Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Another attempt to understand KID (Read 13864 times)
OrangeCounty
Full Member
***
Offline


You played that like it
was a good move!

Posts: 171
Joined: 05/26/10
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #22 - 01/27/11 at 16:51:58
Post Tools
Some of this is repetitive, probably:

"#1: I´d give 5. ...Bg4 a ?!, because the later trade of the light bishops favours white - FALSE or TRUE?!"

It isn't ?!, but it isn't ideal either.  ...Bg4 is probably premature here, as it doesn't really interfere with White's development (especially since White isn't yet committed to Bf1-e2).  The later trade of light square bishops favors White only if White knows how to follow it up!


"#2: After 10.f3, white plays a maroczy-structure, without the light bishop this structure is even better?! - F o T?"

It's only a Maroczy structure if Black plays ...c7-c5 and ...c5xd4.  10. f3 is premature because the e4 pawn is solidly defended and Black is not threatening any tricks with ...Nxe4, because the d2 square is open.  You can always answer ...f7-f5 with f2-f3.  Instead, 10. d5, possibly (but 0-0 first probably doesn't hurt, since Black has not yet blocked the center with ...e7-e5).

"#3: 12.Rb1 - After 25 minutes of thought, I finally played this move. An engine doesn´t help in this position, what would you play and why?"

I would play 12. d5, with the idea of exploiting the bad bishop on g7.  The rook probably belongs on c1 (it is destined for c7), but until the c-file opens, it's best to get on with things and leave it home.

"#4: 14.c5 - what would you play and why?"

14 d5 because you have to play this before c5.

"#5: After 15.Bf2 white has a strategical winning structure, do you agree?"

No.  White would have an advantage if his pawn were on d5, but Black can ruin everything by capturing in the center.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jay
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 212
Location: USA
Joined: 04/18/09
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #21 - 01/27/11 at 15:00:35
Post Tools
gewgaw wrote on 10/25/10 at 22:09:29:
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5. e4 Bg4 6. Be2 O-O 7. Be3 Nbd7 8. Ng1 Bxe2 9. Ngxe2 c6 10. f3 e5 11. O-O Ne8 12. Rb1 Kh8 13. b4 f5 14.c5 f4 15. Bf2
[...]
#3: 12.Rb1 - After 25 minutes of thought, I finally played this move. An engine doesn´t help in this position, what would you play and why?

I think if you gave the move 25 minutes of thought, you might get better feedback by adding your thought process on the move and see if the strong players like the way you thought about it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1947
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #20 - 10/30/10 at 23:19:59
Post Tools
Thanks BP. Clearly the Bd3 stuff isn't in Khalifman, 'cos he doesn't discuss 6 h3 (0r 6 Bd3).

Re the other line, I see the confusion! Sorry, it's my fault. I see now that in mentioning 7 ...Nfd7 8 Rc1 you were referring to a position in which ...Nc6 hadn't been played. I however had been thinking of (in the KID move order) [b]6[/b] ...Nfd7 7 Be3 Nc6, which Khalifman might not discuss because he short-circuits this with 7 Bg5! as you mentioned before. In the somewhat zany -- but I think theoretically interesting! -- move order in which I reached the position (a KID via a Bogoljubow Defence via a Nimzowitsch Defence via 1 Nf3 Nc6!) White was already committed to Be3 -- hence the question became, could I, by playing 7 ...Nd7 in my game (see Reply #8 above) and meeting 8 d5 with the never-played(?) 8 ...Nce5!?, avoid the horrors of 7 ...0-0 8 d5! ? ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #19 - 10/30/10 at 22:49:03
Post Tools
Khalifman covers mostly everything related to his repertoire choice - so everything pertaining to the Classical KID, nothing on h3 related systems.

If you give me the exact move order you're concerned with I'll see if I can locate it in Khalifman. I won't give everything he cites, but will mention the main path he sets out.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1947
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #18 - 10/30/10 at 22:29:48
Post Tools
Ah! I wondered why there seemed to be so many Foisors about! ...

Re 7 ...Nfd7, I just thought I'd better check we're talking about exactly the same position. (I was talking about that reached by 7 ...Nfd7 instead of 7 ...0-0 in my game quoted above.) I only mention it because there are no examples of 8 Rc1 in the ChessLive database. To me, 8 ...Bf3 9 Bf3 (I'm assuming 9 gf isn't so great here) e5 looks well playable (10 de de), but of course I stand to be corrected.

I'd be interested also to know if the Khalifman camp have any comment on the rare version with Bd3/h3 instead of Be2, reachable in the KID via say 6 h3 Nc6 7 d5 Nb8 8 Bd3 (but probably just as likely to be reached via other openings) ...




