The King's Indian approach to the Modern Steinitz was covered in the December 22nd 2022 edition of ChessPublishing, leading to a full-bodied struggle in the game Ortiz Suarez, I. (2520) -Sambuev, B. (2432).

The ...Ne7-g6 idea is also covered in that edition, in one of Tony's games. The Siesta variation was covered in January.

I certainly do not lack study material in the 1e4 e5 column!

I still love the Modern Steinitz! -- esp. played in 'KID of the Kingside' style via 5 0-0 Bd7 6 c3 g6 7 d4 Bg7. It's recommended, I recall, by Short, who I certainly don't associate with iffy systems ...

As well as the sources FreeRepublic mentions (Kuljasevic's MC repertoire database in particular has lots of interesting material), there's also a three-part NIC survey by McShane. And thanks for these other sources, Kerangali! For some reason I didn't even know of the Portisch book, which I guess must expand his chapter in the old How to Open a Chess Game volume. He's one of the really greats, whose writings are bound to deepen your understanding whether you play the precise lines he recommends or not!

Judging from recent publications, the Modern Steinitz is not so fashionable. However strong players still play it form time to time, and I see nothing like a refutation. I like the variety of play that can ensue. When it comes to preparation, it's a double-edged sword as both White and Black have many diverse options. 

I find it interesting to compare one line to the Mar Del Plata variation of the King's Indian Defense:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. c3 Bd7 6. d4 Nf6 7. O-O g6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Bxd7+ Nxd7 10. c4 Bg7 11. Nc3 h6 12. Ne1 O-O

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Nd7





I once thought that the trade of White square bishops favored White. In the King's Indian, Black usually tries to preserve his queen bishop. If king side pawns become locked with a pawn on h3, Black can blow the White king side open with Bxh3.

However, now I think it's probably the other way around. Trading the bishops eases Black play and the two rook pawn moves probably help Black as well.

None of this is forced for either player. I went out of my way a little to find comparable positions to help me get my bearings. I see nothing here to cause Black any great concern.

FreeRepublic wrote on 07/01/23 at 15:28:16:

A bit of theory from last century:  10.Nc3 Be7 11.b3 O-O 12.Bb2 Rae8 13.Rae1 Bd8 14.f4 c6 15.Rd1 Bc7 16.e5 Qd8 17.Na4 dxe5 18.fxe5 Qxd4+ 19.Bxd4 Nd7 20.Nc5 Re7 (De Firmian-Timman, Amsterdam 1996) 21. Nxb7 Bxe5 22. Bxe5 Nxe5 23. Nc5 += Timman.

I half-recalled a recent game Svidler-J. van Foreest, in which after 6...b5 7. Bb3 Nxd4 8. Nxd4 exd4 9. c3 dxc3 10. Qh5 g6 11. Qd5 Be6 12. Qc6+ Bd7 13. Qd5 Be6 14. Qc6+ Bd7 15. Qxc3 Nf6 16. e5 dxe5 17. Qxe5+ Qe7 18. Qc3 apparently 18...b4 was a novelty, and some computer evaluation had both sides' play as "flawless."

Ametanoitos wrote on 01/31/11 at 18:09:17:


"Dynamics of Chess Strategy" in fact 

The other book is the one by Suba 

Ametanoitos wrote on 01/31/11 at 18:09:17:


Yes.

So is this the final verdict then -
and the answer to the original question The Modern Steinitz - what's wrong with it?
 
The usual view has long been that there are a few ways for White to get a slight advantage in this old variation.