ErictheRed wrote on 04/12/13 at 18:58:02:



Thanks. According to my database most Grynfeld players know this (or are lucky):

7.-c5 8400 games
7.-0-0 2700 games

But nice idea anyway

I like this option the most, especially because in a good amount of your games Black will play 7...0-0?! (instead of 7...c5). After 8.Be2! you have chances for a real edge.    

-------------

What is the difference between 7.-c5 and 7.-0-0? Why is 7.-c5 better?

TN wrote on 01/27/13 at 13:54:56:


I like this option the most, especially because in a good amount of your games Black will play 7...0-0?! (instead of 7...c5). After 8.Be2! you have chances for a real edge.  See The Road to Chess Improvement and some posts on these forums.  

I used to play 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.cd Nxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bc, because in that move order I thought Black might be a little more likely to carelessly play 7...0-0?! (who knows if that's really true).  If Black played 7...c5! instead, I'd decide on whether I wanted to enter the 8.Rb1 lines or play 8.Bb5+ (I almost always played 8.Rb1).  

This way, you can begin studying the complicated 8.Rb1 but have a "bail out" option to a perfectly playable position with 8.Bb5+.  There's nothing wrong with 8.Bb5, it's not a bad move, but it can lead to simplified positions where neither side has much to play for.  On the other hand if Black plays for a win with 8...Nd7, he runs the risk of not putting enough pressure on White's center and ending up in a bad game.  So all together I think it's a perfectly reasonable way to play based on sound, straightforward development instead of odd moves like 5.h4.  5.h4 might be playable, but in my opinion, what the top GMs can make work is different than what us patzers can make work...

Lauri Torni wrote on 04/11/13 at 10:38:06:


If you play the Samisch against the Kings Indian, you could try 1.d4 Ng6 2.c4 g6 3.f3.

TN wrote on 04/11/13 at 09:00:53:


But instead of 6...O-O Black could of course play more aggressively with 6...dxc4 (or even better 5...dxc4 [to avoid 5...c6 6.cxd5] after which 6.Bg5 c6 would transpose) and try to hang on to the pawn. For example 7.e4 Be6 8.e5 Nd5 9.h5 with a very complex position

Funnily enough 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.h4 is a way to get a really solid position against the Grunfeld where you don't risk much and play for a small positional edge, Grischuk-Carlsen being a good example of that. If you're a subscriber to the Daring Defences section you can see Flear's notes on that game.

Doesn't look like fun for either side to play if you ask me. I have had some problems playing against the Grunfeld. Also thought of trying it out as Black to learn more about it, but there are lots of things to learn. Anyway, my first instinctive reaction was that sure, 9. ...c6 might be solid, but why not move the pawn two step; thus 9 ...c5 should be more interesting and less drawish? And of course the move which really is in the spirit of the opening.

The 7.Nf3 c5 8.Bb5 Exchange. It's seriously tough for Black to play for a win against it. The 7.Qa4 Exchange is similarly rock solid.