Kings Indian: How to counter against the Smyslov system (5.Bg5)?

Hi chess community!

I have started playing the Kings Indian and wonder what the most trying line is against the Smyslov system (5.Bg5)? I figure there must be a good reason why it is not the most common of white's moves.

Thank you.

 I don't think there is anything in particular wrong with 5. Bg5. Ivan Sokolov has been playing this variation with white. Actually black's most common reply is 5... 0-0 when white could just transpose to Averbakh variation with 6. Be2 but it's also possible to play 6. Qd2!?. Maybe in the past it was thought that 5. Bg5 is inaccurate because black can chase the bishop begining with 5... h6 but although playable this continuation also leads to certain weaknesses that white can try to use.

There's nothing wrong with the Smyslov variation, which is a solid choice for White. Akobian plays it, with great success. The main idea is that White only advances to e3, which gives Black nothing to bite on over on the K-side.

For what it's worth, Akobian himself claims that it's not at all clear what is Black's best plan against this scheme.

The line that is bothering me is 4.Nf3 & 5.Bg5, This was the original question. What would be your recommendation of playing against it? 

Thanks GreenKnight2001. I've been looking at these lines and I agree that it may very well be the best move for black and he might even be slightly better, at least from the games I have seen.

If u want a simple system against Smyslov variation, u can try this :

True, it seems drawish and it is! This system is effective if u want a draw, but if u want to win, u should probably prefer alternatives given above by other contributors.

Just wanted to add a vote for the Smyslov system as white. I'm around 1850 USCF. I've lost many games as white against the KID. I've tried several lines and my percentage is probably around 10% against the KID. Last month, I switched to playing the Smyslov after watching Akobian's videos. I played a team match in which I faced a very experienced KID player. I got a +5 position out of the opening. My score in 3 games with the Smyslov this month is 2.5/3 (including one blitz game and 2 OTB classical games against a 1600 and 1800 player). This is a very viable way to play as white against players who are not comfortable playing positional chess (which is most KID players at the club level). I myself am an aggressive/tactical player but the KID is a special beast to play against because of the aspect of a kingside attack for black vs a queenside attack for white where a single tempo can upset everything. This makes it slightly easier for black to play in most mainlines at the club level, in my opinion because a mistake costs black something on the queenside whereas a mistake by white costs him/her the king. Something like the Smyslov system takes the black KID player out of their comfort zone and I'm beginning to see this very clearly at the club level. I don't mind a draw as white against someone who knows what they're doing against the Smyslov because it isn't very simple to come up with plans as black unless you've actually studied the system in some detail and if you're someone who's done that work, I'll take the draw gladly. In all 3 games I've played after switching to this system, black got himself into a serious bind, almost paralyzed. The one person who escaped with a draw was someone I let off the hook in time pressure after I had won his queen and pawn for a rook and knight (this is the +5 position I mentioned earlier and the computer evaluation should tell you just how bad black's position was because this material imbalance is not worth +5 by itself). If Akobian felt comfortable using this system against most players up to 2500 FIDE, it can certainly serve someone like me a lifetime.  

Just castle and play your normal KID. Don't do anything fancy or you'll just get yourself into trouble.

Rule of thumb: White plays Bg5 in the KID (Saemisch, Averbakh, Smyslow), Black goes for c5.

I try to play the KID as black, and don't think the Smyslov line is an easy one to meet.  The Yusupov training books cover it as well, think one of the green more advanced books.

I think this is a helpful distinction.

Not sure those are good examples for why the system is good for white as most of those games ended due to blunders (I assume in time pressure) with 2400 and 2500 players hanging their rooks and queens. In fact, the c5 response by black is clearly the most serious try even with white getting in d5 and a Benoni-type structure. I need to do some more work to prepare for those lines but in my limited experience, at the club level, most people don't know how exactly to meet the Smyslov, and playing positional chess without too much scope for kingside attacks is not what those players like to do. The combination of the two factors makes this a very nice choice for white at the club level. 

The problem with the bishop attacking the knight like that is the pawn simply makes the bishop waste a move (loss of total tempo) and besides even if you eat the knight, the bishop pair is going to be a long term advantage that simply is not worth a knight sacrifice!

A bishop can nearly always hold its own against a knight...

The bishop pair can almost always dominate the knight pair and sometimes even cause major issues for rooks.

I'd take the bishop pair over most things!

But I'd take a knight vs a lone bishop!

In many variations in the Smyslov, black's light square bishop also has trouble getting out, in addition to the g7 bishop being restricted. White's light square bishop typically is a bit better. After h6 and g5, black weakens his light squares which can often be taken advantage of. White can also play for c5 followed by Nc4 and Nd6 (and black has to spend time preventing those positional threats). White also has ideas of simply expanding on the queenside with b4. Unless black plays very accurately, it is difficult to come up with similar plans for black, in my limited understanding of this system as of now. This is why I think the c5 response followed by Bf5 with the threat of Ne4 is possibly the strongest way for black to meet the Smyslov and this is indeed how Smyslov himself played with black against his own system deployed by white! 

All this stuff about the bishop pair may be true in many situations but in this system, there are specific plans that you must take into account before passing verdict on whether the bishop pair is sufficient compensation for all the other positional restrictions you get into if you don't play very accurately as black right from the opening. 

This is far too simplistic. By the same logic Ruy Lopez is a bad opening because black can attack the white's bishop with 3... a6.

The thing is, while it's true that black sort of gets a free extra move it is not so clear if these pawn moves help him all that much. After all, the goal in the opening should be to develop your pieces not your pawns.

To further illustrate, consider the following two possible position from the Sämisch variation of the KID.

The second position is almost certainly better for white than the first one despite, or rather precisely because of, black's extra move. Later white can attack h6 with Qd2 which, unlike h6, is actually a usefull developping move.

Agree with you about the other point though: capturing on f6 is rarely a good idea in these positions.

Also, a much belated apology for mixing the variation names in my first post. Certainly had heard about Smyslov variation but had forgotten the exact moves.