i truly thank torkil for his discussion ......we r talking about 2 different strategies black plays f5 after move 10 maybe in the KID the pawn structure and its formulation makes a hell of difference, KID is closer to pawn structure of pirc and the modern defence , (dark square openings) , the dutch is a different story white will not continue the same way if u started f4 , its very dangerous to mix openings that way by just altering move orders.....each has its own strategy
dutch defense better version of kings indian?

um... as stated, one opening is classical and one is hypermodern, in the Dutch black comtrols the centre, in the KID black allows white to close the centre before attacking, it would be useless to start a pawn storm before white has commited.

Hi,
in my opinion you have mostly been discussing moves without mentioning the underlying strategies.
Of course, both the Dutch and the King's Indian are well respected and playable openings, but they have completely different initial ideas.
The Dutch (1.d4 f5) is a bit more classic: Black contests the centre, albeit not with a central pawn. Thereby he prevents White from occupying the full centre with his pawns, and in the event of a pawn exchange on e4 he will have a central pawn majority and the semi-open f-file supporting a kingside attack.
The Kings Indian is a hypermodern opening where Black allows White to occupy the centre only to to strike back at it later, so he isn't afraid of White playing e4 at all; it's part of his strategy. Often it occurs that after the typical counter e7-e5 by Black, White closes the centre with d4-d5. Now is the time where Black often implements his plan of f7-f5 (after having moved the knight out of the way). The ferocious wing attacks with f5-f4 and g6-g5-g4 which often follow this are a result of the closed centre, because it would be hazardous for Black to bare his king like that with an open centre.
Therefore the initial question of this thread "Is the Dutch a better version of the King's Indian?" has to be answered "no". Playing f7-f5 eariler and without loss of time just leads to completely different positions, as the closed centre, which is the main feature of the typical King's Indian f5-attack, has not yet occurred.
That notwithstanding, I would recommend you to play a few games with each opening to get a feel which of them suits your character better.
This is spot-on. I've been playing (poorly) in a Dutch Leningrad-theme tournament, because I was thinking that you save tempi to play f5 before making the rest of the "classic" King's Indian setup. What I've found is exactly what Torkil points out -- the positions are completely different because White seldom closes the center in the same way, and doesn't usually play e4 at all. So rather than the f5 being a thematic counterattack to the base of the White pawn chain, it's often not that useful, and instead opens a dangerous diagonal in an open center. It's still playable, for sure, just not at all the character of game as you get from the KID.

Yeah, in the leningrad, black tries to have a stron pawn wedge with e5 and f5. When there is no pawn on e4, it may just be black dominating the center, which comes with a different strategy. It's hard for me to choose between the two though, because I liked the stonewall and black still tends to do a pawn storm. The stonewall is a nice way to avoid too much theory though, since in the KID white has ways to try to take advantage of his large space advantage instead of letting black counterattack how he wants. One time in a blitz game a stronger opponent used ideas of ne2 and h4 (very early on with his king uncastled) against my KID. With hardly any space, I really didn't know what to do. I'm sure there's a solution somewhere, but unfortunately I may need the help of opening theory instead of just my ideas. So for now I'm playing the dutch. Is the KID sounder than the stonewall though?
I've been playing the king's indian lately, but I'm starting to think "why not play f5 before Nf6?" It prevents e4 and the knight can go right behind it. In the kings indian, when black does a pawn storm he usually has to awkwardly move his knight to somewhere just to play f5. This should save black a few moves!
This is in fact one of the basic underlying concepts behind the Leningrad Dutch. Sometimes when White plays poorly this concept is actually realized and Black winds up several tempi ahead of normal KID positions. Naturally this is very bad for White.
Back in the real world White has many ways of avoiding this miserable fate. Several dangerous variations seek to open the game by playing an early e4 without ever playing c4. That makes the position completely different from the KID. Another approach is to play d5 before Black can play ... e5. Now Black may find that it is difficult to prepare ... e5 and when he finally does play it White usually captures en passant and the sought after pawn duo is wrecked leaving weaknesses in its wake. Or White can play various queenside pawn storm variations in hopes of exploiting Black's move 1 commitment to building his game around the kingside.
The end result is that Black's concept of a "better KID" usually leads to a completely different opening, one that is less popular but not necessarily worse than the King's Indian. That's typical of chess openings where even a small change in opening move orders forces the opponent to counter in a different way that changes everything beyond recognition.
Sorry to disappoint you, but the Four Pawns Attack is definitely one of the more harmless white tries.
I have been employing both the Classical and the Awerbakh (early Bg5, a related system is the Petrosian) with some success. If you are particularly interested in pawn storm attacks, you could also have a look at the Sämisch system, where White plays an early f3 to bolster the point e4. He has a certain variety of plans available, but one of them includes Be3,Qd2 and 0-0-0, following up with g4 and h4.