Against the KID, I try the Colle-Zukertort against it but am not too confident with it:
This is my main idea against the KID and I do 2. e3 in hopes of making a Stonewall, my favorite opening of all. I think I like this because the bishop on b2 indirectly eyes the crucial e5 square and can discourage central breaks. This system is flexible, but is it flexible enough to deal with the KID. The KID depends on a kingside attack plus a central break, so I discourage this by solidifying the center and punching back n the kingside. In the Colle-Zukertort I also have the hopes of a potential queenside attack with a later c4 and the opening of a c file. I don't like to play f4, a more Stonewall like move, because then I'd be weak to an e5 break:
As you see, the point of this system, unlike the Colle, makes the dark-squared bishop a tough piece for an attack. By my opinion, it's sometimes very essential that it's comparable to a dragon bishop. It helps control dark squares in the center and even supports a possible Ne5! I like this a lot. Unlike the Colle, c3 isn't played, so Nb4 can be annoying; however, in the KID, Nc6-Nb4 is highly unlikely. So the cons of the Colle-Zukertort is wiped away, which is why I like to use it. Sure, an e5 thrust can send lightning in my face, but I think I can properly deal with it or defend against it while doing damage control.
So what are your opinions?
It is perfectly solid of course but I can say as a KingsIndian player it doesn't cause me any lose of sleep. It is one of the bonus points of playing KingsIndian against these sort of non critical anti lines, black as lots of flexibility and no problems at all. If white wants to play some system where plays e4 in two steps, when perfectly perpared for white to play it in one, well its not too scary. Black even as classic games like Petrosian v Larsen '66 to base play on.
It looks interesting. The main line efforts of c4-d4-e4 pawns is based on the idea that one should jump into the center and take it if Black does nothing to stop it. However, I suspect that it's a matter of taste as to how to approach a K-fianchetto defense. Who knows, maybe some GM will see this and play it in a famous game that will give his name to the line.
LOL: Die Pirc Die!
If only. This thing seems to have blossomed as a fad about 5-6 years ago and now is fading anyway as people get tired of playing something they don't understand. Now the Alekhine and Center-Counter are coming into favor. Openings follow a cycle of B-S.
The problem with the Colle vs the KID is that ...e5 is unstoppable. After that the game turns into a classical Pirc sort of except your dark-squared bishop is on b2.
From black point of view don't think Barry attack very dangerous either, Yelena Dembo's book covers what black needs to know very well. Does have a bit of sting though so ideally would like to do a bit of preparation before facing it. In contrast with OP line think black should be fine just playing common sense moves.
I'd suggest d4 nf6 c4 g6 g3
interesting your idea...
The Barry Attack is powerful against your opponent if he isn't careful. It can be deadly and is good for an endgame player.
Pellik's statement may be true with respect to some of the KIA players, but certainly not regarding most KID players. Actually, I don't think that KID players would just churn out the "classic" KID moves against the Colle. Almost all of them have "Fighting the anti-King's Indians" by Yelena Dembo at home. For example, against Chess4001's line with 4.b3, she suggests 4... c5.
Excuse me, Pellik? The KIA is not for those who don't know how to plan middlegames, the KIA is for those who don't want to have to learn each and every opening, like me!