Irina Krush, Jimmy Connors, and the Long Game
Some competitors don't simply survive across generations. They keep finding ways to challenge them.
I have followed Irina Krush for nearly twenty years, mostly in Chess Life magazine. I have watched her win U.S. championships, followed her games, and seen her career from a number of different angles. So when I looked at her 2026 U.S. Women's Championship run, I wasn't simply looking at another tournament table. I was looking at the career of a competitor I have been following for a very long time.
There is also a personal history here. I remember the video series Irina did with Ron Henley, the Krush Crush series. I remember covering the Accoona French-American Chess Championship in New York City when Irina won the event. I also co-hosted a Chess FM show with Tony Rook, with Irina serving as our chess expert. And for four months, I had the unusual experience of being a teammate of hers during Kasparov vs. the World.
That's why the 2026 championship caught my attention. Not because of a number attached to Irina's name, but because of the remarkable collection of players she had to face across eleven rounds.
Experience across generations
The field Krush faced in 2026 stretched across an extraordinary range. Her opponents included players who were still teenagers and a veteran she had known for years. The youngest opponent was just 13. The oldest wasredacted.
That is one of the things I find fascinating about chess. The board doesn't care about generations. Once the clocks start, reputation disappears, titles disappear, and the only thing that matters is what happens in the next position.
Krush's eleven-round journey produced five wins, two losses and four draws, leaving her with 7½ points and a third-place finish. Rachael Li won the championship with 8½ points.
Jimmy Connors at the 1991 U.S. Open
The comparison that kept coming back to me was Jimmy Connors at the 1991 U.S. Open.
Connors entered that tournament ranked No. 174 in the world and received a wild card. Instead of quietly making an early exit, he produced one of the most memorable runs in U.S. Open history.
He defeated Patrick McEnroe, Michiel Schapers, Karel Novacek, Aaron Krickstein and Paul Haarhuis before reaching the semifinal, where he faced Jim Courier. Courier was 21. The younger player finally ended the run, winning 6–3, 6–3, 6–2.
What made the Connors story so compelling was not simply the result. It was the sight of a great competitor refusing to accept the idea that the next generation had already taken his place.
The opponents tell the story
Look down the 2026 score sheet and the generational contrast becomes even clearer. These were not eleven interchangeable opponents. Every round brought a different story, a different style and a different challenge.
| Round | Opponent | Age | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rachael Li | 16 | Loss |
| 2 | Rose Atwell | 17 | Win |
| 3 | Anna Zatonskih | redacted | Draw |
| 4 | Nazi Paikidze | redacted | Win |
| 5 | Thalia Cervantes Landeiro | 23 | Draw |
| 6 | Anna M. Sargsyan | 25 | Win |
| 7 | Carissa Yip | 23 | Win |
| 8 | Jennifer Yu | 24 | Loss |
| 9 | Alice Lee | 17 | Win |
| 10 | Megan Althea Paragua | 13 | Draw |
| 11 | Tatev Abrahamyan | redacted | Win |
One move can change an entire tournament
And then there is Round 1.
Against 16-year-old Rachael Li, Krush reached a winning position. But then came the kind of moment every chess player knows: a single tactical mistake, a queen dropped, and a game that had been heading one way suddenly went the other.
Li went on to win the championship. Krush finished third.
We have to be careful here. It would be wrong to say that converting that first-round advantage would definitely have made Krush the champion. Eleven rounds of chess contain too many variables for that kind of certainty. Different results change pairings, preparation, psychology and momentum.
But it is impossible not to wonder.
That is the cruel beauty of chess. A tournament can be decided by hundreds of decisions, but sometimes one decision becomes the one everyone remembers.
More than a comparison
The Connors comparison isn't really about tennis and chess. It is about competition itself.
Connors showed in 1991 that a competitor with an extraordinary history could still walk into a major event and make younger players uncomfortable. Krush's 2026 championship run carries some of that same feeling.
She played teenagers. She played established stars. She played a veteran. She won important games. She survived difficult positions. She lost games that she would surely like to have back. And she finished on the podium of one of the strongest women's chess events in the United States.
Having followed Krush for so many years, that's the part that stays with me. Careers like hers are not defined by one tournament, one title, or one mistake. They are built one game at a time.
And perhaps that is the real lesson from both Krush and Connors. The long game is not about avoiding defeat. It is about continuing to sit down at the board, or walk onto the court, after defeat—and believing that the next opportunity is still yours.
A tournament can come down to one move. A career is measured by what you do with all the moves that come after it.