Samarkand and Hong Kong: A Thai Upset, an Unbeaten Chinese Team, and Two Carlsen Defeats

One afternoon in Samarkand, as all eyes turned to the main board, a name almost no one remembered made history. Laohawirapap, a player from Thailand, sat across from Arjun Erigaisi, the Indian super-grandmaster, and won. There were no loud commentaries, no close-up cameras. Only moves, and a result that made chess followers pause. The same day, in Hong Kong, the World Team Rapid Championship entered its second day. Magnus Carlsen, considered the number one, lost two games. His team, WR Chess, was defeated by Team MGD1 and Barys. Meanwhile, an all-Chinese team named Dragon Chilling leads with 14/16 match points, unbeaten after eight rounds. These results, at first glance, seem disconnected. But they tell a story about elite chess in 2026: where stars are no longer invincible, and well-built teams are rising. FIDE, on June 18, 2026, published a brief results report on two concurrent events. The first is the Samarkand Open, an open tournament in Uzbekistan, entering its first round. The second is the World Team Rapid Championship in Hong Kong, on its second day of play. The report provides no technical data: no moves, no openings, no Elo ratings, no time controls. All we have are results and standings. This poses a challenge for anyone wanting deep analysis. But it also opens an opportunity to look at the bigger picture: the movement of elite chess, where tournaments are increasingly dense, teams increasingly commercialized, and upsets increasingly unpredictable. In Samarkand, most strong players won comfortably. This is typical in the first round of a Swiss-system open, where top seeds usually face lower-rated or local players. The rating gap is large enough to create mismatches. But amid a predictably quiet round, Laohawirapap created an exception. He defeated Erigaisi, one of the strongest players in the world in recent years, who regularly sits in the 2750-2800 Elo range. This data needs verification, but if true, it is a genuine shock: a player outside the elite defeated a super-grandmaster. In chess, the term 'upset' is usually reserved for a decisive underdog win. And here, it happened. His pressing block was not on the tactics board, but in a heart no one dared believe in. Laohawirapap had nothing to lose. Erigaisi had everything to lose. That is the psychology often seen in early rounds of open tournaments: pressure falls on the favorite. But turning pressure into victory requires more than luck. It requires focus, precise moves, and a bit of courage to seize the opportunity. The FIDE report does not tell us how Laohawirapap did it. But the result is recorded. For Erigaisi, this loss is a blemish on his record. But it is also a reminder that in open tournaments, no one can afford complacency. Erigaisi, who has made great strides in recent years, remains one of the best young players in the world. A first-round loss does not change that. But it shows that in rapid and blitz, the gap between top players and the rest is not as large as in classical chess. And for Laohawirapap, this victory could be a turning point. Such a result can bring more opportunities to play in major events, attract sponsor attention, and more importantly, self-belief. In Hong Kong, the story has a different tone. The World Team Rapid Championship brings together teams organized as clubs or sponsors. Team names like Dragon Chilling, Team MGD1, Barys, WR Chess show this is not a national-team Olympiad-style event, but a stage for well-invested collectives. Dragon Chilling, the all-Chinese team, leads with 14/16 match points after eight rounds, a near-perfect score. In a match-point system, 14/16 equates to winning almost every match, perhaps seven wins and one draw or eight wins. This shows squad depth: not relying on one star, but on balance across boards. Magnus Carlsen, considered the world's number one, lost two games on the second day. His WR Chess team was beaten by Team MGD1 and Barys. This is a notable signal, but it must be put in context. Rapid is a higher-variance format than classical. Shorter thinking time, greater clock pressure, and in a team event, every board can affect the overall result. Carlsen remains one of the greatest players in history, but losing two games in a team rapid day does not mean a decline in classical form. It only shows that in rapid, the gap between top players and the rest is narrowing. Carlsen, at 35, has been the world's number one for many years. He has shifted focus to rapid and blitz events, as well as commercial events. His participation in a team event in Hong Kong is part of a strategy to build his personal brand and promote chess as an entertainment sport. Two losses on the second day may indicate that even the greatest have bad days. But they do not diminish his legacy. Based on my experience following matches, as a chess commentator for VTC for four years, I have observed that team events often produce bigger surprises than individual events. When you play for a collective, you fight not only for