Opening with 1.Nf3 and KIA


Hey all, I'm thinking about playing 1.Nf3 . I usually play d4 and go for a Colle Zukertort (which I love) but I feel like I have outgrown it. I also play the French and QGD (but possibly going to learn KID) if anyones interested.. So I'm thinking of starting a KIA based repertoire but I would like to know whether people think playing the KIA attack is a good idea and also when not to play the KIA and transpose into different lines that give me an advantage.

Any comments are appreciated


I think the KIA is a bad idea for a number of reasons:

1) It leads to the same position again and again and again and again.  You will start playing moves out of habit instead of out of thought.  Black alters something slightly, you make your habitual moves, you die!  I speak from experience, playing the KIA via 1.Nf3 for 8 months back in 1997.

2) There are certain lines it's not very good against.  The best case if when Black plays a French (i.e. 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nf6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.O-O O-O etc.), but even then, Black gets a good game as long as he knows how to defend the immediate attack on the King.

If you are going to play 1.Nf3, I would recommend following up with 2.c4 against 1...d5 (Reti), either 2.c4 (English) or 2.e4 (Sicilian) against 1...c5, and 2.c4 with an eventual d4 against 1...c6 or 1...e6, going into QGD/Slav lines.


I completely disagree with your first point (apart from the fact if you play the habitual moves you die), I think I will rarely get the same position again and again. Black has enough openings against it to get a variety of positions with different plans in each one, (Kingside attack, queenside attack, centrel expansion etc). And every opening has lines it's not so good against (although the one you suggested I thought was very good for white), which is why I don't want to play it every game. But anyways thanks for you suggestions


I've been playing the KIA as White since joining, and I haven't yet seen the opening repeat itself. White can adopt a great variety of central formations, including d3/e4/c3, d3/c4, d3/c3/b4 and even c3/d4 (with a reversed Caro-Kann Schlecter position).

I'm currently playing White in a rated match game against a 2000+ player, which started as a typical KIA (g3/Bg2/Nf3/O-O,d3) and then transposed to a double-fianchetto (b3/Bb2/c4) and eventually into a very classical-looking position (with d4 and e4).


Everbody I see play the opening always play Nf3, g3, Bg2, O-O, d3, Nbd2, Re1, e4, and after that, at least 90% tend to play h4, Nf1, N1h2, e5, Bf4, Ng4, yada yada yada.  Move order may not be the same every time, but White's position is.  Sometimes c3 is thrown in, sometimes not, but it's all the same Kingside attack for White.


I know what you mean but I don't have to play it like that


The Parrot Attack, described at #5, is quite different than the KIA (which isn't even an attack, but rather a conservative developing scheme).


You don't have to transpose. Anyway Grischuk is probably the guy to watch.


So when should I not play the KIA and instead play different lines that are better for me? I want to be able to confuse my oppoent as much as possible