Funnily enough, for me the Nimzo started as a concession, as I was always hoping for 3.Nf3 when I would play my pet line, the Blumenfeld gambit. In fact, in the very beginning I replied to 3.Nc3 with 3...d5 since that was the only reply I knew a little bit about, but I soon learned the Nimzo and stuck with it.

Later on, my faith in the Blumenfeld faded a little, and in addition, I started having trouble facing White's other 4th moves, like 4.g3 and 4.Nc3 (the truth is, I hadn't studied them at all). Therefore, I decided to learn the QID, which is now my main reply to 3.Nf3, although I still play the Blumenfeld occasionally. The QID is a very natural combo with the Nimzo for me, especially since in many Nimzo lines, I play ...b6 quickly. The resulting positions are very similar, and may in some cases transpose completely. Specifically, I play the line 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nf3 b6 via both move orders (the other one being 3.Nf3 b6 4.Nc3 Bb4).

(Edited to break up a sentence which contained seven commas and one parenthese; sometimes sentences become incredibly long when you write them little by little!)

I've played the Benoni for years, so I suppose I can answer this.  Of course, arguably now I would rather face the Taimanov Variation than the Modern Main Line in the Benoni, if only because it retains better winning chances than the MML.  But this is by the by because I've started meeting 1.d4 with a KID move order, although still with the intention of reaching a Benoni if offered.

So there are people who play the NID as a companion for the Benoni rather than the other way around.

Plenty I think, including a non trivial number of rather strong players. 

In some ways a bit of a mistake to think of the Nimzo as one opening - it starts at move 3 after all and can then be interpreted in quite a few different styles

Guess it is/was Nimzo + stuff for me recently. In fact in theory I liked how the QID looked but the way I handled it in practice..... Ugh!

BobbyDigital80 wrote on 08/29/11 at 20:12:25:


I didn't "settle" for the QID so much as it made sense based on how I learned the game, and the idea behind the NID/QID (idea is the same in both cases - e4 control). I didn't learn the openings from opening books, I learned them from studying Nimzo's games, and of course he was one of the chief pioneers behind the NID/QID. They always seemed a very natural pair to me for that reason, and I didn't think too much about it.

This is also why I ultimately didn't choose the Bogo-Indian, it made less sense to me based on what was occurring on the board. Same with the Benoni.

I eventually added the QGD just because it has some things in common with the QID.

I'd like to know what Nimzo-Indian players play against 3.Nf3 and why they play it (Queen's Indian, Bogo-Indian, Benoni, QGD, etc.) It seems like Nimzo players have to make a concession. They view their main 1.d4 defense as the Nimzo-Indian and against 3.Nf3 they "settle" for the QID or the BID.
But for those who play the Benoni or various QGD lines against 3.Nf3, I assume the reason is because they want to avoid certain lines in the Benoni (like the modern or Taimanov variations) and certain lines in the QG (like the exchange variation with Ne2). So my question is to those players who play the Benoni or QGD: If you knew your opponent wasn't going to play lines you didn't like to play against in the Benoni or QGD, would you choose the Benoni or QGD over the Nimzo-Indian? Do you view the Benoni or QGD as your main 1.d4 defense and only play the Nimzo-Indian because you want to avoid those lines you don't like to play against in the Benoni or QGD?