< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·
|Sep-08-05|| ||Dudley: You're welcome. Love to talk to the wall anyway.|
|Sep-08-05|| ||jcmoral: Hi, sorry for the late reply. Sometimes I miss when people reply to my kibitzes. Would 20.fxe4 have been better? I didn't attack queenside because I thought I could make something of Black's missing pawn on the g-file. Having said that 14.Re1 was a waste of time then.|
|Nov-21-05|| ||Darknite: <black's missing pawn on the g-file> is thematic in many lines of the KID - it is rarely a weakness for white to exploit rather it is a strength for black because it opens the g-file for black's heavy pieces and combined with other normal motifs in the KID such as a pawn on f4 and a bishop sac on h3, it can often be devastating.|
|Nov-25-05|| ||Dudley: Yes in the King's Indian Black normally has the advantage in power on the K side. On a more general note, I find that many players will automatically try to attack the enemy king, even when the other side has the majority of his pieces there. This usually hastens the end, because they cooperate in opening up their position for the side which truly has the attack.|
|Nov-28-05|| ||Darknite: Well i think it was Nigel Short who said something along the lines of 'people are too concerned with pawn structure, checkmate ends the game!'|
|Nov-28-05|| ||Dudley: Throw caution to the winds? I don't think even Nigel Short can get away with that. There has to be some type of advantage that gives a player the idea a mating attack might work. This is not fine positional chess, just common sense judgement.|
|Nov-28-05|| ||Darknite: Obviously no one is saying throw caution to the winds. Clearly one has to be of the opinion that there is an advantage in the position to press for mate. I guess the point i was making is that contrary to what you say, many people are so afraid to damage their pawn structures or heaven forbid sac a pawn that many attacking opportunites fall by the wayside.|
|Nov-28-05|| ||Dudley: You probably know better than I what works and what doesn't. I think I am talking about players in a much lower rating class than you are-like me for example.|
|Nov-29-05|| ||Darknite: Its interesting. I think you are right. There probably is a distinction in styles of play between rating classes. As you say at the lower levels there is a great deal of tactics (mainly caused by blunders) whereas at my level the game tends to become more strategic and tactics tend to fall by the wayside a little. Btwn 2000 and IM strength, players are able to see enough to avoid the obvious pitfalls that lead to short term tactics but not enough to play the kind of positional and exchange sacs etc that GMs specialize in. Obviously these are sweeping generalizations but i think your point has a great deal of merit.|
|Aug-29-06|| ||yanez: I have tried and tried against this opening and cannot gain an edge|
|Aug-29-06|| ||e4Newman: are you speaking from your experience on the white or black side of the board?|
|Aug-29-06|| ||sixfeetunder: <I have tried and tried against this opening and cannot gain an edge> You should then play something else, it is very often, when some openings, although oblectively good, just don't work very well.|
|Oct-21-06|| ||Maatalkko: I just watched a lecture by Fedorowicz on ICC, explaining how the bayonet attack has caused alot of players like Kasparov, Polgar, and himself to give up the KID entirely. (He also mentioned that the 9.Ne1 main line has been giving Black trouble). He said, referring to 9. b4 a5 10. bxa5: |
"I got my face punched a few times with this move, and then I decided that was it, especially after a couple of brutal games where Yermolinksy really put it to me badly. And then you don't see me playing the King's Indian that much anymore, which is a shame because I really liked the opening. I feel like I've abandoned a friend, and maybe some of the other people who were King's Indian advocates feel the same way."
It would be sad if the King's Indian went the way of the Benoni and was never again played by top GM's except as a surprise weapon. The opening has such a rich history, but it has some problems to solve.
|Jan-13-07|| ||jedrus07: Radjabov solved today at Corus this problems perfectly ;)))|
|Jan-14-07|| ||notyetagm: Yes, Radjabov -and- Bologan both defeated the Bayonet Attack today in the first round of Corus '07.|
Here is Bologan's win:
[Event "Corus B"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. d4 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8.
d5 Ne7 9. b4 Nh5 10. Re1 a5 11. bxa5 Rxa5 12. Nd2 Nf4 13. Bf1 Ra8 14. a4
Nh5 15. Ba3 c5 16. dxc6 bxc6 17. Ndb1 c5 18. Nb5 Ra6 19. Ra2 Bh6 20. N1c3
Ng7 21. Nd5 Ne6 22. Bb2 Bg7 23. g3 Nc6 24. Bc3 Ncd4 25. Nxd4 cxd4 26. Bb4
Bb7 27. a5 f5 28. Bg2 Rf7 29. h4 Nc5 30. h5 Nxe4 31. hxg6 hxg6 32. Rxe4
fxe4 33. Bxe4 Qg5 34. Bd2 Qh5 35. Qb1 Kh7 36. Ra3 Bc8 37. g4 Bxg4 38. Rg3
Bf5 39. Rg2 Bxe4 40. Qxe4 Qf5 41. Rh2+ Kg8 42. Qh4 g5 43. Bxg5 Rxa5 44. Rg2
Ra1+ 45. Kh2 Qb1 46. Ne7+ Rxe7 47. Bxe7 Qh1+ 48. Kg3 Qxh4+ 49. Kxh4 d3 50.
f3 Kf7 51. Bxd6 Bh6 52. Bb4 Ra4 53. Rb2 Bc1
|Jan-14-07|| ||notyetagm: <jedrus07: Radjabov solved today at Corus this problems perfectly ;)))>|
Yes, and as a King's Indian fan, it was most gratifying that Radjabov beat the world's expert in the Bayonet Attack, Van Wely.
