Benko/Volga Gambit move order question

I like playing 1.d4 c5 for several reasons. One is that on my club level people play a lot London System and Trompowsky with White so I want to avoid it.

In previous years I played rather often the Benko/Volga Gambit but changed after too many games with the "Anti-KIDs". I think that the change of move order might lure opponents again towards the Benko again and might add some new fun.

white is not forced to play c4 which is needed by black to do the gambit, instead he's going to manuever the king's knight into c4 from f3 d2 c4

Yes, this is true. Then, as with other variations, early deviations avoid the Gambit, too. However, then the play becomes more non-standard and after e.g. 3.Nf3 the main answer is 3...b5 which is in line with your argumentation. It seems that it is not that easy to install a knight on c4 after all. The moves afterwards are just an fast example via CB engine (Deep Fritz 14).

oops sorry i mean instead of going to c4 white will play 3.nc3 then the c4 square is for the other knight so black can't play b5, my bad i forgot the move order

i dont really know why black player usually avoid d4 c5 move order, maybe because of the pawn is better kept at c2 because in benoni structure white usually play a4 e4 d5 c4 so if the pawn havent moved to c4 white atleast can guard his queenside square which is usually the place black will try to seek counterplay. cmiiw

The other obvious point is that 2.e4 transposes you into a Sicilian. Not a problem if you already play that, something to think about if you don't.

There are 2 problems with 1...c5.

The first is what many have already covered.  White doesn't play c4, and this is a benefit for White as his King's Knight can come to c4 via g1-f3-d2-c4 and attack the weak d6 pawn (assuming Black has played either ...e6 or ...e5).

The second is you don't avoid the London System, or at least you don't get a Benko.  White can play 2.e3 or 2.c3.  Not saying these moves are great by any means, and Black can force an Exchange Slav after 2.c3 with 2...cxd4 3.cxd4 and then best is 3...d5, or an exchange Caro-Kann after 2.e3 cxd4 3.exd4 and again 3...d5 is best here.  Black also has other options, and are by no means required to trade on d4.

But that said, there is no bust to these lines, and after something like 1.d4 c5 2.c3, if you don't go into the exchange Slav, and try to play 2...Nf6, what stops White from playing 3.Bf4 g6 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nf3?  How is this any different than 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.c3?

Instead of trying to find a lazy way out, why not study a line against the Trompowsky, London, Torre, etc.

There are two really nice lines against the London System, one for the more positionally minded, one for more of an attacker:

1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.Bg3 b6!  Black delays c5, not giving White any tricks, fianchettos his Queen's Bishop, and moves the Knight to e4.  It is a super-solid line for Black

1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 g6 3.e3 Bg7 4.Nf3 b6 intending 5...Bb7, 6...d6, and 7...Nbd7 with possibilites of ...Qe8 and ...e5.  Might require an ...a6 first if White puts his Knight on c3 to avoid issues on c7.

I'm a King's Indian player, and I find the London slightly annoying, but the answer isn't trying to avoid it, it's coping with it!

You are absolutely right on this matter but I think this one is not really a problem. Both, Palliser and Moser claim that it is very unlikely that a d4 player is opting for an open Sicilian as these players normally play 1.e4. On the other hand I have some Kalashnikov experience and this should be enough then.

One thing, why I don't play Sicilian with black is similar to the reason here. In my region I would only need the book "How to beat the Anti-Sicilians" as literally nobody plays 3.d4. I think this is even an advantage of this move order.

For 3.Nc3 I was thinking about something like:

This one is close to a position in CB: Moser

I'm not sure about this, engine claims that White is already slightly better. But this one would be a line I would consider.

I also was playing KID online but in my region it simply doesn't matter. For years the London System as standard opening as many young players were raised with it and older ones adopted it. I wasn't playing a real KID game for years. Two years ago I had an KID exchange, once. I'm also able to deal with it as I go for an early ...e5, Trompowsky is one of the rare occasions but it is also fun for me to simply spoil the Trompowsky fun for the Trompowsky player.

For a 2.c3 and 2.e3 cases - both Palliser and Moser recommend taking via 2...cxd4.

Definitely, it is not a lazy way as it means dealing with something new while I could also stick with my current repertoire. I'm just hoping to spice up my chess games - a little bit.

Yes, actually I did miss that... Thanks a lot! The question is if the rare(?) possiblity to run into a Schmid Benoni which is cramped but still playable is enough to turn down the whole system. 

I remember an online KID game where I played the Bayonet attack like Kotronias only to end up in an "equal" position after 30 moves of theory where only a GM knows how this can be survived... two rooks, wrecked pawn structure etc.

But in principle you are definitely right and a player of your rating probably wants to avoid that.

Thank you for your time and sharing your game! I know this ...Nc6 x.d5 Nb8 idea from other Pirc variants. I also looked up your endgame as this is quite interesting. Big surprise is that 54...Bb4 is the best move and 54...Bd8 already worse. The blunder ...Kf6 also looks quite natural to me although it leaves the f4 square for the knight.

This is also one downside of games under pressure, at least for me. Suddenly, there is some relief as one thinks that one has overcome the problems. And this moment is when blunders occur. Same with moves 41. and 42 after time control and previous time pressure.