Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian (Read 4398 times)
FrenchRefutes1e4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender: Male
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #15 - 09/26/17 at 19:06:16
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 09/26/17 at 14:51:04:
Which response advocated giving up a whole rook?  The point is that you seemed willing to sacrifice material in one variation that you know the theory of, but immediately went passive when you were out of book.  That's something to think about. Did you even consider sacrificing the b7-pawn? If you did, why did you reject it?


Post 4 sounded like you were saying I was advocating giving up a whole rook when it was an exchange for a pawn and a massive central pawn mass.  Sounded like you were wondering why I wouldn't support giving up the Rook on a8 if that's my mentality, but I would only give up the Rook on a8 if I am getting comp for it.

I retreated because I couldn't find a good place for the Knight in order for the Rook to be covered by the other Rook.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mn
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 418
Location: Ottawa
Joined: 09/22/16
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #14 - 09/26/17 at 16:20:10
Post Tools
I considered 9...Na6 as well but I figured that if White chooses not to take on b7, I'd rather have the Knight on d7 than a6 - I figured the Bishop is likely to take on f3 if queried so having d7 free wasn't all that important.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 468
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #13 - 09/26/17 at 15:41:21
Post Tools
@myself - I am not liking 9.Qb3 Qa6 so much anymore.

A new idea. 9.Qb3 Na6!? 10.Qxb7 Nb4 is very trappy.
Edited:
Now I see EricTheRed already mentioned 9...Na6.


@mn - 9.Qb3 Nbd7 10.Qxb7 Rfc8!? is also possible (iso 10...c5). A sample line where I substituted a couple of human-looking moves is 11.Qb3 Be6 12.d5 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nc5 14.Qd1 Bg4 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Nb3 17.Rb1 Nxc1 18.Rfxc1 Nd7. Black can probably hold this position with accurate play. Winning would require white to go wrong earlier.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #12 - 09/26/17 at 14:51:04
Post Tools
Which response advocated giving up a whole rook?  The point is that you seemed willing to sacrifice material in one variation that you know the theory of, but immediately went passive when you were out of book.  That's something to think about. Did you even consider sacrificing the b7-pawn? If you did, why did you reject it?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
FrenchRefutes1e4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender: Male
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #11 - 09/26/17 at 13:25:33
Post Tools
FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 09/26/17 at 13:24:20:
mn wrote on 09/26/17 at 11:48:16:
By the way, I'm curious what the justification for Black's position is after 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Bxf3. I admittedly haven't played either side of the Fianchetto KID in years, but at a cursory glance, this looks like a dream position for White to me - space advantage, Bishop pair, safe King. It also looks like attempts at counterplay via ...c5 can be met with an annoying e4-e5 (xb7), and this is confirmed by clicking through the database.

I'm genuinely curious what you see in Black's position.



White never gets in e4-e5 because in the normal line with 9.h3 instead of 9.Qb3, Black plays 9...Bxh3 10.Bxh3 and now the immediate 10...e5!  Then a lot depends on how White replies.  Advancing, Exchanging, leaving the tension, etc.  If he advances, often Black will trade on d5 and move the f-Rook to c8 and play on the Queenside.  One of Black's obvious goals is to get a Knight in on d4.



Correction:  9.h3 Bxf3 (NOT Bxh3) 10.Bxf3 e5!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
FrenchRefutes1e4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender: Male
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #10 - 09/26/17 at 13:24:20
Post Tools
mn wrote on 09/26/17 at 11:48:16:
By the way, I'm curious what the justification for Black's position is after 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Bxf3. I admittedly haven't played either side of the Fianchetto KID in years, but at a cursory glance, this looks like a dream position for White to me - space advantage, Bishop pair, safe King. It also looks like attempts at counterplay via ...c5 can be met with an annoying e4-e5 (xb7), and this is confirmed by clicking through the database.

I'm genuinely curious what you see in Black's position.



White never gets in e4-e5 because in the normal line with 9.h3 instead of 9.Qb3, Black plays 9...Bxh3 10.Bxh3 and now the immediate 10...e5!  Then a lot depends on how White replies.  Advancing, Exchanging, leaving the tension, etc.  If he advances, often Black will trade on d5 and move the f-Rook to c8 and play on the Queenside.  One of Black's obvious goals is to get a Knight in on d4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
FrenchRefutes1e4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender: Male
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #9 - 09/26/17 at 13:19:06
Post Tools
In response to reply 6, it's not a full rook.  It's an Exchange.

