'It was quite good, the weakest part of the rep was  Bologan's DVD offers a more promising Samisch solution in my opinion'

Any chance of sharing what line he suggests.

Thanks.

Btw, the one thing that bothers me about 6... Na6 vs. the Four Pawns Attack is that White can force a draw in the line 7.Be2 e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 Nc5 10.Bf3 Qxd1+ 11.Kxd1 Rd8+ 12.Kc2 Nfxe4 13.Nxe4 Bf5 14.Re1 Bxe5 15.fxe5 Rd4 16.Kc3 Rd3+ 17.Kc2 Rd4 with a repetition which is given on the DVD by Bojkov.

Earlier deviations do not seem convincing for Black with the exception of 12... Be6 13.Re1 Nfd7 14.Nxd7 Rxd7 15.b3 Nd3 16.Re2 Nb4+ 17.Kb2 Nd3+ 18.Kc2 with another early repetiton as given by Gallagher in "Beating the Anti-King´s Indians".

So unless someone has a good idea here for Black 6... Na6 should be avoided if a quick draw is not acceptable.

OldGrizzly wrote on 07/22/11 at 07:26:28:


TopNotch probably means this thread:

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1270968020

glut wrote on 07/16/11 at 22:17:10:


It was quite good, the weakest part of the rep was against the Samisch in which he offers the c5 gambit line, but like many authors/presenters before him he under estimates  White's resources should the gambit be simply accepted. Indeed the current state of play indicates that Black must play quite precisely in these pawn down endgames just to achieve a draw, whilst White cheerfully plays for two results. Bologan's DVD offers a more promising Samisch solution in my opinion, in fact, provided one could afford it I would say these two DVD's compliment each other very nicely indeed. 

The Four Pawns Attack was well treated, and along the way he destroys some analysis given by Semko Semkov in his contoversial Kill KID: Vol 1 book. Funnily enough the Semkov line was already refuted on the forum and the refutation is even more convincing than Bojkov's. In Bojkov's line there is a glimmer of hope for White to play on if he treads a very narrow tight rope, in the forum line there is no rope, tight or otherwise.

I also like his suggestion against the Fianchetto, although it would make some sense to have a back up line just in case, as his recommendation leads to very sharp unclear play. Although sharp unclear play is usually just what the doctor ordered against practitioners of the Fianchetto variation, who tend to like to massage their positions and squeeze their opponents to death in a slow controlled methodical manner.

The Classical coverage was quite reliable if not a little boring. KID players usually like life a bit more exciting than this, but then again who says one need play only one line vs the Classical.

The lesser lines were all covered adequately as well, and in particular he did a good job on the currently trendy h3 lines for White in its many forms. 

Tops

I watched half of the DVD so far and it is definetly one of the better DVDs by chessbase ! Unlike our friends Davies and Martin he presents an interesting repertoire for black, in my opinion also in some coniderable depth, underlying the key ideas quite nicely. I am even considering giving the Kingsindian a second chance (I stoped playing it some years ago). I didnot check what Avrukh recomends agains his proposed g3-line, but my opinion is still very favourable

I wonder if by "the literature" you are including things like NIC Yearbook, Chess Publishing, Chessbase Magazine and Panczyk/Ilczuk's (non-repertoire) book on the Classical KID.

I haven't liked it at all: not updated tips against Fianchetto and 4PA, the boring h6 instead f6 in the Classical Na6, Be3, Ng4, etc... I think it doesn't worth the money I've paid for.