Thnx 

For becoming better in tactics the majority will say that I should play e4. I feel that e4 is primarily piece play tactics and with d4 more pawn push tactics, if you know what i mean.

I would like to have a save and a attacking option in my repertoire. For the KID I was thinking about the fianchetto as save and the four pawns variation as attacking option. Right now I absolutely dont know anything about the 4 pawns, but am I right that it is sharp?

I realise that you will have to choose early on in the game which option I use, if I have those two in my repertoire. Are there any other options with save and attacking play in the KID that do combine better?

Thanks

That's a really good advise of which I did not thought about yet. Thanks for that . Could you tell what the flick knife is?

Thanks

Yes, I do  that  I guess around 40 long games per year and I'm planning to play in more tournaments. I feel that I can cope better with strong opposition than 2 years ago and when I look at my old games I am astonished by the bad moves I make. I feel I play a lot better now, but it doesn't show in my rating.
Probably I should improve my tactical vision and calculating skill first, then move to endgames, then positional play and then openings  .

> I feel that I know a lot more about chess than my rating implies

Hah! Don't we all, mate.

b3 doesn't look like the right move. White wants to play on the queenside and break with c5, no? b3 doesn't help with that. Crude and based on ten seconds blindfold reflection if that, but I suspect it's a start.

You seem to me to exemplify some current tendencies in how people try to learn about chess, what with sticking things into Fritz, waiting for the next highbrow repertoire book, and looking up unannotated games on websites.  I would wonder if you spend much time looking at things on the order of Geller's "The Application of Chess Theory" or Marovic's "Dynamic Pawn Play in Chess" (to name a couple that I know have some material pertaining to the Fianchetto KID/the types of position reached therein).

Well, I inserted it in fritz. I believe I went out of theory with 10. b3 . b4 was given. I actually do not have any books on this line  I;m waiting for Avrukh's second volume to be published...

I never used other games to compare with mine, but I think that would be a great thing to do, so i will start looking and hope to post some games soon  .

Hi, about a week ago I played a game in the fianchetto variation. I played the white side and it went like this:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 0-0 5. Nf3 d6 6. Nc3 Nc6 7. 0-0 e5 8. d5 Ne7 9. e4 Nd7 10. b3? f5 11. Nd2 xe4 12. Ndxe4 Nf5 13. f3 h6 14. Qd3 g5 15. Bb2 Rf7 16. b4 h5 17. c5 g4 18. xg4 xg4 19. Rad1 Nf8 20. Bc1 Nh7 21. a3 Bf8 22. Rde1 Rg7 23. Nd1 Qe8 24. Ne3 Qh5
25. xd6 xd6 26. Nc3 Nd4 27. Nc2 Bf5 28. Ne4 Bxe4 29. Bxe4 Nxc2
30. Qxc2 Ng5 31. Bxg5 Qxg5 32. Rf5 Qe7

And I went on to win. I realise that my level of play and that of my oponent is not very high. I found I was playing a little flat if you know what I mean and I would like to add a little bite to my opening and middlegame play. (I realise that this variation is not critical, but I will keep on playing it. ) My question is: Where can I improve my game in this example?

Thanks