Generally spoken, I find it very instructive to investigate such „minimal pairs“ (two positions where only a single piece is on a different square). But I haven’t found any opening book yet which does that in a systematic way. 

Thank you, TN, for your clear explanation!

I'm trying to understand the position after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Qd2 c6 8.Nf3 e5 9.Rd1 Qc7 10.0-0 Re8:


Here White normally plays 11.d5, whereas in the very similar position, but with 9...Qe7 instead of 9...Qc7, the better players seem to prefer 11.Rfe1. I wonder if that happens just by chance or if there's a particular reason for that? Can somebody help?

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

For those of you who are interested how it went on with my King's Indian experiences: Unfortunately, I had to leave the tournament half-way due to a serious cold, so I had only two games with White, a Grünfeld and a Noteboom (the latter was quite interesting: After some move order inaccuracies in the opening both sides had to sacrifice at one time or the other a queen, unfortunately I eventually lost  ).
But I might face the KID this Friday  .

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

Seeley wrote on 02/17/12 at 20:57:02:

I'll go for the Averbakh. "Formal" reasons are the statistics in White's favour and that Black has almost no deviations earlier on (except playing the Grünfeld, of course  ). But after having gone through some of the theory, I like this sort of positions - not too open, not too closed, and a little tricky.
I'm curious how it goes in my tournament - I'll have four or five games with White, so I might face the KI one or two times. So maybe I've found my "final" weapon against the KI!
An additional "bonus" is provided by Chessexplained: The possibility of combining it with the "Pseudo"-Krasenkow 5.h3 and 6.Bg5. So in a second step that might be a nice variation to add to the Averbakh.

Again, thank you all for your help!

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

Speaking of the Averbakh, this is somewhat of a model game for both sides: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070619.  Bareev gives excellent commentary on this game in Dvoretsky's book Positional Play.  

The general themes and pawn structure are certainly applicable to many Saemisch positions and other variations as well; it's a good game showing some of White's main ideas (closing the Kingside to concentrate on the other wing) and how Black needs to play extremely dynamically to hold the balance.  In my experience, even strong club players (2300ish) can't play these positions as Black very well; it's very hard to time the dynamic counterplay correctly, and if Black misses that one chance he can often end up in a strategically lost position.  Of course strong club players rarely have the strategic skills of a Karpov, but White has such a big space advantage and Black a bad Bishop that you don't really need them.

ErictheRed wrote on 02/21/12 at 04:03:01:


I like this approach, and it is kinda what e.g. Greet uses for the Ruy Lopez in his book.

Another point, also mentioned by saubikhr, is that some KID lines can be used against the Benoni too, since ther are lots of transpositions, as in the Sämisch, Four Pawns Attac and Nge2-lines. This might be a time saver for you.

Once again thanks for your recommendations and for sharing your personal insights!

Seeley, you're quite a good advocate for the Averbakh, I think!  But anyway, I will wait until tomorrow when I'll get the "Dangerous Weapons" before I make a decision.

saubhikr wrote on 02/18/12 at 04:12:03:

I play the Nimzo-Indian, mostly with an early b7-b6, so that's not of great help. O.k., in some variations there's an early c7-c5, e.g. the Rubinstein Romanishin-Psakhis and in some variations of the Classical with 4...0-0, but I don't meet those variations so often.

Quote:


That sounds like a good approach, and in some variations it's quite close to what I'm doing (or try to do). But as I indicated in my first post, I actually need something rather short term, the long term preparation against the KID has to wait.


My thanks also to everybody not explicitly mentioned in this short post, have a nice Sunday evening!

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 02/19/12 at 02:27:36:

It remains a gamble. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O and 6.g3 is answered with ...Bg4.

Statistics can be fun. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Nf3 O-O 5.g3 and in 20% of the games Black plays ...d5 while in 11% Black prefers ...c5. Surprisingly 5...c6 is quite rare with 5% but surely playable because of 6.e4 d5!
So I doubt if this is an easy approach for White - it just seems to be imprecise compared to 3.g3.

With the Fianchetto, White is not necessarily confined to play the Fianchetto Grünfeld with the move-order, unless for some reason a King's Indian player plays the Fianchetto Grünfeld instead of the Fianchetto King's Indian. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. Nf3 d6 5. g3. If Black wants to delay moving the d-pawn and cause White to guess, with the move-order 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3, Black must play 3...d5 as a Grünfeld player, since 3...Bg7 will disallow the Grünfeld with 4. e4. Even though you do not want to play 4. e4, a Grünfeld player will not try to risk White not playing 4. e4. Then after 3...Bg7, 4. Nf3 0-0, again I doubt Grünfeld players are going to continuously delay ...d5. Then 5. g3, and Black can choose between the Fianchetto Grünfeld or Fianchetto King's Indian, but as far as I have seen, King's Indian players usually play the Fianchetto King's Indian.

Seeley wrote on 02/17/12 at 21:57:42:

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Be2 c5 White usually invites a transposition to the Acc. Dragon with 7.O-O.

Seeley wrote on 02/17/12 at 21:57:42:

Ah, I didn't know that. Good point.

