I'd say stick with KID.
You can play this opening against 1. c4, 1.Nf3, 1. g3 as well.
How good is the Kings Indian for beginners?
Sort:
Tacticator wrote:
I'd say stick with KID.
You can play this opening against 1. c4, 1.Nf3, 1. g3 as well.
True and it's hard to stop balck playing it. Also, I figured the king of guy who plays 1.d4 or 1.c4 probably doesn't want a KID type game. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know
I love the KID.
1.. d5 is more logical, instead of giving away the centre. Logical = better understanding of chess in the long run.
But chess is a game, and a game has to be fun.
isaacthebird wrote:
I love the KID.
How long have you played it ?
I find the KID confusing. Structures/plans you think wouldn't really work end up working due to concrete play (you're checkmating, or the tactics work for you or something seemingly magical).
TheProfessor wrote:
( check out my win vs Angelo111 today- who is 100 points higher than me... Just sayin')
So long as your opponents are playing moves like 10.f4 (strategic self destruct) and 21.h4 (gives up a piece) then you can play whatever openings you like.
TheProfessor wrote:
what openings do you suggest vs 1.d4?
1...d5. Queen's gambit or slav.
ViktorHNielsen wrote:
1.. d5 is more logical, instead of giving away the centre. Logical = better understanding of chess in the long run.
But chess is a game, and a game has to be fun.
1...d5 is the classical approach. But many players don't like the Queens Gambit (accepted or declined) as well as the Slav ... 
For counter play KID or Grünfeld is more interesting and also more modern. It's not necessary to play in the Center (classic way) you can also undermine the center first and later attack it (modern or hyper modern way)!
Geller wrote an instructive book on KID. (It's not up to date but it explains the ideas.) Fischer and Kasparov proved that KID can be used on highest level! Why not for beginners as long as you try to understand the ideas.
Grunfeld seems fun (although I hear it takes a lot of prep as black). The KID and benoni give positions that tend to confuse me though. Obviously GMs play them and make them work... if you like these opening go for it I guess.
If you want something hyper modern why not the nimzo indian? Its ideas are clearer and it's very good (played at highest level often).
waffllemaster wrote:
Grunfeld seems fun (although I hear it takes a lot of prep as black). The KID and benoni give positions that tend to confuse me though. Obviously GMs play them and make them work... if you like these opening go for it I guess.
If you want something hyper modern why not the nimzo indian? Its ideas are clearer and it's very good (played at highest level often).
Some players simply don't like the positions rising from Nimzo-Indian or French (which is similar against 1 e4) ... 
As Caro-Kann and Slav are also related.
Counter attacks are possible with KID (and Sicilian). However there is much theory and you simply have to learn the ideas as with every opening.
Just because you play e6 and Bb4 does not mean there is a relation between Nimzo and French. In fact the french similar to the KID then the Nimzo as both French and KID are about pawn chains while the Nimzo is about piece control
I love FACING the KID!
Call me the King's Indian Slayer! 
PIRATCH wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
Grunfeld seems fun (although I hear it takes a lot of prep as black). The KID and benoni give positions that tend to confuse me though. Obviously GMs play them and make them work... if you like these opening go for it I guess.
If you want something hyper modern why not the nimzo indian? Its ideas are clearer and it's very good (played at highest level often).
Some players simply don't like the positions rising from Nimzo-Indian or French (which is similar against 1 e4) ...
As Caro-Kann and Slav are also related.
Counter attacks are possible with KID (and Sicilian). However there is much theory and you simply have to learn the ideas as with every opening.
I played the nimzo for a short time, I thought there was some sort of Hubner blockade variation with pawns on the dark squares (c5, d6, e5) i.e. not like a french / caro / slav... I forgot if that's something black chooses or white chooses though.
TheProfessor wrote:
Tacticator wrote:
I'd say stick with KID.
You can play this opening against 1. c4, 1.Nf3, 1. g3 as well.
True and it's hard to stop balck playing it. Also, I figured the king of guy who plays 1.d4 or 1.c4 probably doesn't want a KID type game. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know
I play both, but I don't mind playing against KID. It just takes more time to break through to the king.
moonnie wrote:
Just because you play e6 and Bb4 does not mean there is a relation between Nimzo and French. In fact the french similar to the KID then the Nimzo as both French and KID are about pawn chains while the Nimzo is about piece control
Why are GM (as Euwe and others) saying there is a close relationship between Nimzo and French?
It is a solid opening, trustworthy in the sense it can't let you down lol No shock surprising counter-play 
It's terrible for beginners. It is opening for advanced players. Slav and QG Accepted are better.
KID is a great opening, at any level.
Sure, the positions can be sharp. But if learned to swim by jumping in the deep end, the KID is going work on the same principle.
Sorry, your analogy didn't make sense. Playing the KID without understanding chess is like jumping in the deep end and dying several hundred times before figuring out how to swim...
varelse1 wrote:
KID is a great opening, at any level.
Sure, the positions can be sharp. But if learned to swim by jumping in the deep end, the KID is going work on the same principle.
Hi, I am a beginner whose rating is 1276 and I play the KID exclusively against 1.d4 and has had good sucess with it ( check out my win vs Angelo111 today- who is 100 points higher than me... Just sayin') I am familiar with common themes and enjoy the positions I get but have heard that the opening is too sharp and complex for beginners, is this true? And if so , what openings do you suggest vs 1.d4?
Thanks