundation is spending on different athletes?

Here are some answers. OGQ has identified six ‘priority sports’ in which it can help India win Olympic medals. These are athletics, badminton, shooting, boxing, archery and wrestling. They have signed on three athletes (Tintu Luka, Vikas Gowda, Om Prakash Singh Karhana), eight shooters (Gagan Narang, badminton players (Saina Nehwal, Guru Sai Dutt, P Kashyap, Sai Praneeth, PV Sandhu) and six boxers (Mary Kom, Sanjay Kolte, Usha Nagisetty, Suranjoy Singh, Shiva Thapa, Thokchom Nanao Singh). They are yet to select wrestlers and archers.

These athletes are not given money, but their needs are taken care of. Sethi estimates OGQ has spent Rs 2 crore in the past two years. “Two years ago is when we gained momentum,” he says.

Asked the extent of funds it has now, Sethi says, “Enough to meet our commitments, which extend up to 2016.”

Says R Ramaraj, “The model is such that all administrative costs are borne by the board of directors. We plan to support the athletes through fundraising. We are in a position to continue in this fashion till the 2016 Olympics. But we need to focus more on fundraising.”

“It’s like this,” says Sethi, “The corporate board has asked us to raise funds. But if push comes to shove, their cheque-books are open.” OGQ recently launched its Power Your Champions scheme to raise more money. This scheme asks Indians to donate Rs 100 per month towards the project.

Rasquinha says, “Our goal is to get a million Indians to contribute Rs 100 a month. Imagine the sums we will have for our athletes if we get even close to the target. Eight to nine companies have signed up for this. (Sethi puts the number of individuals who have signed up at 3,000-4,000). This is more realistic than getting a corporate to commit a big sum.”

Asked what concrete things OGQ has done for its athletes, Sethi says, “Saina Nehwal and P Kashyap needed a physiotherapist exclusively for themselves. We got them one. We provided Tejaswini Sawant with ammunition, which made a small but crucial difference to her performance. PT Usha, whose athletics school we have a tie-up with, wanted a certain kind of gym equipment. We acquired it from Spain, spending about Rs 30 lakh.”

World champion Tejaswini, on whom OGQ has agreed to spend Rs 8 lakh a year, says, “Since joining them in October 2009, I don’t have to worry about my equipment or training expenses. Earlier, I would take the train while travelling within India. Viren told me to fly instead.” Each athlete has a different budget, depending on the athlete’s potential. For example, Gagan Narang, India’s best performer at the CWG with four gold medals, is sanctioned an amount of Rs 40 lakh a year.

There are some programmes that take a cut from the athlete’s earnings. Asked if OGQ does the same, Rasquinha says, “No. We only have a voluntary clause. If anyone feels like putting some money back into the project, they can. This too shall be used for development.”

Asked how often the OGQ board meets, considering the high profile of its members and their busy schedules, Sethi says, “We meet at least once in two months. It is difficult for Anand or Leander Paes to be there at every meeting. But we have 80-90 per cent quorum. The rest of the days we are constantly in touch.”

Members of OGQ say that they want to work with India’s sports federations, not compete with them. “Viren has done a good job of being friends with the federations,” says Ramaraj. Rasquinha says, “We want to complement the system.”

The Commonwealth Games have not just boosted OGQ’s morale, but also given them some pointers for London 2012. “OGQ athletes won 30 per cent of India’s gold medals,” says Rasquinha. “India as a whole did well. Some of the performances were world class and could have earned qualification for the finals at the Beijing Olympics. We know where we stand now.”

“The CWG was a milestone,” says Sethi, “While the shade of the medal is not always a reliable indicator, timings and scores are. India won three medals in Beijing. I think we will win five to seven in London. We are there for the athletes. We don’t want anyone to miss a medal by a hundredth of a second because something was lacking in terms of training or support.”

gold medalLondonOlympics