Opinion on a best defense against d4

St George 

Ware

Polish

English

Neo-Mongoloid

Slav-Indian

Horwitz

Keres

Nimzo

Bogo

Queens Indian

1.d4 h5

Old-Benoni

Old-Benoni played Queens Gambit Style 

these are some of the defences I'd like to play against d4 

There is no line where black is just proved t

To be dead lost but engine gives +3-4 eval in favour of white 

And haven't you watched gowtham chess and anish giri videos they also have the same opinion for the kid

And i am only saying thier words

This is what caruana said once in interview and also hikaru said after beating gelfand that kid is not that much good nowadays

At depth 42 (!) Stockfish gives +0.30 for the King's Indian.

That's marginally better (for Black) than the Queen's Gambit Declined Orthodox variation.

Grandmaster play is as much determined by fashion as by analysis. GMs are as fashion-conscious as teenage girls.

I don't know guys I am just saying what super gms says and what the new trend is 

And I am not saying that kid is bad, my main point was that grunfeld is better 

But why are people arguing about englund gambit everyone knows its worst

Even if the Super-GMs didn't like the KID... who cares? You won't be playing like a Super-GM, and neither will your opponent. Objective evaluations are distinctly secondary to personal preference and your own understanding of key squares and strategic themes.

Should I quote my own post (about trying to mimic the opening choices of Super-GMs) again?

"When a person is just now learning how to drive a car, should they zoom around at 300 km/hr, engine roaring and tires squealing, like Lewis Hamilton? After all, a Formula 1 World Champion must know a lot more about driving a car properly than some dumb driving instructor who has never won a major race... no?"

The KID isn't bad or busted. As others have pointed out, it's simply a matter of changing trends.

Popularity in main defenses comes and goes throughout the years, and then comes back again.

Here are a few SuperGMs who played the KID this past year, in actual tournaments: Fedoseev, Carlsen, Aronian, Radjabov, Ding, Duda ...

If the KID wasn't a valid choice, none of them would've chosen to play it. And at that level, nobody plays defenses on a whim ... they're all played after extensive prep. So not only are these top players choosing to play the KID, they're also spending time preparing with the KID.

Sounds to me like they believe in it. Otherwise, they wouldn't waste their time.

Ultimately depends on your style and how you approach the game. The big question is: in what kind of positions do you thrive in?

If you’re a super aggressive player, then the KID is an opening to consider.

If you’re more on the solid side, then the QGD + Nimzo (or just QGD alone) would be a solid choice.

If you’re seeking dynamic counterplay that isn’t necessarily of the do or bust nature (like the KID), the Benoni/Benko/Grunfeld offer such dynamics.

Then there’s also the objectively slightly dubious openings like the Englund gambit, Albin counter gambit, etc that can be played if you’re just looking to have some fun and possibly score some quick wins.

I find the classical Dutch Defense to be fun. Black gets good attacking chances with minimal theory + if you’re a french defense player you can play 1.d4 e6 to avoid any anti Dutch’s such as the Hopton attack, Rapheal variation, staunton gambit, etc

I enjoy the Semi-Slav. Very underrated opening and is famous for having the most complicated opening of all: the Botvinnik Semi-Slav. I created a Semi-Slav study which covers the Botvinnik and Moscow/Anti-Moscow and almost done with the Meran study. 

Compared to other Black openings for 1.d4, it is able to withstand a lot of move orders so people have a hard time avoiding it (unless they have no life and play London, Colle, Veresov, etc.)

I tried it because of Simon Williams's but sucked at it. However, it is tricky to play against so I go into a French instead. Also, Hopton attack is my go to against the Dutch. People surprisingly play into Fool's Mate and/or play gxf6 losing instantly

As to what is objectively the best I don't know if there is one, personally I'm sticking with KID though I need to learn it better than I know it now. Its just what I've always played and I've made so many changes to my openings recently I need to stick with the ones I'm a bit used to and get better with them. If you like the look of an opening and it's playable, that's what you need. At non-master levels as others have no doubt said, we lose games because we lose concentration and drop pieces or blunder, rather than because of the specific opening we use and any problems with it (as long as it's something playable that doesn't result in substantial early weaknesses)

OK for the Albin, but the Englund isn't "slightly dubious".

Actually all about it is a couple of cheapos which can only work against beginners.

Grunfwld suits my style

Yeah it can be a bit hard to play and sometimes I find myself not knowing what to do. The hopton is also a fun line!

Yeah perhaps that was an understatement on my part haha.

I'm 1600 but I somehow still lose to the Albin. I now to play Nf3, and a3 but they get me in the middlegame.

Englund was good when I was below 1200 when Eric Rosen made that Knight Sacrifice trap but when Eric Rosen makes a video, it only works for a few days or weeks until everyone knows about it. 

Jonathon Schrantz however isn't as mainstream as Rosen and it helps when he shows a trap in the Pirc. Works most of the time

This was used successfully against a GM 

I attest to the Pterodactyl lines!
In fact, the modern defense with C5 immediately after activating the king's bishop is the top engine move in many lines.

But the QGD and Slav approaches are also positionally incredible.

Modern defence

Grunfeld is best At any lvl and no one defences are even near it