You should be able to, it was covered in a past update.

It's definitely of theoretical interest to white players that are frustrated that the Bayonet is kind of...meh theoretically right now, and since 9. Nd2 has yet to get an improvement over, I think it was, Van Wely - Kramnik, 2008 (could be wrong on the player - it occurred in the 9...a5 with ...Bd7 variation).

I think there's going to be a boom of popularity for 9. Ne1 in the near future. There's a terrific amount of fertile ground, and we've already seen 10. f3/11. g4 get a lot of play recently. There's also a thread here discussing an important line of 9. Ne1 here, and Kozul's Gambit hasn't been fleshed out that much, either.

Me too.

But this whole thread should be moved to General Chess.  Moderator?

gramsci wrote on 11/12/09 at 07:38:36:


Easy: look at strong players who plays the najdorf against 1.e4. What do they play against 1.d4 ? The grunfeld !

What I mean is in the Najdorf you may lose because you are playing with black, but it is theoretically sound, nobody doubts, and gives you a funny, rich game. Against 1.d4 I haven't been able to find something similar. Give a hand please!

I realize that we're in the King's Indian group, but since we're already discussing openings like the Dutch, Benoni, Semi-Slav, etc., I just wanted to express my surprise that no one has mentioned the Nimzo/Bogo/QID complex.  There is no exchange variation (as in the Slav move order) and no variation where white gets a significant initiative (as in the Bayonet Attack).  And (almost) every position is strategically interesting and instructive.  I personally think that the Nimzo/QID is the best defense against 1.d4, but I'm not as strong as many of the other posters here, so I respectfully defer to their expertise. 

Best,
Scott

Me too, brother.  But linkspringer, I don't have such a low opinion of the Leningrad as you.  I think it's dicey, but dynamic.  I played it for a while, and I won't say I won all my games, but I won my share, nobody blew me off the board.

There's a "Good Boy, Bad Boy" thing in chess.  Want to be a good boy?  Play the Slav or the Nimzo.  Want to be a bad boy?  Play the Modern Benoni or the Leningrad.  I don't know who does better, the good boys or the bad, but I think it's more fun to be a bad boy.

Markovich wrote on 11/11/09 at 20:15:24:


In 1997, I picked up a book called "Leningrad Dutch: Strategy and Tactics" that was a really depressing read from Black's point of view: all main lines left Black struggling...
Quite recently I had cause to look into Leningrad Dutch theory again, from White's point of view. To my 'dismay', it looked like Black is in pretty good shape again! Lots of interesting improvements in all the main lines. Even the ...Nc6 line is alive.
The Leningrad may be borderline for the 2700+ club, but it seems below that it is sound enough for many titled players looking for rich, active play. 

In other words, against 1.d4 there is some defence theoretically sound  that gives you a "rich play"?