Crazy Idea White Side King's Indian Defense

I have always had problems on the white side of a King's Indian.

It is very hard for white to open up black's king.

When white castles kingside, however, black is the one who gets a nice attack. (White works on queenside pressure, while warding off mate. I have seen may games where young kids ... masters ... have easily defeated seasoned grandmasters from the black side.)

Castling on the queenside, also tends to hit white faster, as stated in the other recent King's Indian post. (Black breaks through first !!!)

The King's Indian has always given me fits with the white pieces.

The following few lines are my own ideas/thoughts.

Does the c4 and e4 duo really help white against this set up?
I don't really think so.

Blacks main goal is to play e5 or c5.
The c4/e4 pushes actually help black.
They weaken the d4 square and give him a firm base to work on.
I know this sounds extreme. As I said, it is my own thought process about this defense.

It brings to mind Larsen saying d4 was a mistake in the Sicilian Defense.

Black's play seems more natural.
It is also very hard for white to force an advantage against the King's Indian.

Look at the greats that played it and had such good results (Fischer/Kasparov/etc).

I understand the point of 1.d4 d5 2.c4.
You are pressuring the center and making black defend.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 doesn't really do the same thing.

I honestly believe that 2.Nf3 is the way to go.
Then after 2. ... g6, white perhaps should not play 3.c4 ... OR ... play 3.c4 and not play e4 ... OR ... play 3.g3/3.Bf4/3.Bg5/3.Nc3 !?.

After 2. ... g6, the position is already assymetrical.
Draws are out the window, so why should these less common 3rd moves be considered dubious?

It's not really a case where x is proven to be better than y.
2.c4 and so forth just has the GM seal of approval from the millions of games played with it.

I know this is EXTREME !!!

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 also hits at white fairly fast. 3.d5 is most common.
From there, black already has pretty good control of the d4 square.
What has white really gained? (space... blah)

I know this sounds crazy. 🙂
Can anyone really prove an advantage using the King's Indian with 2.c4 though?

Your thoughts ???

I think your post is a bit too basic...like those kind of advices where someone lost and asked why and the reply is: "first you should develop all your pieces, you see, N from b1 is not developed, and only after to start an attack on the opposite King"...ok, maybe the advice is good, but at a certain level we are dealing more with concrete lines, and bigger plans...

I kind of feel the same as you in blitz when I started to use London System against it and it works better than my previous Samisch line, but in long OTB or RHP games it is not as effective...

I was just mentioning my (unorthodox) thoughts on 2.c4.

I don't expect it to catch on.

The whole grab as much of the center as you can approach was started long before the hypermodern openings had such complexity. Over time, they were shown to be playable. (Funny note: In the early days, around New York 1924, the London was used by the greats like Lasker and Capablanca).

Most of the "thematic" games in the King's Indian are black wins. It is really hard to demonstrate white crashing through (at least without variations that would have saved black).

I think the biggest deal about the King's Indian is the difference in the two colors. It's not symmetrical. You can't really compare white's setup to blacks. It's like apples and oranges. For this reason, you can not look at any variation and say here white is clearly better because ... (whereas in a Queen's Gambit Declined you can say white is better here because he has this minority attack, or here black has hanging pawns/isolated pawn, or here black doesn't have much space and can't get active)
The advantages and disadvantages are not so clear cut in a defense like this.

Maybe, I personally have so much trouble with it is because I am more of a classical player (1.e4 e5 / 1.d4 d5).

I used to have much trouble against the Pirc as well. I could not find a point of "attack". Slowly, but surely I switched to a more modest setup (1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.h3 ... if Korchnoi can play it, it must not be all bad). By not overextended and searching for attacks that aren't necessarily there, I began to no longer have trouble with the Pirc.

Thanks for sharing your ideas.

I would like to here more as well, from you and other members.

🙂

Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
I have always had problems on the white side of a King's Indian.

It is very hard for white to open up black's king.

etc...

I would not let an opening upset you so much.

I play it as Black - it's dodgy - Bronstein said it was more risky
to play the KID than the King's Gambit.

2.Nf2 cuts down your f3 (samisch) - and f4 options which are
sharp. As a KID player 2.Nf3 would not bother me.

If there was something very clever against the KID it would have
been found a long time ago - better players than you and me have
been looking at the KId for the past 40 years

The line I hate playing against is the........😉

Originally posted by DeepThought
My understanding of the KI is that white is normally looking to a queenside attack, rather than playing against black´s king immediately.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I would not let an opening upset you so much.

I play it as Black - it's dodgy - Bronstein said it was more risky
to play the KID than the King's Gambit.

2.Nf2 cuts down your f3 (samisch) - and f4 options which are
sharp. As a KID player 2.Nf3 would not bother me.

If there was something very clever against the KID it would have
been found a lo ...[text shortened]... n looking at the KId for the past 40 years

The line I hate playing against is the........😉

I think we clearly have different ideas about what is crazy.

My brief spell of playing 1.d4!? included the gibbins gambit against 1...Nf6

See main line:
1. D4 Nf6 2. G4 Nxg4 3. E4 D6 4. Nc3

And white will castle on the queenside, with decent initiative on the kingside.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
I think we clearly have different ideas about what is crazy.

My brief spell of playing 1.d4!? included the gibbins gambit against 1...Nf6

See main line:
1. D4 Nf6 2. G4 Nxg4 3. E4 D6 4. Nc3

And white will castle on the queenside, with decent initiative on the kingside.

I used to ad lib it, really. But it gave me some fun games 🙂 what's the book?

Originally posted by doodinthemood
I used to ad lib it, really. But it gave me some fun games 🙂 what's the book?

Originally posted by doodinthemood
I used to ad lib it, really. But it gave me some fun games 🙂 what's the book?

So that's what it's called.

Saw it for the first played against me a few years back.
I'm Black.

1. D4 Nf6 2. g4 Nxg4 3. E4 Nxf2! and won.

2 Pawns and a uncastled King for a Knight = (AKA Cochrane Gambit).

Dont' worry about what opening your opponent is going to play.
Let him worry what opening you are going to play.

Play Chess

Play Chess[/b]

Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
Yes, I know. I like to attack the king though. 🙂 I think I mentioned white trying to break through on the queenside, while black plays for mate!

🙂