kylemeister wrote on 06/24/13 at 19:54:47:


Agreed that this idea looks much better for Black when he leaves the pawn on c6 for a while, covering b5.  I'll have to take a closer look at it later.  Maybe with the pawn staying on c6 White should go back to Bf1-d3-c2; I'm not sure.   

Those are nice games illustrative of some of the strategic problems Black faces in this line, GabrielGale.  Who am I to argue with Schandorff, but I'm inclined to delay Bd3 depending on how Black arranges his Knights.

Lots of different positions being thrown about; I'm up for taking 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.f3 Nbd7 4.c4 e5 5.d5 c6 6.Nc3 Be7 7.Be3 0-0 as a starting point, with 8.Nge2, 8.Qd2, and 8.Nh3!? as the most important continuations.  8.Qd2 is probably the most flexible (waiting another move to see what Black does), but I must confess to being especially drawn to plans of putting the Knight on h3 and f2, overprotecting e4 and g3, not getting in the way of the Bishop on f1, and ready to hop to d3 later to support the push c4-c5, exchange off a Knight on c5, etc. 

Sow how about 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.f3 Nbd7 4.c4 e5 5.d5 c6 6.Nc3 Be7 7.Be3 0-0 8.Qd2 and we look at each of Black's plans in turn?  I'm inclined to think that Black will decide between:

1) Whether or not to play ...cxd5, and when to do so
2) Whether to play for ...a6 and ...b7-b5, often combined with ...Nb6, or ...a5 and ...Nc5
3) Whether to play for the ...f7-f5 push, and if so, whether it should be prepared with ...g7-g6 and whether the Knight should go ...Nf6-e8 or ...Nf6-h4 (eyeing f4).
4) I bet most of us agree that ...c6-c5 is too passive for Black; White will castle Kingside and arrange b2-b4.

GabrielGale wrote on 06/24/13 at 12:52:56:

My idea as well.

ErictheRed wrote on 06/24/13 at 07:27:23:

This is why I offered a line; to me the postion after 7.d5 looks like a reasonable starting position.
The only game I could find with a Nh3 setup after 7...c6 8.Qd2 a5 is Alburt-Soltis, USAch 1983. Black postponed ...cxd5 possibly to avoid Nb5.
Schandorff's proposal is arrived at via 7...c6 8.Bd3 a5 9.Nge2 Nc5 10.Bc2 (I didn't invent this move myself) cxd5 11.cxd5 Ne8. After 12.a3 Bg5 13.Bf2 (Tomescu-Georgiev, Reggio Emilia 2004), he doesn't tell us what's wrong with ...Bd7, eg 14.b4 axb4 15.axb4 Na6 16.Rb1 Qf6.
Another idea is 12...g6 13.b4 axb4 14.axb4 Rxa1 15.Qxa1 Na6 16.Qb2 f5.
Of course I'm well aware of the fact that the setup ...a5 and ...Nc5 in the end doesn't prevent White's plan. Neither does the mirrored version in the Gurgenidze blockading defense (...h5 and ...Nf5, something that's also know in the French). The idea is to slow White down.

As for 6.Nge2 a la Miles I refer to Lputian-Zaichik, USSRch U26 1980 and Getz-Djurhuus, NORch 2011.

I didn't know that Schandorff had recommended this, and his book is probably a good place to start.  1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.f3 is certainly the most logical move order to get into this system.  

I stand by what I said before: White is very comfortable, and this compares unfavorably to a standard Saemisch KID.  At a very basic level, Black's problem is the old Russian schoolboy one; how to break with ...f7-f5 in such a way that White doesn't successfully blockade the e4-square.  I disagree with Markovich that Black can successfully arrange ...Ne8 and ...f7-f5 very easily; I think his task is harder than in analogous KID lines.  

MNb, your line 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3 Nbd7 4. e4 e5 5.f3 Be7 6. Be3 O-O 7. d5 c6 8. Qd2 cxd5 9. cxd5 a5 10.Bd3 Nc5 11.Bc2 looks strange to me for a number of reasons.  But looking at the position after 9.cxd5, I think 9...a5? is a fairly huge positional blunder, giving White the b5-square from which to invade Black's Queenside.  I'd probably prefer the flexible 10.Nh3!? for White, who has the pleasant choice of castling on either side, putting a Bishop or Knight on b5, etc.  I don't see how Black is supposed to arrange any counterplay after 9...a5?
  
Compare to the KID line 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 c6 8. Qd2 cxd5 9. cxd5, which in my database has occurred 1,063 times.  9...a6! was played 521 times by people like Kasparov, Milov, Cvitan, Popovic; 9...a5? was played 4 times by people I've never heard of.  To quote Chris Ward concerning this exact position, "A common mistake for Black by less experienced KID players is to play ...a5 automatically in an attempt to secure the c5-square for the Knight.  In the Saemisch it's often a pretty negative policy as Black has nowhere to go from there and White can usually arrange the knight-budging b2-b4 anyway.  Specifically, here 9...a6 both facilitates the advance ...b7-b5 and prevents a white piece from parking itself on that same b5-square.  Indeed I can recall once being told that 9...Nbd7 is a mistake because of 10.Nb5!."

I wouldn't mind discussing this line further, but we need to agree on a starting position.  I maintain that White is better and that his job is easier than in the Saemisch KID.

HgMan wrote on 06/22/13 at 19:51:26:


In fact, 1.d4 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.f3 is Schandorff's recommendation for White in Play 1.d4 - The Indian Defences.  In an attempt to stay consistent with his recommendation of the Samisch against the King's Indian, he opts for a system against the Old Indian with d5, f3, and Nge2.   

Like Markovich, I too had thought that f3 looked out of place against the Old Indian -- with the Black bishop on e7, White wants the Knight on f3, not the pawn -- but Schandorff seems to feel that his line gives White a good chance of retaining an edge.   

It should also be noted that, from the pure Old Indian move order -- 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d6 3.Nc3 Nbd7 4.e4 e5 --  White can play d5 without following up with f3 as in the famous game Spassky-Kavalek, Montreal 1979.  Afaik, this is still considered a reasonable system for White.

Markovich wrote on 06/22/13 at 13:47:14:


I think this is what I was after. Much of the Old Indian also hinges on control over/pressure on e4, but f3 looked odd (Hans Berliner might disagree...). And while I would never think to play this way as White, the move order is a curious (and not altogether rare) attempt to dodge the Pirc.

MNb wrote on 06/21/13 at 21:34:36:


As Markovich noted, I'm rather happy to see White play d4-d5 in the Old Indian. My preference (from my proposed move order) would be: 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.f3 e5, but this opens the door to an early queen exchange (not dangerous, but not great for creating decent winning chances, either). 3...Nbd7 does little to prevent the advance of the c-pawn, but avoids the queen exchange.

And, yes: plans of exchanging pawns on d5 and playing along the c-file/queenside are a clear possibility for Black, combined with an ...f5 thrust.

Of course, given this opens with 1.e4, I don't know how likely or desirable a transposition into a Samisch-like pawn structure is for White on a subjective—as distinct from objective—level. Overall, though, I'm liking this Old Indian...

There is no such thing as a Saemisch vs the Old Indian. You can set up a Saemisch-like pawn formation, but with Black's bishop on e7, it's suboptimal.

Indeed, the Old Indian is a path to certain KID positions without risking a Saemisch.

With reference to some of the foregoing, d4-d5 is not very good against the Old Indian, because Black's B is much more active on e7 than on g7. Black usually plays Ne8, f7-f5.