In the Kavalek, it's 8.h3 Be6 9.d5 cxd5 10.Nd4 dxc4 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Bxb7 Nbd7 13.Bxa8 Rxa8.  Black also gets a massive central pawn mass.

Vastly different than just giving up a Rook for Nothing via allowing  10.Qxb7 and 11.Qxb8 in the line 8.e4 Bg4 9.Qb3.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mn
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 418
Location: Ottawa
Joined: 09/22/16
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #8 - 09/26/17 at 11:48:16
Post Tools
By the way, I'm curious what the justification for Black's position is after 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Bxf3. I admittedly haven't played either side of the Fianchetto KID in years, but at a cursory glance, this looks like a dream position for White to me - space advantage, Bishop pair, safe King. It also looks like attempts at counterplay via ...c5 can be met with an annoying e4-e5 (xb7), and this is confirmed by clicking through the database.

I'm genuinely curious what you see in Black's position.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #7 - 09/26/17 at 04:34:09
Post Tools
By the way, your original post mentions a possible improvement at move 33, but looking briefly at your game, I have to wonder why you didn't play 21...f4 instead of putting the rook on f6.  The big mistake is at move 24 though, when 24...g5? gives white an essentially winning position, because he has an extra pawn and you've made your bishop terrible.  You need to activate your bishop at that point, 24...Bh6 or 24...fg with the possibility of activating it later.  25.g4? was a counter mistake on White's part, who can put his bishop there instead with a huge bind.  But at move 24, you have pretty reasonable compensation for a pawn.

Sometimes we forget to play simple chess.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #6 - 09/26/17 at 04:21:26
Post Tools
FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 09/26/17 at 02:56:15:
Nowhere did I say I was willing to "sacrifice a Rook" in the Fianchetto Variation.  This isn't the classical where the Rook on a8 is totally useless.  I said I'd be willing to allow Qxa8 if there is a legit way to trap the Queen!  That would be a combination, not a sacrifice.  Similar to what White does in some lines of the French where the Queen takes on b2 and a1, but later gets trapped by force, and so it's not a "sacrifice", it's a "combination".


Your own words were:
FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 09/25/17 at 15:42:23:
play 8...Be6 with the Rook sac line against 9.d5 where you take on d5 and again on c4, allowing Bxa8...


I didn't quite know what continuation you were talking about, but you did say "Rook sac line," not "combination where you win White's queen," so it sounded to me as though you were prepared to play a true sacrifice against another of White's continuations.   

FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 09/26/17 at 02:56:15:
Secondly, about the Bishop, trading Bishop for Knight in this line is NORMAL!  Black, under normal circumstances in this line, trades the Bishop for the Knight on f3 and follows with ...e5.  The reasoning is simple:

1) It keeps the White e-pawn on e4, blocking his Bishop

2) Black gains ownership of the dark squares in the center.  Particularly d4 and to some extent c5.


I understand that much, but Black would like it if White at least spends a tempo on 9.h3 before capturing the knight.

Anyhow, I think that it's pretty clear that after 9.Qb3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Qc7 11.Be3 White is better.  You have to go back a couple of moves to find Black's mistake, and while perhaps the immediate capture on f3 isn't so bad, there's just no need for it--unless you're worried that after ...Nbd7 (closing the retreat path of the bishop) White can move the f3-knight and chase down the bishop on g4, but in that case the immediate 9...Qc7 would be better than capturing on f3 and then retreating the queen.

Ideally Black shouldn't do any retreating, can we agree on that?  The second move that comes to my mind here is 9...Nbd7 as mn pointed out; the first is actually 9...Na6!? because I'm slightly concerned that the bishop on g4 could be hunted down in the future.  These are the first two moves to analyze.  If you're concerned about saccing a pawn, I would argue that 9...Qb6 is a better way of protecting it, since Black has a minor threat of capturing on b3 with control of the b4-square.  For instance 9...Qb6 10.Be3 Qxb3 11.ab Na6.

Still, I probably wouldn't seriously consider 9...Qb6.  You just played 7...Qa5 and 8...Bg4; if you believe in your scheme of development, you need to continue playing logical, foreword, "get your pieces out quickly" moves and not worry too much about the b7-pawn.  Frankly the move 9.Qb3 is so obvious that you should have the confidence that it doesn't work for White, because if it did, no strong players would use this scheme of development for Black.  That's not to say that White can't hold onto a small edge after 9.Qb3, but you should realize that it's nothing to worry about and go from there.

