13452 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Will you still be playing ...g6 after 3.Bg5 ? (3...g6 4.Bf6 and then ...Bg7 doesn't work so well, nor will you be castling Kingside if you move your Rook to save it)
a lot of people use that, so I'd suggest...
3... f6, for one thing, I may not be able to do Bg7, but what are White's pieces doing? his bishop will get pushed back, and I'll just develop faster, and same thing as before, double rooks, etc. And I can put my bishop on c5 if White prefers to advance his pawns when I wish to exchange off some pawns in the centre. Like a Kings Indian line: d4 nf6 c4 g6 nc3 bg7 e4 d6 be2 0-0 nf3 re8 0-0 nbd7 be3 e5 d5 c6. You undermine White's centre and prove the advanced pawns to be a weakness. Same thing here
And f6 helps the e5 pawn break sooner or later
2...Ne7?! is of course playable, but not a great move. The combination e6+g6 is in itself a bit weakening on the dark squares( and quite dangerous when white can still play an early f4-f5 which may well prove chrushing), and the Ne7 makes kingside development very difficult. For example Cystem suggestion is reasonable, 3...f6 being a sad ammission of defeat(not in the sense that black is lost, but in the sense that black has to recognize that his formation makes little sense). 3.f4 is another move, as well as 3.Nc3 g6 4.Bg5 Bg7 5.Qe2 where it looks like white will develop a strong attack. In general any comparison between the king's indian and this line is out of place, there is very little in common between your opening idea and that defence.
But that King's Indian line you cite doesn't advance the f-pawn at all. Advancing both the g- and f-pawns defeats the whole purpose. The King's Indian is a hypermodern opening.
EDIT: responding to post #3
I posted a very similar line in "Mistake against the french was not so bad." but I believe my line was slightly better.
OF COURSE YOU HAVE TO ADVANCE THE G PAWN, OR ELSE THE BISHOP CAN'T GET TO G7!!! And also, its not "theory" to advance the f pawn, but sooner or later, Black should do it. Whats the point of the Kings Indian? To start an attack on the kingside! Black does this by the pawn breaks f5, g5, h5, etc. Of course BVlack doesn't have to, but look at the majority of Kings Indian games won by Black. Most games do have kingside pawn advances.
OF COURSE YOU HAVE TO ADVANCE THE G PAWN, OR ELSE THE BISHOP CAN'T GET TO G7!!!
I don't know how you managed to miss the point, but it's the advance of the f-pawn that takes this away from having anything to do with the King's Indian. You can push pawns around however you want, but why use an inappropriate name to describe something? The King's Indian doesn't tear apart the King's protection.
You do know that the King's Indian usually attacks the kingside by move the pawns to lets say h5 g4 f3 to attack the Kingside. (If White castles that way).
Read Chess Tactics &Strategy, by Graham Burgess.
Wow, i totally forgot about this topic! 2 months since the last post :) Are you still believing in this setup?
You're too clueless to get it. Enjoy yourself.
And h6 would also work, if Bh4, then g5, Bg7, and 0-0.
lol...Far be it from any of us to discourage you in this experiment (after all, someday we might be playing you in a tournament).
Is that an insult?
Seriously speaking, the problem is that you can't just say "i will play f5 and g5 as in a kings indian and archieve a kingside attack" on the basis that you will play similar moves. There is a rational reason which allows black to go all out on the kingside in the KID, and it's the blocked centre. Black starts his attack only after white has played d5, since it's now impossible for him to punish black's diversion on the wing with a central counter. Here the centre is not locked and if black tryes to play "as in a king indian" he will be slaughtered in the centre.
What bresando said.
Also, I find your over-enthusiasm about your new opening a little suspicious. Yes, all beginners get excited once they discover a "new opening", but you might be a troll who has over-done it.
He is not a troll , he is just an ignorant that spend all his studying openings and never seriously studied middle-game.There is no other way so much nonsense to be explained:
"WHAM. THIS IS AN IMPROVED VERSION OF THE KINGS INDIAN. WITH …g6…Bg7… 0-0… and f5 to follow. The bishop or knight can recapture on f5, doubling rooks down the f-file, and White is dead! Also, if you're in trouble, the e7 Knight can head to the queenside by… Nec6, or even Nd5!"
OP has 1608 on-line rating while his understanding is actually of a player's under 1000.He is cheating(not his opponents , himself)
Bresando tried to say some good things with his usual very polite and very patient style but I wonder:
Bresando ,didn't you laugh?I mean
"Improved version of King's Indian defense""????
That is hilarious man , how can you even answer seriously in that?
Dabigone ,the fact that you never seriously studied middle-game does payoff now.
I may sound harsh but actually I am trying to help you.I wouldn't even bother to answer if I din't feel that you can be helped.I saw some of your games and you obviously are very talented if you manage to play like this with not even a moment of serious middlegame study.You could easily be at 2000 and more if you didn't spend all your time in openings
Do yourself a favor.Lock every opening book you have , find GOOD middlegame and endgame books and spend the next year without reading or spending to openings not even a minute.You need a serious "opening detox".
If you do that you will laugh when seeing someone say:
As usual you are completely right michael, and of course i smiled after seeing that hylarious comparison with the KID :) I guess that our radically different way to express the same concept might help the OP since he is bound to understand/like one of the two. Yours is probably more effective, but since people tends to be rather, uhm, sensible on the forums ("YOU'RE JUST A TROLL YOUR LINE IS MEANINGLESS MY OPENING ROCKS" is the statistically commoner aswer to constructive criticism :P) i always prefer to start with a "Basic Middlegame SKills, Lesson 1" style, in the vague hope that it will be better received ;)
Solskytz vs logozar blitz games
by solskytz a few minutes ago
by leklerk1 a few minutes ago
G Butterman Chess Board
by rcmacmillan 3 minutes ago
Queen vs 1 Rook and 2 Bishops in end games
by MyRatingis1523 4 minutes ago
10/25/2016 - Too Far Advanced
by human_robot 5 minutes ago
erik and cc staff
by badenwurtca 6 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by dragonair234 11 minutes ago
Post your best miniatures here
by W-Luke 19 minutes ago
Nakamura is Japanese not American
by Live-The-Moment 19 minutes ago
Chess.com old version
by johngensler 52 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
Try the new Chess.com!
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!