Yes, I understand that. But my point was that many other parts of the repertoire advocated on the DVD did not necessarily lead to a theoretical edge either. So why would be not offer the reversed Sicilian/KID line and recommend readers to play the fianchetto KID. 

However, I suspect the real reason is simply it would have taken too much extra time to cover the reversed Sicilian/KID line - which is fine since the DVD is actually unusually long.  Either than, or he is planning on releasing a Fianchetto KID DVD soon.

It is interesting that Daives in his English Opening DVD seems to suggest that the Reversed Sicilian approach against the KID is not effective.  He in fact suggests that White should really transpose to a fianchetto KID. This is significant since for some of the other lines Daives proposes on this DVD - such as his approach against the Symmetrical - it is doubtful that White gets a genuine theoretical edge. So, for some reason he must be fairly pessimistic about the Reversed Sicilian against the KID.

BPaulsen wrote on 02/24/10 at 09:56:52:


Yes.  In Gurevich-Bacrot, Bg5 was played after ...Re8.  ...Re8 with the idea of ...e4 is one of the old centrally-oriented plans for Black.  I was readily reminded of Bg5 making a splash in the mid-'80s versus another old central plan, with ...Nd4.  Are you saying that Bagirov advocated 8. Bg5 (I would think it is suboptimal to play it that early) as leading to an edge for White?

To prevent the clearing of d5 for use by White isn't the only reason for ...h6, e.g. it can serve to prepare ...Be6 (versus Ng5) or prevent White from using Bg5 to cut across ...Re8 plus ...e4 (once upon a time it wasn't common for White to cut across it that way).

BPaulsen wrote on 02/24/10 at 09:56:52:


I would say that the Black pieces landing on d4 in one of the games I cited forced White to alter his usual plans.  As for White gaining extra options, well sure, like 8. d4, which Petrosian later played against Fischer ("I was as impressed by that game [Petrosian-Vasiukov] as Petrosian must have been, since he got crushed" -- Fischer) and others; 8. e4 looks interesting ...but again such things represent a change of plan.

BPaulsen wrote on 02/24/10 at 09:56:52:


Huh?  You were implying that I was using the fact that White has lost some games in this line as a basis for my view that it isn't such an easy line for White to play.  I think we can probably agree that White's failure to go undefeated is irrelevant to that issue.

kylemeister wrote on 02/24/10 at 09:11:36:


No. See Bagirov's book as an example, especially since it's an old book (meaning it's also an old idea). Bg5 is played well before black has committed to central or flank action as far of clearing the d5 square for use by white, hence why an early ...h6 is often used to prevent it.

Quote:


Bolded for emphasis.

The point is white's play is not difficult to conduct. There's no great underlying subtleties that are beyond the ken of your average player that simply wants a line against the KID. The plans are easy to learn and apply.

Quote:


It doesn't really alter white's plans, and if done at first sign of Bg5, then white gains some additional options. Hardly anything that would throw a white player into confusion.

Quote:


...Then what's the point of arguing against this way of playing?!

alumbrado wrote on 02/23/10 at 23:38:19:


The main theoretical problem with the Closed Sicilian set-up is if black opts, on around move 5 or so, for ...c6 and ...d5, where white is practically forced into an ultra-drawish Fianchetto Grunfeld.

After 1. Nf3 g6 white's best is probably 2. e4 for move order reasons. 1. Nf3 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. e4 e5 equalizes for black when he ends up a tempo up on a known KID line, 3. d4 allows a normal Grunfeld which defeats the purpose of the move order with 1. Nf3, but with 2. e4 white can play 3. c4 if black commits to 2...d6, otherwise 2...Bg7 meets 3. d4 followed by 4. c4 with a typical Modern Defense (black gains an independent try with 1. Nf3 g6 2. e4 d6 3. c4 Bg4 4. d4 e5 5. d5 Bh6!?, but white still retains a slight edge). White can always go with a 5. h3 Pirc, too, which is fine (ie: Davies' recommendation).

1. Nf3 players have to be conscious of move orders if they're treating it seriously.

But the Botvinnik system usually means Nge2 and that's not going to be easy to arrange after 1.Nf3.

So either you have to start with 1.c4, go into one of the lines mentioned above (the b2-b4 stuff faces another problem, though, which is the move order with 1...g7-g6) or you have to bite it up and learn a line against the KID.

I've dabbled with the Krasenkow stuff with h2-h3 with reasonable results; and lately I've also been having a look at the Smyslov lines with Bg5 and e2-e3 (meeting ...c7-c5 with d4-d5 and reaching a sort of Benoni).   

The aim is the same - to reach positions where Black can't just hack away with a standard kingside pawn storm (and where, indeed, the attempt to do so can often backfire on the light squares).

Having said that, I think Réti players ought to be able to play both the 'reversed Closed Sicilian' positions referred to in other posts, and ideally be able to switch into a mainstream fianchetto KID (depending on opponent, mood etc.). The fianchetto used to be my main choice and the main reason I don't still play it is that I felt my play was getting a little stale.  You don't have to go for the absolute main lines there - White has a number of interesting and fairly promising offshoots which not many Black players will have prepared extensively for.

If playing 1.Nf3 has taught me one thing, it's that White needs to be flexible and light on his feet.

The "danger" is enough to hold the balance, meaning white can't just forget about it. It's the equivalent of citing a bunch of games where white's queenside initiative won the day because black didn't take necessary precautions - doesn't really say much.

Play in the center is, of course, fine and equal - however most KID players I've ran into are less concerned with reaching equality than they are mating the opposing king.

Zak wrote on 02/23/10 at 18:35:40:


Against the KID if you really want to stick with Reti-flavored stuff then b4 is the way to go.

If you're all about the flank opening approach, then the Nf3/c4/g3/Bg2/0-0/Nc3/d3 with queenside play is easy to play, and practically a good choice (objectively it's equal, but white tends to do well anyway). Much like the Closed Sicilian that it resembles in reverse, the kingside attack mainly just holds the balance, and little more while white sets about trying to do things on the Q-side.