  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4905
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #17 - 10/30/10 at 19:35:19
Post Tools
Well, that does seem to have a more critical look to it.  It seems that the Foisors (a married IM couple) didn't play that exact line again after the 1993 game, preferring e.g. 7...Nfd7 (as noted, the main book line).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #16 - 10/30/10 at 18:51:29
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 10/30/10 at 15:27:43:
I too wouldn't have thought that Black should be playing ...c5 there.  Panczyk and Ilczuk have ...Nb8 only without the preliminary ...Bxf3, giving 8...Nb8 9. 0-0 c6 10. Rc1 Nfd7 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 a5 13. Re1 Na6 (thus far A. Delchev-O. Foisor, Mangalia 1992) 14. Na4!? +=.  Nd4 doesn't seem to be a particular worry. 


Khalifman gives:

8...Nb8 9. 0-0 c6 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Nfd7 12. Qd2 a5 13. Rab1 Na6 14. Rfc1 Nac5 15. b3 a6 16. a3 +/-, Tukmakov-C. Foisor, Zaragoza 1993.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4905
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #15 - 10/30/10 at 15:27:43
Post Tools
I too wouldn't have thought that Black should be playing ...c5 there.  Panczyk and Ilczuk have ...Nb8 only without the preliminary ...Bxf3, giving 8...Nb8 9. 0-0 c6 10. Rc1 Nfd7 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 a5 13. Re1 Na6 (thus far A. Delchev-O. Foisor, Mangalia 1992) 14. Na4!? +=.  Nd4 doesn't seem to be a particular worry. 

Regarding 8...Bxf3 9. gf, the Poles evidently think that White should also get some advantage there.  They give a few lines and citations, e.g. Van Wely-I. Rogers, Dutch team ch 2000 (where White ended up clearly better, but a suggested improvement is 13...Qa5 with the idea of ...Rfc8) and Granda Zuniga-T. Taylor, New York 1987 (where "White was better in the endgame"). 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1947
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #14 - 10/30/10 at 11:22:17
Post Tools
Thanks again, that's really helpful. (Haven't found the Petrosian game yet but I'm sure it's in one of the online databases.)

In the ...Nb8 stuff I was thinking that Black shouldn't play ...c5, but I can see why he might -- and why he might have to fear a White queenside advance in some cases -- after Rc1, an idea I'd overlooked/underestimated ...

Of course, a 1 ...Nc6!? player doesn't have to go there! In my game quoted above I think I should have played 6 ...e5, or even 4 ...e5!? as recommended a couple of years ago in another thread by [i]linksspringer[/i].
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #13 - 10/30/10 at 10:34:30
Post Tools
Michael Ayton wrote on 10/30/10 at 10:13:29:
That's an interesting insight, BPaulsen -- thanks. But could you say a bit more? -- I'm a bit confused. I was under the impression that after both 8 d5 Nb8 and 8 d5 Bf3 9 Bf3 [but, I think 9 gf looks really dangerous!], Black had to fear a possible White central advance more than White playing on the queenside? -- I'm assuming Black will play ...c6 + ...a5 (and possibly ...cxd5). How big do you think White's advantage is in these positions, which appear to be quite controversial. (Stefan Buecker for instance in another thread suggested they're OK for Black.)


From Khalifman's analysis on the first line you quote, and he's noticeably not too fond of black's chances:

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. d4 0-0 6. Be2 Bg4 7. Be3 Nc6 8. d5 Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Nb8 10. 0-0 Nfd7 (10...Nbd7 11. Be2 c5 12. f4 +/-, Hill-Stewart, Correspondence 1994) 11. Rc1 c5 12. Be2 Na6 +/-, Kretchetov-Boysan, Dos Hermanas 2003.

7...Nfd7 is the main line, which white normally replies to with 8. Rc1. White's edge is much smaller than in the previous line (just += instead of +/-), but it's still a lasting one.

As for what black "fears" - white has more space due to the Pc4 than in the Classical Pirc, hence black's equalizing task being much easier there, whereas in the King's Indian Defense equivalent there is a real risk of getting squeezed off the board.

Obviously it's still a game, and black's playable.

Quote:
Anyone got any comments on my 7 ...Nfd7 (8 d5 Nce5) idea above?


Above you quoted 6...Nfd7 - 7. Bg5 leads to +/- according to Khalifman, but I won't post all of it. The source game is T. Petrosian-Mukhitdinov, Tashkent 1951.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1947
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #12 - 10/30/10 at 10:13:29
Post Tools
That's an interesting insight, BPaulsen -- thanks. But could you say a bit more? -- I'm a bit confused. I was under the impression that after both 8 d5 Nb8 and 8 d5 Bf3 9 Bf3 [but, I think 9 gf looks really dangerous!], Black had to fear a possible White central advance more than White playing on the queenside? -- I'm assuming Black will play ...c6 + ...a5 (and possibly ...cxd5). How big do you think White's advantage is in these positions, which appear to be quite controversial? (Stefan Buecker for instance in another thread suggested they're OK for Black.)