Fllg wrote on 02/17/12 at 23:44:53:

That's interesting, I didn't know Vigorito had recommended 6...c5. I'm fairly sure, though I don't have the book in front of me, that Bologan suggests ...Na6 and ...e5 in his Chess Stars work.
Regarding 8.e5 in the final line you mention, I seem to recall Panczyk and Ilczuk liking it in their book 'Offbeat KI', though Flear is less than impressed with it in 'Dangerous Weapons'. I've tried this move twice as White and Black got dangerous activity on both occasions. In practice, it's certainly easier to play for Black than for White, imho, and I can't see myself playing the move again.

MNb wrote on 02/17/12 at 21:28:27:


You're quite right, of course, that this is the case if Black plays the old main line with ...c5. My point above, though, was that it's equally possible for Black to play in this way against Nf3 lines if he wants to. My experience with the Averbakh has been that most people nowadays prepare for ...e5 by answering 6.Bg5 with either ...h6 or ...Na6 (or even ...Qe8 in one case). I suspect this has something to do with Black repertoire books trying to maintain some consistency in their approach (ie aiming for ...e5 rather than ...c5) rather than being a reflection of the merits of the two different approaches.

Zwischenzugzwang wrote on 02/17/12 at 19:39:33:


I hope you enjoy and are inspired by Flear's Averbakh chapters in Dangerous Weapons, Zwischenzugzwang. Just to avoid you being put off before you've even started, I thought I'd mention that the hair-raising line in the first game of the first Averbakh chapter ('Cramp and Provoke') can be easily avoided by retreating the B to e3 rather than f4, transposing straight into the more sedate second game.

Also, I disagree with the assertion made earlier in this thread that the Averbakh leads to a wide variety of pawn structures. The way I handle the line is to play d5 as soon as ...e5 is played, so I always get the standard blocked-centre KID pawn structure. Of course, Black can play ...c5 instead of ...e5, or even aim for ...c6 ...a6 and ...b5, but don't forget that this is equally true in most other lines of the KID. Certainly these options are open to Black before you even reach the Petrosian, so you aren't actually avoiding any alternative pawn structures by choosing the Petrosian over the Averbakh. Another virtue of the Averbakh over the Petrosian (and other early Nf3 lines) is that Black is prevented from playing the annoying 6...Bg4, following up with ...Nfd7 and then either ...c5 or ...e5, concentrating pressure against the square d4. This setup is slightly frowned upon by theory, I think it's fair to say, but there's nothing remotely resembling a refutation and it sets White some quite unusual problems for the KID. People who play this as Black tend to know it well, and if you want a standard-ish KID position, you won't get it here!

Anyway, I hope this is of some help. Please do let us know what you decide in the end.

Well, we all have differing experiences in life and in chess!  I have found the exchange variation to be a very handy weapon that when played correctly by white takes away a lot of black winning attempts and certainly eliminates the dreaded mating attacks. My own anecdotal experience of never having lost as white with is is not scientific by any means, but this particular variation does meet the criteria specifically for what was asked about by the OP. Also agree with the early d5 lines in the Petrosian.  Very thematic, but I have found that relying on opponents being unprepared is not a very sound way to choose an line for myself.   

Three other lines are the Kramer, Smyslov and Bf4 lines. The Kramer is completely harmless if Black knows a tiny bit of theory, the Smyslov is a good choice if you just want a playable, quiet middlegame, and the Bf4 lines are very tricky in my opinion, unless Black knows the ...Nbd7/...b6/...Bb7 antidote.

Exchange variation.

My main recommendation would be the Gligoric, but the Samisch is another appropriate option that hasn't been mentioned. The Fianchetto Variation comes under E60-E69, so maybe the OP rejected this option because it would require learning the Fianchetto Grunfeld.

How about the Seirawan system with 5.Bd3/6.Nge2? Black typically responds with either an ..e5-based system or a Benoni transposition (a typical situation for many KID lines). In the ...e5 lines Black will often go for a kingside attack, but it appears less dangerous here than in the Classical. For one thing, White often gets to block with f2-f4.

I also like the Petrosian 7.d5 and Gligoric 7.Be3 suggestions. Surely there is a lot of theory out there, but Black players may not know them as well, and it's not as crucial for White to know it all as in the Classical or the 4 Pawns.

Zwischenzugzwang wrote on 02/16/12 at 18:45:31:


How about the Averbakh (d4, c4, Nc3, e4, Be2, Bg5)? It has the advantage of preventing Black from mechanically pursuing his King-side attack, thus enabling White to play without the danger of being overrun in the early stages. It's unfashionable rather than untheoretical, to be honest: there's plenty of theory from 20-odd years ago, but a lot of that theory is in the old main line where Black chases the B back to f4 and sacs the pawn on d6, and there's no need for you to enter that line anyway (you can retreat to e3 instead). I've punted it a few times with great success. It's a sound variation but so out of fashion that many players with Black simply haven't bothered to learn an effective antidote.

Glenn Flear's written a few chapters on the variation in Dangerous Weapons: The KI. There's enough in there to get you up and running if you fancy giving it a try.