I need a second defense for Black vs 1. d4

I currently play the KID as Black against 1. d4.  I am looking to learn a second defense to use.

I am trying to decide between the Slav, Nimzo, and QID.  So far I'm leaning towards the Slav, but am interested in the opinions of anyone who plays any of those openings.

Thoughts?

I play none of those, but if you already like the KID, you may want to check out Leningrad Dutch. It's very similar in a lot of ways to KID, kind of a hybrid system. Imagine if you didn't have to waste time with Ne8, f5, Nf6, but had f5 played already. That's what Leningrad tries to do, at a simplistic level.

If you play Nimzo, you should also be able to play QID and Bogo-Indian from what I understand, as you really need to be able to play whichever is going to be better depending on what white does in response to Nf6, e6.

I play actually all of these openings except KID. I know them all, but I had most sucess with the Slav Defence. It's very much theory, but a solid line. Of course you have to prepare for different lines, but you'll learn it.. I reccomend Slav, but I think that you should learn all of the listed, because maybe you'll start playing 1.d4 someday..

I've always played the KID and had quite some good results with it. Recently I wanted to play something different and decided to play the Grünfeld Defense. If you want dynamic play right from the opening, this is the way to go ;).

You don't really get to choose between the Nimzo and the QID.  They're sort of a package deal, with the Nimzo being playable against 3.Nc3, and the QID (or QGD, or Bogo, or Benoni, or whatever) against 3.Nf3 and all the other BS 3rd moves.

1.d4 Nf6?? loses a tempo in the endgame allowing white to capitalize with 2.Kd2! to threaten to enter the the queenside pendulum.

Better is 1...d5 to allow black to meet 2.Kd2! with 2...Kd7 maintaining the opposition.

Benko, Benko, Ben-ko!

If I have to pick one of them, I'd pick the Slav. Based on my games playing from both sides it has some punch to it. I think that it might also keep your intrest better than the other two. I say that because, at least in my case, I like to have completely different, almost opposite openings so I can move from one to another to keep my intrests. Chess is much too fun to play one set of positions for your whole life. Unless you are incredibly fascinated with an opening and then write a couple of books on it to help the rest of us out.

In my orginal list I really should have also had the Grunfeld and the Semi-Slav listed as well...

There are already a lot of people here who have mentioned some openings , most of them work,

There is something to be carefull about,  and the amount of time/work you want to put into an opening. which is actually tied into the specifics of the opening mentioned and your own playstile.

especially if you are around 1500/1600  forget the grunfeld of bogo-indian because these require in-depth training and time to read through  the deviation and main lines.   There is nothing more awkward then getting through the first 10 or so moves and then be stumbled because you don't know the right progression.

I would recommend the slav , dutch main line and stonewall ,  these are theoretical but are easy to to learn and provide play for the defender type player aswell as the attacking  style. some positional players like to do so as well.

please note that this post stated against d4,  if you read carefully you notice that almost all plays mentioned here are against d4 QG games - type structures.  If someone choses to go London style on you , then some openings won't work.

now,  1800 + openings target opening structures after the initial moves, somewhat pre middelgame, these openings are more strategical , and are for planners, who are looking for a specific type of structure,  they already count pawn structure settings, open rook files Bishop types etc. some are Grunfeld , bogo-indian and english-asymmetrical. 

2..e6 would probably be the most flexible answer against 1.d4, since this move can be used in almost all openings for 1.d4

anything beyond 2100 imo are more player-tied styles,  as you see al sorts of openings beyond that level and they sometimes do or do not work.  Best way is to practice a lot, and expand your opening repetore with openings that work for you and your style of play

Semi-Slav is a nice aggressive opening for you to try. THe major difference between it and the KID is that the focus of your play is on the Queenside rather than the kingside.

Grunfeld is the closest opening to the KID. Grunfeld has a lot of theory to it, however.

if you wanna have fun and maybe surprise some oponents try  the chigorin defense!

If you learn the Nimzo, then you have to learn the Queen's Indian and vice versa. Just the Nimzo alone has LOTS AND LOTS of theory too. As for Slav... I personally don't like it much (though I play it). First try out some Slav structures and see if you like them.

I don't ever listen to the people who say I'm not rated high enough to play something.  That's how you learn, by breaking out of your comfort zone!

None of the people at the chess clubs I go to would say I'm not rated high enough to play an opening. They might *truthfully* say that I may have a hard time learning some of the concepts at my rating strength, but they'd also probably tell me that is the best way for me to learn.

 Most comments about ratings combined with openings is not a matter wether you are strong enough to play an opening.  the rating comments suggest that it goes to a certain understanding of concepts, you may not know at a certain level.

books about openings and tactics and such form 2100+ players are useless for 1500's   it is simple as that.  it is expected in these books you have a certain level of knowledge.  that is the plane and siomple case.  

that is also why there are books and lessons for every level of chess.  there are even wirters which target the 1500's  and 1800's for just that reason. so what you are saying about someone not being "strong" enough which would be rubbish  holds more truth in that than you might think.

The KID is fine for any level if you understand it IMHO. Don't try to learn new openings too early, instead, choose a sideline of the KID that is different from what you currently play. 

However, if you want to take Estragon's advice go ahead.Who am I to argue with a 2400?

You should try d6 followed by c6 then e5