yourself but also for your teammates. Pressure can be motivation, but it can also be a burden. In WR Chess's case, it seems the combination of one individual star and teammates not strong enough could not withstand teams with more even depth like Team MGD1 and Barys. This is a familiar lesson in team sports: one outstanding individual cannot replace a cohesive collective. In the chess world, the only boundary is the boundary of skill. But in team formats, that boundary is also measured by chemistry, board-order strategy, and collective pressure tolerance. Dragon Chilling is showing they understand this. With 14/16 points, they win not just through individual talent, but through a system. That is what professional chess teams are aiming for: building a squad with no weaknesses, rather than relying on one star. The World Team Rapid Championship is a relatively new stage in the FIDE system. It combines the team element of the Olympiad with the commercial element of club leagues. Teams play each other across multiple boards, usually four, with match points awarded. This creates a different dynamic from individual events: a player can lose their game but the team can still win if teammates win. That is why squad depth is more important than ever. I once worked on the project 'Forgotten Queens' in 2026, when the country was focused on the men's World Cup in Russia. Then, I sought stories about female chess players and women's tournaments ignored by the media. In Samarkand this time, the forgotten players are the unknown names on the board. Laohawirapap is one of them. He has no impressive resume, no high ranking, no media attention. But he appeared, and he won. That is the beauty of open chess: anyone can become the protagonist for a day. This event also marks the rise of Asia in chess. With the Samarkand Open in Uzbekistan, the team event in Hong Kong, and the dominance of the Chinese team, along with the Thai player's victory, Asia is showing itself as a major force. China has long been a chess power, with top players like Ding Liren, Wei Yi, and many young talents. India is also rising strongly with Erigaisi, Gukesh, and Praggnanandhaa. Southeast Asia, with Laohawirapap, may be seeing a new wave. One notable point is that the FIDE report does not mention any female players. Chess is one of the sports with participation from both men and women, but at the elite level, the gender gap remains large. Women's tournaments, such as the Women's World Chess Championship, still do not receive commensurate attention. That is an issue that advocates for gender equality in sports like me always ponder. However, within this article, let us focus on what happened. However, caution is needed. A single upset does not make a trend. In chess, weaker players occasionally beat stronger ones, especially in early rounds of open tournaments when top seeds are not yet fully engaged. To judge whether Laohawirapap has truly improved, we need to follow the next rounds, and more importantly, other tournaments. Similarly, Carlsen's two losses should not be interpreted as decline. That is rapid, in a team event, where luck and variance are much higher than in classical. What is more notable may be the emergence of the commercial team model. Teams like Dragon Chilling, Team MGD1, Barys, WR Chess are not national teams. They are sponsored teams, possibly privately owned, competing under brand names. This is a growing model in world chess, similar to esports or professional basketball leagues. It brings sponsorship money, professionalization, and opportunities for players to have more stable incomes. But it also raises questions of identity: is chess gradually losing its national character and becoming a purely commercial sport? Another signal is calendar density. Two FIDE events take place simultaneously: the Samarkand Open in Uzbekistan and the World Team Rapid Championship in Hong Kong. This shows elite chess is increasingly busy, with many tournaments held in parallel. For fans, it is a chance to follow more events. But for players, it is a challenge of stamina and focus. And for organizers, it is a problem of splitting audiences and resources. Looking broader, chess in 2026 is showing a shift. Young players from India, China, and other countries are rising strongly. Open tournaments are increasingly high-quality, attracting even super-grandmasters. Commercial chess teams are reshaping how chess is organized and sponsored. And upsets like Laohawirapap's remind us that in chess, nothing is impossible. I have seen a generation ready to attack, and I believe they will never back down. That generation includes young players daring to challenge big names, well-built chess teams, and organizers daring to experiment with new models. They do not just play chess to win, but to shape the future of the sport. The question is: are we witnessing a shift from the era of outstanding individuals to the era of well-organized collectives? The answer may not be clear yet. But one thing is certain: chess is becoming harder to predict, and that is good for the sport.