The QID is a lot less theory demanding than one might think when it comes to playability. It runs on ideas more than anything else. The theory crops up when you reach an understanding of what is the best idea to reach equality in a given position and why.

Very flexible opening; I've been playing it for over a decade. Greet's book and Khalifman's book are both good for it in their own way.

One example of QID flexibility that comes to mind is related to the Colle to Classical transposition. Let's say White plays 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.e3 b6 4.Bd3 Bb7 5.0-0. The idea is often to play c4 on the next move, having side-stepped Black's ...Bd6 continuations and angling for more hacky kingside attacks. However, Black can suddenly switch tracks himself with 5...c5 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Nbd7, and have Hedgehog positions in mind.

Examples in this vein also abound in the more typical continuations.

Pingudon wrote on 02/25/14 at 03:52:05:

Just be aware there's an issue with one of the 4.g3 Ba6 5.b3 b5 lines. The refutation of the line as given has, I believe, been played in a ICCF correspondence game. I think there's some discussion on some of the issues in an issue of the Kibitzer (or perhaps it was somewhere else?) with some ideas how to deviate, if I recall correctly. It's all a bit vague in my mind, because I briefly looked at those lines and in the end had decided not to play them (and use the rest of his repertoire).

Greet provides one good line against the 4.g3 Ba6 5.Qc2 variation that avoids the whole gambit mess.

Thanks a lot for your answers. I am going to try Greet book.

I think the Queen's Indian is a fine opening and very thematic as Pingudon suggests. My concern about playing it (with the Nimzo), as opposed to a Slav, is the practicality of facing flank openings e.g. the English, not worrying about the amount of theory as opposed to the Bogo Indian.

I'm sure that's right, but items like this --

http://www.newinchess.com/Shop/ProductDetails.aspx?&ProductID=993&_utm_campaign=...

-- serve as a reminder that there are some sharp lines to look out for ...

Hi friends! I am trying to learn to play well the complex Nimzo/QI against 1.d4. I think that playing semi slav or King's indian is much more difficult because there are so many forcing lines. Nimzo a queen's indian is more about understanding positions. But most of repertoire books prefer Bogoindian and Benoni but not the QI. Is there any reason for that? Could you please give me your  opinión