I meant that the position of the central pawns isn’t determined immediately. After 1.Nf3, 2.g3, 3.Bg2, 4.0-0 you can still choose between set-ups with i) d4, c4 and Nc3 ii) e4, d3, c3 and Nbd2, iii) c4, d3, Nc3 and e3 or even e4, iiii) c4, e3, b3 and Bb2 and possibly a few others. Which one you select will depend on your preference, your mood and on the opponent’s build-up.

<<but if you want to know if it suits you, just play over quickly some games (50 or so) and see if you like them> I don't think I've ever heard this advice for sampling an opening before.>

I don’t know any other way. If you want to know how to play a certain opening you’ll have to see how the game might develop, looking at various characteristics, such as which squares often become strong or weak, which side attacks where frequently, and so on.

<< I'm also curious as to your definition of 'like.' For instance, I 'like most of Petrosian's games, but I don't really understand many of them :)>

I’m sorry, I have no other word. Some positions “feel good” and others don’t, even if the theoreticians give a different verdict. Petrosian is actually a good example. His games give me the impression that he didn’t care much about openings or middlegame theories and that he had his own highly individual ideas. That's why we often understand little of his moves at first glance.

<<I suggest you take out the repertoire explorer and look at the games of Barcza, Smyslov, Romanishin or Vaganian to name a few.> This sounds like instantly good advice. I'm becoming a devout follower of Smyslov's style and approach to play, and Vaganian is just too cool for school. Don't know much about Barcza or Romanishin, though.>

There is the Barcza System, right? Which is something that starts like this. I don't know precisely what it is, but if he got his name on it he must be good to look at.

In conclusion, I am not so much worried with the King's Indian Attack... Only an exceptionally brilliant player like Bobby Fischer or Garri Kasparov can afford to play this opening with reasonable winning chances...>

I'm not a brilliant player. However, I do enjoy playing the KIA.

I don't really feel that your 'example' opening is long enough to demonstrate the scope of KIA developement. There is tension just below the surface of this attack.

So...watch out for the Loch Ness monster.

I had a question regarding middlegame development though.

After you have your KIA set up...what is the best way for white to identify which side he should develop? What should I be looking for to advance on the Kingside? What about the Queenside? Any advice and sample PGNs would be very very appreciated.

Black is refusing to play into a pure reversed KID by not playing ...c5. His move...Nc6 of course has the primitive threat of ...Nb4, which White can handle easily enough.

4...Nc6!? also avoids the standard kind of Lasker setup against the KIA or Reti, which would be 4...c6 (the "London System" is Black's anti-Reti reversed, actually)

So, the road to fighting for an advantage may be to ask, what is wrong with Black blocking his c pawn? What kind of situation will make the Nc6 sort of useless, or make Black need to push his c-pawn but not be able to push it?

King's Indian Attack
1.♘f3 d5 2.g3

click for larger view

Reti, King's Indian attack (Barcza system)
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3

Reti, King's Indian attack, Yugoslav variation
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 c6 4. O-O Bg4

Reti, King's Indian attack, Keres variation
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 Bg4 3. Bg2 Nd7

Reti, King's Indian attack
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 g6

Reti, King's Indian attack, Pachman system
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. O-O e5 5. d3 Ne7

Reti, King's Indian attack (with ...c5)
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 c5

This post is so true:
<Nov-25-11 Eric Farley: This site's classification of the King's Indian Attack is not correct. The Reti-Rubinstein 1923 game, for instance, is NOT a KIA. It's a Reti-Barcza system; as a matter of fact, in his book "Masters of the Chessboard" Reti used this game as a model to show his system. Today it's like this: 1. Nf3 d5 2.c4 it's a "pure" Reti
1. Nf3 d5 2.g3 and then c4 it's a Reti-Barcza
If there's an early c4, after g3, it's a Reti-Barcza. If there's an early d4, it may be a Grunfeld Reversed or a Catalan. If there's an early e4, then it's a King's Indian Attack. Needless to say, transpositions in this area abound. People interested in these systems might consult Keene's good book "Flank Openings.">

1.g3 is the (A00) Hungarian Opening. It is also called the Benko Opening (not the Benko Gambit). It certainly can transpose to the KIA if White plays Bg2, d3, Nf3, 0-0, and e4 in any order, perhaps with Nbd2, c3, and Qc2 helping to support e4.