And Bologan beat a 2566-rated Bayonet player, not exactly a pushover either.
|Jan-14-07|| ||jedrus07: I am going to say more :))) Today i beat 1600 player with my KID in my regional league in Poland, therefore earning 3/4- 1960 performance :D Good days for KID ;)|
Did you read Eduard Gufeld - 'Kings Indian Defence'? This one inspired me to play this :))) Great reading for all KID fans :)
|Mar-22-07|| ||WTHarvey: Here are some winning combinations from King's Indian E97 miniatures: http://www.wtharvey.com/e97.html|
|Dec-31-07|| ||KingG: Anyone know anything about the line 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Be2 e5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d5
Ne7 9.Bg5 ?
In particular, what would regular King's Indian players here recommend as the best way to play against it as Black.
From what i can tell the main options are 9...Nh5 and 9...h6. I tried 9...h6 in a blitz game, but it didn't work out too well after White exchanged on f6, as i played for a King-side attack when undermining White's center might have been a better option.
My insitinct tells me this line shouldn't be good for White, but i find it to be a little bit annoying, and i notice some great players like Ftacnik and Yermolinsky have played it in the past, so it can't be that bad.
|Feb-21-08|| ||rgr459: <King> I play the King's Indian, and I have tried 9...Nh5 10. Ne1 followed by 10...f6 11. Be3 f5 12. f3 f4 to set off the thematic kingside expansion transposing back to a Samisch-like position. I have obtained decent positions against fritz with this set-up where black can slowly coordinate his pieces for a kingside assault, but I think the normal move is 10... Nf4|
|Feb-21-08|| ||MaxxLange: I played a game against the computer the other day where it played a Modern Benoni move order but held off on playing ....e6. So, all kinds of transpositions into the KID are in play:|
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. d5 d6 4. Nc3 g6 5. e4 Bg7
now, if I play 6.f4. hoping to head for the Taimanov line in the Modern Benoni, it can just play into the KID 4 Pawns attack, which is not what I wanted.
6. Nf3 0-0, and we are headed for Classical KID or, I guess, I can still play the Averbakh system. But, after 7. Be2 e6, it seems to have gotten into the Modern Benoni after all, after I'm already committed to a Classical setup.
I know there are lots of transpositional possibilities in this kind of opening, but is there any way to crack down on Black for trying the specific move order above? Suppose I absolutely wanted to force him to play a KID. Is that even possible?
|Feb-21-08|| ||KingG: <MaxxLange> One way to 'punish' him for his move order could be to retake on d5 with your e-pawn after 7...e6 8...exd5 9.exd5. White then probably has a slight advantage. Otherwise it may be worth looking into the Modern Main Line of the Modern Benoni(involving an early h3, preventing ...Bg4), which is also quite strong for White.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||mannetje: This is what Joe Gallagher has to say about the Bayonet attack (9.b4): (2004)|
<Over the last 8 or 9 years the Bayonet Attack has been one of White's main success stories in the King's Indian. Prior to this 9.b4 was generally thought to be a poor relation to the main alternatives in this position, 9.Ne1 and 9.Nd2. It was rarely seen in top class chess. Strange, you may think, as 9.b4 is the obvious way for White to force through c5-c5 as quickly as possible. In this position the pawn structure dictates that White will attack on the queenside. The reason why this move was not trusted was that it allowed Black to play the active 9...Nh5, whilst after moves like 9.Nd2 or 9.Ne1 the black knight, in order to get of of the way of the f-pawn, would have to retreat.
Attitudes began to change after White discovered the move 10.Re1 (in reply to 9...Nh5). The simple idea is to meet 10...Nf4 with 11.Bf1. The bishop on f1 is very well placed defensively and it turn out, that despite his active appearance, that the knight on f4 is quite poorly placed. There is nothing for it to attack and it can even get in the way of blacks kingside play. For example, the traditional pawn storm with ...f5-f4 is not possible with the knight on f4 and black will also have to be constantly on the lookout for white playing Bxf4 at a favourable moment. It took a while, and cost an awful lot of points, before black players appreciated this.
Meanwhile everyone was playing 9.b4. The old main lines, 9.Ne1 and 9.Nd2, just disappeared. Even Gary Kasparov got his fingers burned and the Bayonet Attack was the main reason for his recent loss of confidence in the King's Indian (he didn't play it once in his world title match with Kramnik, who happens to be one of the main advocates of 9.b4). Many other King's Indian specialists, such as myself, settled for giving up 7...Nc6. A whole new system with 7...Na6 was born almost solely due to White's successes in the Bayonet Attack.>
<However, the tide finally appears to be turning. The main problem for black was not the strength of the Bayonet Attack, but the fact that he was playing to ambitiously. The King's Indian attracts players who are looking for a sharp struggle. Instead of trying to prove equality they were trying to destroy the Bayonet Attack. They didn't realise that the best way to destroy the Bayonet Attack was to prove equality! Once equality has been established white players are bound to turn there attention elsewhere. And that is exactly what has happened over the last two or three years. We now see a lot less of the Bayonet Attack and a lot more of the other variations of the King's Indian. We are also seeing less of 7...Na6 as players such as myself are returning to the heart and soul of the King's Indian, 7...Nc6.>
|Jul-12-10|| ||rapidcitychess: What's this "equality" line?|
|Mar-05-11|| ||Penguincw: Opening of the Day :
King's Indian, Orthodox
1.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.c3 g7 4.e4 d6 5. f3 O-O 6.e2 e5 7.O-O
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·