I still question whether you're thinking too much about precise theory or "playing King's Indian-type moves" (such as ...Bxf3) and not looking at the position afresh and asking, "How can Black best solve his opening problems from here?  What is Black's most logical continuation given his previous moves?"
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
FrenchRefutes1e4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender: Male
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #5 - 09/26/17 at 02:56:15
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 09/26/17 at 00:30:14:
It's a bit odd to me that in one line you're willing to sacrifice a rook, but that in the game you immediately 1) gave up the bishop pair, and 2) moved your queen again to defend a measly pawn.  And the measly queen's knight's pawn, the one that capturing with a queen often leads to big trouble!

Are you so focused on the particulars of opening theory that you've forgotten some of the basic principles of opening play? 



Nowhere did I say I was willing to "sacrifice a Rook" in the Fianchetto Variation.  This isn't the classical where the Rook on a8 is totally useless.  I said I'd be willing to allow Qxa8 if there is a legit way to trap the Queen!  That would be a combination, not a sacrifice.  Similar to what White does in some lines of the French where the Queen takes on b2 and a1, but later gets trapped by force, and so it's not a "sacrifice", it's a "combination".

And you talk about contradiction of aggressive and playing Qc7, this is why I am asking.  Looking for the right answer.  I'll give up a pawn all day.  In the King's Indian, being down a pawn is a joke, but you need to have a reason to give up a Rook.

I do want to look at that line mentioned where Black jettisons the pawn, but not the rook, and plays 9...Nbd7 and 10...c5 (if 10.Qxb7).  If there is some way to actually trap the Queen, then allowing Qxa8 makes total sense, but I don't see it.

Secondly, about the Bishop, trading Bishop for Knight in this line is NORMAL!  Black, under normal circumstances in this line, trades the Bishop for the Knight on f3 and follows with ...e5.  The reasoning is simple:

1) It keeps the White e-pawn on e4, blocking his Bishop

2) Black gains ownership of the dark squares in the center.  Particularly d4 and to some extent c5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #4 - 09/26/17 at 00:30:14
Post Tools
It's a bit odd to me that in one line you're willing to sacrifice a rook, but that in the game you immediately 1) gave up the bishop pair, and 2) moved your queen again to defend a measly pawn.  And the measly queen's knight's pawn, the one that capturing with a queen often leads to big trouble!

Are you so focused on the particulars of opening theory that you've forgotten some of the basic principles of opening play?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 468
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #3 - 09/25/17 at 20:15:03
Post Tools
9...Bxf3? was totally unnecessary.

9...Qa6 is interesting, e.g. 10 Be3 Nfd7 and probably 11...e5. White's queen finds it much harder to leave b3 than it was to arrive.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
FrenchRefutes1e4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: United States
Joined: 01/21/16
Gender: Male
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #2 - 09/25/17 at 19:52:08
Post Tools
Interesting.  Thanks.  I'll have to look at this.  I've been trying to make 9...Nfd7 work.  I'll have to look at 9...Nbd7.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mn
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 418
Location: Ottawa
Joined: 09/22/16
Re: Question in the Fianchetto King's Indian
Reply #1 - 09/25/17 at 18:11:20
Post Tools
9 Qb3 looks like a half-bluff. The right move is 9...Nbd7!, when it turns out taking the pawn is just awkward enough to give Black sufficient counterchances. If you're facing this line a lot you may want to commit a couple computer sequences to memory:

10 Qxb7 c5! (10...Rab8 11 Qxc6 Rfc8 12 Qa4 Qxa4 13 Nxa4 Rxc4 14 b3 doesn't look like quite enough for Black);
A) 11 dxc5 Rfb8 12 b4 (forced; 12 Qxc6 loses to ...Bxf3 and ...Ne5) 12...Qd8 13 Qa6 dxc5, and the computer gives a forcing line beginning with 14 e5 that's fine for Black.
B) 11 Qb5 Qxb5 12 Nxb5 a6 13 e5! (13 Nc3 Bxf3 and ...exd4 isn't so good for White) 13...axb5 14 exf6 Bxf6 15 cxb5 exd4 with dynamic equality.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo