King's Indian Defense

Ok, yeah, not all c5s mean a Benoni, but a lot of them lead to Benoni-type structures. The Saemisch gambit is a good example of it.

However in the 4 Pawns attack you play c5?? White plays d5 and you end up in a Benoni structure. And if you ask why the double question mark... e5!! refutes the 4 Pawns attack, so there is no reason to give White another chance.

Awesome! Thanks for the tip! Another weapon in my arsenal now! Wanna be my KID teacher? (just kidding) =D

What I find most interesting is how a simple different position of the knight can deeply alter the middle and endgame in some cases.

There are similarities... many times the game end up transposed into similar lines. Both in the pirc and the KID, you fiancheto the dark bishop, you play the pawn e6, and you usually put the knight on Nbd7, and sometimes you can play c5, or fiancheto the other bishop.

There are lines of the KID that white plays e4 early, and this is the point where the two lines sort of meet, in the control of the center. I'm not saying, of course, that every line of the KID is the same as Pirc (and I never said modern?!), just that many games usually end up with VERY similar scenarios in the struggle for the center.

Then again, I'm no International Master, so forgive my ignorance if I'm completely out of my depth here.

Very new to the KID.  Quick question.  If you have a Knight on f4 and it's taken by the bishop and retaken with the e pawn, is this a good thing because your bishop has an open diagonal or a bad thing because your pawns are doubled?  Or does it depend on whether or not the bishop has any potential targets and whatnot.  

How about the bayonet? 

The move number of ...c5 does not make it a Benoni versus a King's Indian.  After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f4 O-O 6.Nf3 c5 7.d5 e6 8.Be2 exd5 9.cxd5, you are actually in a Benoni.  Doesn't matter that ...c5 wasn't played until move 6.  It is A68 (Not 9...Re8) or A69 (9...Re8).  It's a Benoni.  Period!

It's just like how 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 is still a French, despite no 1.e4.

1.c4 Nc5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.e4 is an Accelerated Dragon, Maroczy Bind, despite 1.c4.  You get the same position after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.c4.

The opening name is not determined by a sequence of moves.  It is determined by the position on the board of the last "defined" position.  So, for example, after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.d4 cxd5 5.Nc3 Nc6 is a Caro-Kann, not a Scandinavian because the defining position is 5...Nc6.  If Black played 5...e6, then after 6.Nf3 Bb4, we are in a Nimzo-Indian Defense.  

So again, it's not about whether ...c5 is played on move 2 or not.  It's the final product before the middle game phase begins.

I been playing the KID for ten years, I don't about IMs and GMs; I am confident that I can meet any white setup. The you one pointed I met and was able to achive an advantage.  

I thought fide player play better than uscf player, that was horrible by 1857 fide player; I played 1700 uscf and who were tougher.

Questions I have, as an AMATEUR KID player. If these questions can be met with answers by experienced players, or give me game examples, I would be very grateful:

1.  When to castle in KID. Or better question, when NOT to?

2. In what kind of situations is c5 benefitial, and in what kind of situations is it not advised?

3. In what lines is it a good idea to fiancheto the second bishop? 

 

Jengaias, he is a FIDE Master 2244, you don't think this master understand chess.