Markovich wrote on 06/02/09 at 01:16:21:


I've thought Radjabov's 6...Na6 is okay, as well as his other preference 6...c5 7. d5 a6.

Since you've probably done more work on this system than me, if you have lines leading to a white edge after both lines I'll gladly alter my statement.

Regarding the Fianchetto KID, I only view that as equal because black has an easy equalizer in a Grunfeld transposition. If black sticks to the KID I think white is better.

I'm not a strong black, I'm not strong, nor am I a KID advocate, I would love nothing more than a variation leading to a nice white plus.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 06/01/09 at 21:16:09:


I only meant = because black can just turn it into an easy Grunfeld after g3 appears on the board.   I would gladly play the g3 KID otherwise, but I know a number of players that only use the Grunfeld in case of g3.

What I thought, and what I typed are two different things.

If you are higher rated there must be some reason for it. I doubt that it is because he is such a killer in standard KID positions.

Btw since when are we going to adapt our openings because we are scared of weaker players?

Quote:

You need a backup line in that case - eg 10.Qe2 - you avoid the theoretical main line but still get something to play for. The same in the KI - if not prepared to play Mar del Plata play something different...

I agree with Markovich's hypothesis "Never let the weaker player have his standard kingside attack in the King's Indian, but instead make him play a fluid game of chess", but my opinion is that a similar argument could be made for the lower-rated player as White, provided that he is well prepared for the Mar del Plata or an alternate kingside-hack variation. 

Black's attack is quite dangerous, but if the attack doesn't checkmate White, then White will usually win, and the resultant complications provide the lower-rated player with a greater chance of achieving a 'lucky' win if neither player is entirely sure of what is occuring on the board. 

Against lower-rated players, I usually meet the King's Indian with the Samisch, Classical (with a Bayonet) or the Fianchetto Variation, with very good results because my opponents usually don't achieve their usual kingside counterplay. 

Alternatively, Markovich's hypothesis also applies to the Four Pawns Attack, where one mistake by Black will often lead to an immediate defeat, but a mistake by White will only lead to an inferior position. In other words, openings such as the Four Pawns Attack for White and the Mar Del Plata for Black have a high 'caltrop coefficient', to quote the 'opening traps at the club level' thread.

All right, dear chessfriends, I am now going to promulgate the Markovich Doctrine:  Never let the weaker player have his standard kingside attack in the King's Indian, but instead make him play a fluid game of chess.  In particular never let him have the Mar del Plata variation or anything that resembles it.

Why on earth would you gamble with your king against someone that you'll very likely outplay in an ordinary game of chess?  Why would you offer him the chance to concentrate, to the exclusion of all else, on devising ways to blast open your castled position?  So play the Gligoric, the Fianchetto, or the Averbach and take away his chances, along with his fun.