As the Indian contingent was leaving for London, media houses and analysts proclaimed that the boxing team, alone, would win around three medals. I subscribed to that forecast, even if it meant the unthinkable — that athletes of one discipline would match India’s best-ever campaign at the Olympics.

But it was based on cold facts. That Vijender Singh and Vikas Krishan (both world championship medallists) and M.C.. Mary Kom, a five-time world champion, have, at their best, the history and the pedigree to do what only nations from the former Soviet bloc, USA, Cuba, etc can dream of. As well as the fact that India is seeing a boxing revolution — of sorts.
Where did the revolution start? In Haryana.
When? Well, around the early 2000s, but it took proper flight after Vijender’s bronze medal at the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
Why Haryana? In big part because of the concerted efforts of the state government to reward its athletes if they found success at the top level internationally.
But why only boxing? To be fair, other sports too are showing positive signs in Haryana. At the 2010 Commonwealth Games, almost half of India’s medals came from Haryana athletes. But yes, boxing is flourishing there. This is because from the time the first-ever Sports Authority of India centre was set up in Bhiwani in the late 1980s, Haryana has had a culture of boxing. Vijender’s success has only raised the stakes.
And then the crucial question: why only Haryana, isn’t Manipur up there too? Yes and no. In terms of talent and ability, Manipur has always been around, but socio-political reasons have held athletes back in that part of the country.
While we celebrate the achievements of Devendro Singh and Mary in London, they are not part of a revolution; they are just the faces of boxing in Manipur. There’s a lot more talent there, but no effort on the part of our sports administrators to tap into it yet.
Can we really call the Indian boxing scene a revolution yet? Why not? In the last four years, we have won medals at the Olympics, had world champions (Mary), world no. 1s (Vijender) and, crucially, an eight-person representation in London. Did we ever think that possible?
Importantly, the number of boxers to have qualified for London did not qualify by chance or circumstances. It happened because of a moderately professional — rare for India — federation, tremendous financial support from the Haryana government, role models and the continued good work by the Indian Army (in terms of its promotion of sports).
If eight boxers had qualified despite the system, as is usual in India, it wouldn’t be a revolution. It is one, because processes are in place today to make India a strong amateur boxing nation.
Remember though, that the upward curve started after 2008. Whether the medal count matches pre-London forecasts or not, the process shall continue. Today, among India’s top boxers, London participants Sumit Sangwan, Shiva Thapa, Devendro and Krishan are all in the 19-22 age group.
Away from London, Suranjoy Singh is slightly older at 26, but Nanao Singh is 21 and so are a number of other competent boxers. Among women, there’s the next Mary — Sarjubala Devi.
Experts say that amateur boxers get nearabouts their best around the time they are 25-28. That’s where Vijender is now, and what Mary has just crossed. A large chunk of our best young boxers will only get there in another four years. A clutch of medals in London or not, success in amateur boxing is around the corner. For sure. It’s just a matter of waiting for the right time. And that could be in Rio de Janeiro come 2016.
Shamya Dasgupta is Senior Editor with Wisden India and the author of ‘Bhiwani Junction: The Untold Story of Boxing in India’ published by HarperCollins India in June 2012