Hi im new here but I am a loyal kings indian supporter. If I had the money I would have a lot more books on it but I do not. My favorite however is "Bronstein on the kings indian"

If you wish to learn the ideas and themes of the opening a long with going over the games that layed the foundation of the opening then I highly recomend it. Is it up on current theory? no. But it is a very good read. I first started playing the kings indian with out any book knowledge. Just the ideas I had found in Bronstein's games.

Doesn't all chess writing these days involve a bit of marketeering? Very few really write unobjective coverage for both Black and White.  To some extend they all attempt to pump up the intended audience. Afterall, to sell the book, you have to sell the opening and you have to sell your approach to the opening.

It is common for advocates of "aggressive" openings to be also aggressive in making their claims and evaluations. You can find plenty of examples on this board!

Authors on the Petroff and Slav definitely seem less zealous in comparison

LeeRoth wrote on 07/03/07 at 03:12:03:

Really I think that White can learn something from any repertoire book, which is what it recommends!  But I agree that White can learn a little extra something from Gallagher's book, which offers insights into both sides' ideas. 

Still, I wonder if I'm alone in finding his repeated, pointed dismissals of White's ideas to be rather obnoxious.  Perhaps no single one of them is obnoxious, but when it comes out on page after page, it's a little wearing.  Also rather suspicious, if I may say so.  Really if all of the opinions expressed by Gallagher in these pages were borne out, there would be little reason to play 1.d4, or to answer this sadly antiquated move with anything other than the KID.

I don't know about books, but Rustam's A World Champion's Guide to the King's Indian is quite nice and instructive.

cma6 wrote on 07/03/07 at 01:43:54:


I have Gallagher's Play the King's Indian.  It's a great book, but its a repertoire book for Black.  If you're looking for more balanced coverage, you might be happier with Gallagher's earlier Starting Out Guide, which is meant to be more objective, albeit more basic.    

Nevertheless, even though Play the King's Indian is a Black repertoire book, I still think that White can learn something.  For example, I found Gallagher's explanation of each side's plans in the Nd2 variation to be very helpful.  Basically, he feels that White's Q-side attack is too quick to be ignored and cites Beliavsky-Solak, St Vincent 2000 as an example of what can befall Black if he's not careful.  

Gallagher thinks Black has to take some sort of preventative action on the Q-side, but he doesn't like 9..c5, which gives White a target on the Q-side and a chance to develop an initiative with Rb1 annd b4. The repertoire is therefore based on 9..a5.

After 9..a5, he gives 10.a3 Nd7 (he doesn't cover 10..Bd7 and refers the interested reader to the Starting Out book for coverage) 11.Rb1 f5 12.b4 Kh8 (he explains why this has become the main move, displacing 12..f4 and 12..Nf6) and now he covers 13.Qc2 through the game Lputian-Dolmatov, Rostov 1993 and 13.f3 through Ljubojevic-Kasparov, Linares 1993.

I don't have the Starting Out book, so I can't compare, but even for the player of the White pieces, Play the King's Indian is well worth getting.

LeeRoth

mlz3 wrote on 11/18/05 at 11:40:42:



Hi Mlz3:
  I'm refugee from White side of Bayonet Attack (I don't think White gets anything much.) I'm looking for good material on the Nd2 MDP line. I've just ordered Golubev's new book.
  I would appreciate it if someone who has the Gallagher book could
give an outline of the lines he covers, i.e., does  he cover any 9 Nd2 material not covered in Golubev or Nunn's "New KID"?
                              Thanks, CMA