Thank you everyone for your advice
Kings indian defence
Sort:
KID is riskier than the Kings Gambit, but playing for a win with Black is inherently riskier than playing for win with White.
why is it riskier?
blake78613 wrote:
KID is riskier than the Kings Gambit, but playing for a win with Black is inherently riskier than playing for win with White.
Yes. Comparing an opening for Black with an opening for White in riskiness seems like apples and oranges. Also, what Kasparov said about the KID didn't stop him from playing it.
when you said risker, does it make the king vulnerable to a certain attack?
Usually, it is the Black who is looking to attack the White's King in the KID. It is risky in the sense that there aren't too many draws in the KID, generally one plays it to either win or lose.
Fezzik wrote:
Dragec is describing the KID.
I agree that it is a potent weapon. But if someone is looking for solid, they should look elsewhere. Black's main ideas involve counterattacking in the center with either e5 or c5 and preparing a K-side attack with f5.
If you try to play the KID "solidly", you will get overrun.
That most famous American player won some classic games against Taimanov by attacking violently on the K-side.
I was confused because Dragec used KIA instead of KID and sundenly everybody started to talk about "KIA".
Also, when everybody disagreed about the solid aspects I thought it was about the attack, because I never saw the KID as such a risk opening.
Actually, I've played this several times and I allways believed it was a safe option, because of the early castle, little memorization and the locked center.
It is true that the King's Indian setup is fairly safe in the sense that the Black's King cannot usually be directly attacked early on (at least not in the main lines), so you will not likely get checkmated in 15 moves or something. However, because the White has more space on the Queenside and is more active there, the Black cannot afford to sit back and must try to attack on the Kingside before the White has time to grind his Queenside. Quite often sacrifices are necessary for this to work. Also, even endgames here tend to favour the White so the Black has to play for a win or at least some substantial gains in the middlegame. In that sense, the opening is risky because it calls for taking risks. If that doesn't bother you, it's a good opening.
Dec 19, 2010
0
#30
Well put Atos. I play the KID at a suitably novice level. It can be a lot of fun to play the kingside attack. At my level the chances that white plays completely accurately and takes away all the attacking chances are pretty small.
Atos wrote:
It is true that the King's Indian setup is fairly safe in the sense that the Black's King cannot usually be directly attacked early on (at least not in the main lines), so you will not likely get checkmated in 15 moves or something. However, because the White has more space on the Queenside and is more active there, the Black cannot afford to sit back and must try to attack on the Kingside before the White has time to grind his Queenside. Quite often sacrifices are necessary for this to work. Also, even endgames here tend to favour the White so the Black has to play for a win or at least some substantial gains in the middlegame. In that sense, the opening is risky because it calls for taking risks. If that doesn't bother you, it's a good opening.
Well, I have an example of KID game I am playing.
It is my game against basron, you can all take a look at it in my online home. I am having difficult to win but my position is definetly better. Besides my poor endgame I believe I was well succeed using the KID against a guy about 100 points higher rated.
By move 7 I made a pawn sacrifice that gave me the control of Queen Side's Columns. Later I destroyed White's center, with an endgame with 2 pawns up.
If anyone wants to make suggestions about what already happened in the game I guess it is ok. Giving me advice about my unfinished endgame, however, would be a kind of cheating, so please don't.
Well, in this game, the White played the Four Pawns attack, which is somewhat different. I was talking about the KID main lines. The game looked more like a Benko.
I have always loved playing the KID and for many years it was my main weapon against both 1 d4 and 1 c4 . Only in the last decade or so did I add more "solid" defenses to my repertoire, such as slav, QGD and nimzoindian......
Fezzik wrote:
Dragec is describing the KID.
I agree that it is a potent weapon. But if someone is looking for solid, they should look elsewhere. Black's main ideas involve counterattacking in the center with either e5 or c5 and preparing a K-side attack with f5.
If you try to play the KID "solidly", you will get overrun.
That most famous American player won some classic games against Taimanov by attacking violently on the K-side.
I wasn't talking about KID, which should be clear to anyone paying attention to the thread.
blue150 in#13 asked about the Kings Indian Attack, so I answered to that in my post #14 - and both I and blue mentioned KIA explicitly.
Someone may have been confused, because OP was discussing the KID, but blue jumped in with questions about the KIA, so I answered.
BTW, I didn't recommend to play it, I just answered the question. 
II-Oliveira wrote:
Are you talking about the King's Indian Attack or still the Defence?
King's Indian Attack - look at the #13 and 14# for a start.
Now, switching to KID, this is one nice game featuring it:
Atos wrote:
Well, in this game, the White played the Four Pawns attack, which is somewhat different. I was talking about the KID main lines. The game looked more like a Benko.
But the four pawns attack is one of the main answers to the KID, isn't it?
So you were all talking about the e5 lines... I usually don't play e5, even if it is not the four pawns.
By the way, the Benko like sacrifice in my game is a common move in that position.
is the attack movements similar to defence movements?