Can anyone use the Benoni Defense?

I have tried.

And tried.

And tried.

Did I say I tried?

But I can never get this to work... Is it strictly situtational? Because whenever I use this opening it gets decimated. Maybe I'm doing it in the wrong order? Or maybe I just suck. But has anyone had any luck with this opening?

Hopefully someone who is experienced with this opening can help me out..

Of course birdboy's kidding, everyone knows that if its got "defense" in the title it is an opening for white.

Ah the Taimanov? Very popular. Moon knight that looks like white was going to play the english but black didn't know what to do. Just take the pawn? (Thats what I'd do anyway)

Ug. Sorry for making myself look stupid again. I know defenses are for black; but I sometimes use them for white.. I pulled that defense off of wiki. Maybe I've been doing it wrong?

You're right it wasn't right. The link is here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoni_Defense

I posted that from memory; but apparently my memory has failed me. But why would that be a good defense?

I looked at the wikipedia entry, and I'm not exactly seeing the resemblance. For one thing, how is it possible to get a c4 d3 e4 structure in a d4 opening, and why does black have pawns on e5 and d5 instead of c5 and d6?

No I stated what I posted was wrong. I was wrong. Sorry for the confusion. But why is the benoni defense a good defense? I honestly don't understand how I got that from the wiki...

I play the semi-slav -- but if I were an attacker I'm sure I'd go for the KID.

Supposedly at the GM level it's really close to positionally busted, but also supposedly there are always tactical resources for black at some point... provided you're playing at the 2700 level.

I tried it out for a bit online (the benoni) while I was still struggeling to find a defense to 1.d4.  It seemed too easy for my opponent's to shut down my play and squeeze me.

Trying to play a black defense as white from move one is... not a good idea.  Openings are move-order specific or at least pawn structure specific.  If you blindly try to set up a particular structure and ignore your opponent's move it's just not going to work out for you.  It's always better to notice each of your opponent's moves (you didn't take the free pawn 2 or 3 moves in a row).

Openings that can be played (almost) no matter what your opponent does are called systems.  Instead of trying to play a black opening as white you may like to adopt the colle or stonewall system.

I know it's seen here and there at the top, but it's not as popular as you make it out to be.  I think only Gashimov is a real proponent of the opening, although I'm sure players like Ivanchuk and Topolov have logged quite a few.  But the other players you mentioned have probably only played it a handful of times as a surprise.

I didn't say it was busted :)  at the top that's how it's considered though, close to positionally busted, but black always seems to be able to generate tactical counter play to offset his very real positional drawbacks.

You said the Benoni has seen play in a world championship match?  I'm skeptical :)  Which match was it played in?

Seraching on chessgames.com I think I answered my own question :)

I can't believe Kramnik has used this defense!  It's as you say too, in a championship match!  That's just crazy heh.  But the annotations given with the game note the reputation of the defense saying "Kramnik is desperately in need of something irrational to disturb the balance, given his dire match situation."

The annotations also informed me Spassky-Fischer 1972 game 3 was a benoni... I really didn't know :p

After all, if you do happen to lose a few games because of the openings's validity or lack thereof, you can just quietly change it, no harm done, in fact you get to be bathed by more instructive losses (after all, losing after playing even really accurately would have to reveal some fundamental problem with the opening as to why it doesn't work), what could be better It's not like a paycheck is depending on a few results.

So that's worst case scenario; probably never will happen to most (unless it's some clearly bad line like 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f6?, when your opponents finally find the refutation). Indeed, even at the very top level it's not necessarily a bad choice once in a while, at least if the opponent is ill prepared, as some of these "unsound" lines still seem to get played sporadically and not necessarily with scornful punishment. This is because we are simply all human! It's damn hard to refute an opening, especially figuring if it's on the spot, and the guy plays a novelty you've never seen before. If the GM doesn't respond perfectly, it may well grant the opponent with a playable, probably messy position. Sure they may "refute" the move for next game, but I'm sure the winner will be prepared with plenty of new tricks up his sleeve.

I choose to play "better" lines a lot of times because first off the better lines tend to be more stable, and pretty much any loss in the line can be clearly self-blamed. Second of all, who ever said it wasn't nice to have control over a position or a fully equal position as black? Personally I don't mind it, dunno about you guys. Then again I play the king's indian, but like the modern idea of putting the knight on a6 in the classical, leading to a quieter battle; though I wouldn't be surprised if white got an edge, it's a complex strategic battle that should favor the better player. In fact I think it's perfectly sound.

Maybe I said it poorly -- but in my head it all makes sense

I recall reading a transcript (it was thru a link provided on the chess.com forums iirc) of a kasparov conversation where the grreat garry and some other strong players were basically in giggles at how busted the benoni was.

LOL noob