Hello battleangle, 

to play the Fianchetto against the KID looks like a 
safety-first approach. You don't have this option after 
1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 or 2...c5. 
There are lines in the Tromp, that should suit a 
1.e4 player better than a 1.d4 player. 

My impression is that White loses control of the sharpness of the game in the Tromp, but nethertheless it is a very interesting opening.

TN wrote on 11/09/09 at 04:55:01:


Well, statistics is basically the only way to judge the strength of an opening. How else? The strength is how well one perform with it in practical play. Of course you cannot measure this over a single or a few games (like with your 3.Kf2), because you need to average out randomness and specific factors. Instead you need many games and then you have... yes, statistics!

And the interpretation of statistical data is dependent on a model. The simplest model is just giving the score like I did above. Some refinements could be:

- Checking if stronger players perform differently. For example I think this is the case for elite players in the openings I gave.
- Checking if some side scores better with time. Could be that a good defence/new way to cause problems has been discovered.
- Checking if you are different from other players. For example you could play a couple of thousand games on ICC/playchess and then check your stats, this may contain some surprises.

I play the fianchetto against the kid,
often black hides back on the 7th und 8th rank, then I play d5 they do not play kingsideattack with f5, instead they play c6-c5 and close everything. Waiting behind their pawnchains for me to risk too much in such a dull position ... the only thing I can play for "advantage" is dxe5, really I think any position in the tromp is better than dxe5 at some point in the fianchetto kid.

saubhikr wrote on 11/08/09 at 13:23:04:


I play the occasional Tromp, but I don't think it is any theoretically worse than other normal white openings.

In my DB 2.Bg5 has scored 54%, which is same as for 2. c4. And this is higher than for example 1.e4 c5! 2. Nf3, which has scored only 52%, as has 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4! ...
 
2.. Ne4 often leads to original and fun play and the current theoretical status is pretty good for white still with many options.

2.. c5 also typically gives unique and interesting play and you can choose between Bxf6, Nc3 and d5. Black has scored pretty well but white has definitely many chances to outplay black.

2.. d5 could lead to somewhat dull play. But after Bxf6 it is still white that can expect some small advantage. And you could argue that it is even more boring for black

2.. e6 is a respectable move that has scored relatively well for black.  You can play Torre attack with Nf3 or e3!?,Nd2!? or go for e4! after which I know from own analysis that there are unplayed important improvements for white...

2.. g6 Similar to 2.. d5 but even a little better for white.

2.. d6 After Bxf6 this is similar to .. g6 or .. c5.

One of my reasons for playing the tromp is that it often leads to fun unusual and creative positions. And you have many chances to outprepare your opponent.

Tromp is my main opening against 1...Nf6. My question to you will be - are you okay having positions where you have no 'theoritical' advantage but believe you can outplay your opponent thanks to your familiarity of the position and better chess middlegame skill. If the answer is yes, go for it!

I am thinking of integrating the trompowsky in my repertoire, it seems to me the positions become simpler, but the endgames seem still dynamic. I feel I have a lot more positional knowledge and calculating power than many opponents on my level (2010 ELO, 1995 DWZ), but I feel they manage not to let me make use of my skills by playing openings like the king's indian. I can also play aggressive openings, but it has to be me who attacks, so I do not like to play the kid where black attacks.