Anyone got any comments on my 7 ...Nfd7 (8 d5 Nce5) idea above?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #11 - 10/29/10 at 02:20:18
Post Tools
A good perspective on the white point of view is in the "Opening for White According to Kramnik 1A" book by Khalifman.

As for the earlier comparison to the Classical Pirc - part of the motivation for the 6...Bg4 lines in the Classical Pirc is precisely the fact that white has a Pc2, hampering his Q-side play.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1947
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #10 - 10/28/10 at 21:36:20
Post Tools
Thanks kylemeister -- I should have mentioned 8 ...Bf3 9 Bf3 Ne5, and only didn't because I casually assumed this was good for White (foolishly, since it's an interesting line which may be Black's best?) so was interested in 'another' idea. Whatever the value of the ...Nb8 idea I think I prefer it after 8 ...Bf3 9 Bf3 -- on 8 ...Nb8 maybe 9 Nd4 is a good option for White? But I hadn't realised 9 gf was a serious possibility and would like to know more! As for 8 ...Bf3 9 Bf3 Na5, I assume this is inferior to the similar line with ...Na5 given in [i]NCO[/i] (525/3) because there Black's KB is unobstructed thus allowing ...Bxc3.

There aren't a lot of games with ...Bf3 and ...Nb8. Can White hope to slowly squeeze Black to death here or should Black be OK? I confess I find it hard to evaluate this (sort of) position. But in the Pirc version with the pawn on c2 Black seems to be OK ...

Meanwhile does my ...Nfd7/...Nc6/...Ne5 idea without castling have a future? The KID move order would be 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4 d6 5 Nf3 Bg4 6 Be2 Nfd7 7 Be3 (7 Ng1 is given in [i]NCO[/i] at 523/1/n1 as a bit better for White but maybe this is not too frightening?) Nc6!?. I'm assuming that after 8 d5 Nce5 9 Ne5 Be2 10 Qe2 Ne5 the exchange of two minor pieces helps Black, and that 10 Nf7 Bd1 11 Nd8 Bg4 is nothing.

« Last Edit: 10/28/10 at 22:36:22 by Michael Ayton »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4905
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #9 - 10/28/10 at 16:54:42
Post Tools
On 8. d5 there is also 8...Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Ne5 (I would think of this as probably the most typical reaction in "such positions," and here it is treated as the main line in NCO, ECO and Panczyk/Ilczuk) or 8...Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Na5.  9. gf is apparently a serious possibility too.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1947
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Another attempt to understand KID
Reply #8 - 10/28/10 at 16:38:17
Post Tools
[quote]Just because something doesn't equalize doesn't make it dubious.[/quote]

A very good point I think. There’s not much sense in getting hung up on the idea that Black hasn’t ‘equalised’ an opening position if it appears that s/he ought to be able to do so over a reasonable span of following moves. The question I guess is how many moves, and what sort of necessary suffering/care, counts as ‘reasonable’. Obviously too one shouldn’t reject an opening line just because [i]NCO[/i] or whatever calls it ‘+/=’: so much depends on what this ‘advantage’ is like and whether it’s likely to be increased, or eliminated. I know Watson used to use terms like ‘lightly +/=’ to indicate (I suppose) the latter case.

Personally I’m rather attracted by these …Bg4 lines (which I reach with an early …Nc6) and I wonder how great White’s advantage is. They’re also great for discombobulating opponents! I possibly managed this on Wednesday, when (with a cold coming on) I was happy with a quick draw. After 1 Nf3 Nc6 2 e4 g6 3 d4 Bg7 4 c4 d6 5 Nc3 Bg4 6 Be3 I transposed to a KID with 6 …Nf6 and soon achieved my objective after 7 Be2 0-0 8 0-0?! Nd7 9 h3 (9 d5 =; 9 Ne1 =) Bf3 10 Bf3 e5 11 d5 Nd4.

There doesn’t seem to be much theory on these positions. I guess [u]8 d5![/u] must be the move, and I was going to play 8 …Nb8 then …a5, …Na6 etc. – but how big is White’s edge then I wonder? (The position is quite like a Classical Pirc line but with White’s c-pawn on c4 not c2.) I also remember thinking about [u]7 …Nd7!?[/u] 8 d5 [u]Nce5!?[/u] (obviously …Nb8 is possible too) but I couldn’t work out what happened in the complications after 9 Ne5 Be2. I suppose White can borrow an idea from TN and go 9 Qd2 instead but maybe Black’s QB will be OK on h5? -- put me right if I’m talking bull!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo