RoleyPoley wrote on 04/11/19 at 14:45:02:


Of course, sorry. The book is "Mastering the Nimzo-Indian: With the Read and Play Method" by our boss here (Tony Kosten). It's a starting guide book about typical pawn structures and plans, not a theory book in a way we are used to in 2019.

But I have to say that nowadays is a waste of time to study in depth the nimzo in terms of profit vs investment time, because very few people plays in the 1.d4 2.c4 3.Nc3 vs our move order. Some people here said this already. Few people play 2.c4 and when you see it: "Wow! Someone is playing c4!!!" then you see Nf3 on move 3...

Myself I am avoiding NID both with White and with Black If everybody allowed me to enter into nimzo waters, I will play a lot more Nf6-e6 move order as Black against 1.d4.

And yes, Sielecki book on the Nimzo+Bogo is very good. I played his Bogo recommendations for a while, obtaining good positions out of the opening almost every time.

Salut,

BobbyDigital80 wrote on 04/11/19 at 10:36:13:

Perhaps he meant mastering the Nimzo?

IsaVulpes wrote on 04/11/19 at 10:36:18:
I asked a talented youth at the club how she plays against 1.d4, her reply was "I play the Bogo-Indian."

CanadianClub wrote on 04/11/19 at 08:52:08:

Isn't this agreeing 

I agree as well, fwiw :^) The 4.Qc2 mainline I combat with some concrete stuff one has to know a bit about, and all the Bg5 lines are somewhat important to handle properly, but most of the Nimzo, even playing the absolute top database choice till move 10, can be handled over the board.

I don't play the QID, so I'm not sure how similar it is in that respect (personally, when looking at the positions, they always looked less natural for Black to me - in particular the A0 pawnsac line of course), but even if it amounts to some kind of work, you can of course always pair the Nimzo with something else (I play the QGD after 3.Nf3, and if the standard one is too boring for you, then the Ragozin is always an option; Sielecki in his book recommends the Bogo, which also shouldn't be too much work; and if you already play the Benoni, you can of course also go for that, while having avoided the most critical tries)

E: The main reason that I can see to steer clear of the Nimzo is that it's a big question how often you actually get it on the board.
I've been playing the Nimzo in OTB play since the Gustafsson video series on it was released (end of 2016, so a little over 2 years), and in the 80-100 games (well, halve this since only Black matters) that I got in that timespan, I managed to get.. 3? 4? Nimzos on the board (default opponent in the 1800-2100 range).
Almost everyone I've seen goes 3.Nf3, so if you really really want to play some NID games, you may end up disappointed (akin to the Marshall, which I also .. try to play  ); while if you play something like the KID, you're always going to get something resembling the positions that you want.

I disagree.

In the NID, there are lots of possible variations for White (4.Qc2, 4.e3, 4a3...) to take care of. But once you get a feeling about what's going on in the opening (in general) there are very easy to find and very easy to figure out over the board. There are some tactical lines where a little knowledge is important, but there are also alternatives to this "critical" variations that are absolutely playable.

"Understanding the Ninzo-Indian Defence" and "The Nimzo-Indian Move by Move" are two not-too-heavy single volume books that explains the major nuances of the NID.

Grünfeld, semi-slav or KID are, imho, more success-theory-dependant than NID.

I don't play QID and maybe there are critical lines, of course, but it seems to me (from a certain distance, as I don't play it) that are not very difficult to start playing it confidently. As with any opening out there, the more you play it, the more you'll going to understand it.

PD: another easy source to follow, a little video gem: "The Knock-Out nimzo" (http://badbishop.com/bbpages/dnimzo.html), in aprox and hour... Nimzo explained.

If someone takes up the NID and QID, is that twice the amount of theory that other openings like the KID or Semi-Slav have? I want to play the NID and was wondering how much QID theory there is compared to it.