I often use this opening, but I don't ever see anyone use it. I think it is great because of the openings for attack that you create without weakening your defenses.
I can only respond anecdotally, but my friends yell at me for being to passive when I pay the KIA, but I happen to agree that it's very good. People think that "less immediately aggressive" = passive, when it doesn't. It = safer.
e4 its very good in 600 elo
At that level, openings mean about nothing anyhow. Games are decided on blunders.
I would wager that the KIA might be great for players to maybe even FM or something. You could have a system playing some form of king's indian system against every black and white opening.
If GMs don't play an opening, we can say it's not a good opening for GMs. However if amateurs don't play one we can't say it's not good for amateurs.
Fischer used to play KIA all the time when young, that should tell you something about it. Sure he played the Ruy Lopez etc. also.
Handwaving it away as saying the bishop is blocked by the e4 pawn is just silly. It's pseudoanalysis. Nobody including me can really trash talk it unless we're either a gm or have studied it in depth, and I doubt many here can say either of those things.
I would wager that the KIA might be great for players to maybe even FM or something. You could have a system playing some form of king's indian system against every black and white opening.
If GMs don't play an opening, we can say it's not a good opening for GMs. However if amateurs don't play one we can't say it's not good for amateurs.
Fischer used to play KIA all the time when young, that should tell you something about it. Sure he played the Ruy Lopez etc. also.
Handwaving it away as saying the bishop is blocked by the e4 pawn is just silly. It's pseudoanalysis. Nobody including me can really trash talk it unless we're either a gm or have studied it in depth, and I doubt many here can say either of those things.
Fischer did not use the KIA "all the time" when young. He used it repeatedly against the French after realizing the Winawer gave him fits, despite his famous quote about the Winawer.
Never did he use it repeated against all black responses except 1...e5 (Ruy Lopez).
Fischer did not use the KIA "all the time" when young. He used it repeatedly against the French after realizing the Winawer gave him fits, despite his famous quote about the Winawer.
Never did he use it repeated against all black responses except 1...e5 (Ruy Lopez).
Yes, only against the French and against the 2. ... e6 variation of the Sicilian. Other than that, Fischer avoided the KIA.
I started using it when white goes 1. d4
That's the King's Indian Defense.
abcdefgh 12345678 -=+x#RBNQK this is all punchu8tion you need to know from chess
You forgot O
And the Infinity sign.
[Blah blah blah]
Open and Close Parenthesis.
[Blah blah blah]
The forward slash is also missing, and also ! and ?, or combinations of them, like !!, !?, ?!, and ??.
So not just the O is missing.
Doesn't matter, bigmac30 still forgot O.
abcdefgh 12345678 -=+x#RBNQK this is all punchu8tion you need to know from chess
You forgot O
And the Infinity sign.
By itself - Unclear
Over an equals sign - With Compensation
Also, using the standard FIDE notation, the Open and Close Parenthesis. Used for 2 things - draw offers and promotion:
32.Qb3(=) is Queen to be 3 and White offers a draw.
32...g1(Q) is Black pushes the pawn to g1 and promotes it to a Queen.
The forward slash is also missing, to represent "Draw". 1/2-1/2
Now if you read any articles or books, tack on ! and ?, or combinations of them, like !!, !?, ?!, and ??.
So not just the O is missing.