LostTactic wrote on 01/01/14 at 07:22:30:


I was mostly responding to this line: "It's cool being able to play it against almost everything that isn't 1.e4," and also "Then ...Na6 against everything else."  Maybe if you clarified your suggestions a bit more I wouldn't disagree with you (...Na6 is utterly useless against the Saemisch, for one), but it sounds like you're recommending playing a "system" instead of playing a complex opening system where every move by White might cause Black to re-evaluate where his pieces and pawns belong, and vice versa.

LostTactic wrote on 01/01/14 at 07:22:30:


Here is where I (and I'd think 99% of players stronger than myself) really disagree with you.  First, playing "moderately or very defensively" is a recipe for disaster in chess in general, though certain types of positions are more forgiving of that kind of play than others.  And while the King's Indian is a very flexible opening and allows Black to play his first 5 moves against pretty much everything, he pays a very high price: White can get an enormous space advantage.  In most variations, if Black doesn't play extremely energetically he will have nothing to compensate for this, and White will have a very easy to play and large advantage.  Further, it's really White's decision to gain a lot of space or not, so whether Black is required to play aggressively is entirely out of his hands.  Look at the Saemisch variation for one; there's a reason that sacrificing a pawn on move 6 or beginning rapid central and queenside counterplay with 6...Nc6, 7.Nge2 a6 8.Qd2 Rb8 are the most popular ways of playing.  

Here's one game I've always liked; look at how hard Black has to play to strive for counterplay, eventually sacrificing a piece for a couple of pawns: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070619.  Even here White missed a win or two, but that isn't entirely the point.  Black has to be prepared to play with extreme amounts of energy, dynamism, whatever you want to call it in the King's Indian.  Notice that Black wasn't even facing threats on the kingside, but his severe lack of space was enough to mean that he was losing without drastic measures.  

Not everyone can play like Fischer or Kasparov, and trying to play it "moderately or defensively" will just make you suffer without space, with a terrible bishop on g7, facing a mating attack down the h-file, penetration on the queenside, and sometimes all of the above.  We all like to think that we can play like Tal or Kasparov, but any player should ask themselves: "Could I have timed 17...Nxe4 correctly, as Kasparov did against Bareev?  Even when the resulting position was still better for White?  Anyone can play ...Nxe4 when we see that it leads to advantage."  If the answer is no, then the King's Indian probably isn't for you.  And there's no shame in that, many of the world's best players throughout history have avoided the King's Indian.   

Anyway I'm not going to belabor the point more.  I'm actually working on a book from White's point of view (which may or may not ever be finished); if I complete it I'll just be able to refer to my book instead of trying to debate this point online.  The King's Indian is a wonderful opening, but it shouldn't be played as a "system."  If White plays very passively Black can get away with anything, but here White can grab a TON of space and have a long-enduring large advantage if Black doesn't find counterplay.  White doesn't even need to play very sharply and attack down the h-file or anything like that, simply putting his pawns on c4, d4, and e4 is enough to require Black to play with great energy or suffer.

Okay /end tirade.

So you're looking for something unconventional but solid. In that case 1...d6 against everything could be an option, aiming for lines like 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 (the Modern Philidor) and 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5. Barsky wrote two books for Chess Stars describing exactly this repertoire, and they've been discussed elsewhere on this forum. Of course this means you have to be ready to play the queenless middlegames that arise after dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 - to be honest I don't know how easy it is for a club-level player to develop a feel for how to defend these positions.

LostTactic wrote on 12/30/13 at 23:10:01:


This is the exact way NOT to play the King's Indian.  Club players do it this way and the results end up something like London System players or Colle System players.   

The King's Indian is an incredibly rich opening with many, many complex plans and subtle nuances.  Strong players don't play it so that they can "play it against almost everything."  The King's Indian should not be a "system" opening, and players that try to make it one suffer terribly.   

Also, you don't need to be a French player to play 1.c4 e6, as after 2.e4 you can play 2...c5 and even 2...d5 shouldn't necessitate any knowledge of the French other than the line 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.ed ed 4.c4, which Black players should be fairly happy to see.  Black is equal and the position will become imbalanced.

I personally think that people should play more classically for a while before jumping to the Indian defences.  The Queen's Gambit Declined, the Tarrasch, the Queen's Gambit Accepted, the Slav, and Semi-Slav offer a lot of different possibilities for interesting chess, where finding good moves more often than not involve straightforward principles like "develop quickly," "control the center," etc.  I'd stay away from the King's Indian, Pirc, and the like until you've achieved enough understanding of the classical systems of development to understand why Black players started to look for alternatives.

Thank you very much to all of you!
@TN I'm just an amateur , rated between 1700 and 1800 elo. My actual repertoire is simply "the dark Knight system". Before I used to play the Chigorin against d4 and the Qd6 Scandinavian against e4. I was thinking to use Nigel Davies book on the modern as an unique system but perhaps the opening is too difficult for me.
I don't like the KID. I would like to be a "strange" player to play against. I think the way to go could be knowing my own , unconventional, stuff  better than the other player
Thoughts?
A good book on the petroff? Thanks again and happy new year!

I think the King's Indian could be considered against 1.d4/c4/nf3 etc. It's cool being able to play it against almost everything that isn't 1.e4. I'd recommend 6...Bg4 vs the Classical, very easy to learn and play variation. Then ...Na6 against everything else, ...c6 vs the fianchetto.

Against 1.e4 the Berlin is cool.

Against 1.d4, play 1...d5!. Both QGA or QGD are good options. But I think you are going to see lots of London System and Colle by White. Even more than Queen's Gambits.

Against 1.e4 I reccommend you to play the Scandinavian: 1...d5! It's the major system with less theory to learn against e4 by far. Even Anand relied on it against Kasparov in their WC games some years ago (and not because of the amount of theory, I suppose). You can google a little to get differences between Qa5 and Qd6 systems, but both are good.

Against 1.c4, you can play same structures that against d4: e6-d5-Nf6 and so on.

Salut !

One might prefer 1...e6 versus 1. c4, to avoid the Mikenas.

The "reach a playable middlegame" bit reminded me of Portisch using the same wording in his chapter of the old book How to Open a Chess Game.  For the record, his suggestions against 1. e4 included the Neo-Steinitz and the French (with 4...b6 or 6...Qa5 in the Winawer).  In this sort of vein, the French with early ...de has also been recommended (by Purdy in one of his books, and by Korchnoi to Sosonko after watching the latter get crushed in a Sicilian  ).

Pale Horse, Pale Rider wrote on 12/30/13 at 16:08:27:

Thank you too! And against other openings ( 1.e4 or 1.c4 )?
Other ideas?