Playing against the Queen's Indian as White

Yes, that's right. What are some of the specific lines for 4. a3, especially against 4... Ba6? I know that that move is superior to 4... Bb7, which is nevertheless an acceptable and good move.

I'm sorry, it's 20 years ago and my memory for variations isn't what it was. Ten years ago when I hit 58 I started slowing down. But I'm interested so I'm going to have a look. I'm not sure if I have any old books on the subject but I'll get back to you, if I may. It's taken me this long to really feel I understand the Nimzo so perhaps a rerun of the queen's Indian would be useful for me.

I have some knowledge based on 4. Nc3 Bb7 5. a3, but does anyone have info on the "real" Petrosian variation 4. a3 Ba6, information would be highly important to me. Thank you!

I thought it was normal to delay Ba6 for a move or two. Might be wrong.

Yes, it's not necessary to play it immediately, but 4... Ba6 is (I believe) the most common response to the Petrosian variation.

According to the Chess.com opening database, it has a 30% win rate, while 4... Bb7 has a 25% win rate.

And I think that 4... Bb7 is regarded as more drawish and solid, while 4... Ba6 is a more aggressive move by nature.

cool

If anyone knows any 4.a3 lines, please post them here. If you have any other QID knowledge, feel free to let us know here.

Having thought about the opening extensively, last night, only in my head I'm afraid, I genuinely think that you should not play the 4. a3 variation if you wish to win as white. It seems that black has easy equality and it really isn't worth studying the variations. The 4. g3 variation gives a slight edge to white but is complex and the theory is well-known ..... even the 4. Ba6 variation. I do not think that should be played hoping to win as white against a player about as good as you.

I have tried 4. e3 in the past. I think that is also Petrosian's Variation. But it is only good for surprise value. If I were in your position, of being determined to play the QI and not the NI but wanting to win, then I would study two variations very carefully. One is the hybrid variation with 4. Nc3 and the other is the naturally developing variation with 4. Bf4 and Nbd2 in the event of Bb4+. If you became expert in both of these I think you would have a reasonable armoury, although not so formidable as if you were to play 3. Nc3 in the first place and become expert in that.

edited

I agree that the Nimzo-Indian gives White better chances of winning, but isn't Petrosian's variation 4. a3 also regarded as a good way to play aggressively against the Queen's Indian, while the 4. g3 variation is seen as drawish and boring?

Apparently, Petrosian also played 4. e3. I know that Kasparov is famous for playing 4. a3 but I would have thought his wins in that line occurred before the correct defensive techniques became well known. My experience, which is very limited, is that 4. a3 is a dead draw if black plays the right moves. However, databases would seem to confirm that. I found that I often won after 4. a3 if black failed to play ... Ba6. Unfortunately, black usually seemed to play that line. Surely, 4g3 is complex and subtle and it might be to the taste of someone who plays the queens indian out of preference.

4. e3 was also played by Spassky and I believe other Soviet champions played it. Doesn't it have concepts similar to that of the Rubenstein variation in the Nimzo-Indian, where White will play Bd3, Qc2, sometimes Nge2 and Ng3 to attack e4 and try to get e4 in?

I've never looked at the variation extensively, but this was the impression that I had of it.

I would think that in the QID line, you would have to get f3 in there somewhere because of the pressure that ...Bb7 would exert on the long diagonal.

Also, maybe not, because I doubt that many a black player would give up the Bb7 for the Nf3.

Against 4.a3 a common response for black is 4...d5. The argument for this is that 4.a3 is a slow move - albeit one that shuts down a key thematic option (...Bb4) - therefore strike in the centre as you now have as QGD position with tempii.

While it is the mainline against 4. g3, 4...Ba6 doesn't make sense when 4. a3 has been played, as the whole point of the move is to induce 5. b3 to protect the c-pawn and then force the queen's Knight to d2 (in defence of ...Bb4+) when it would have been much happier on c3.

4...Bb7 is also playable.

I like the idea, but what's the problem with simply kicking the f5-Knight with g6?

In the Nimzo, white has not played Nf3. White may play Ne2, which is the best square for the knight in that opening, and f3 leading to e4. After Nf3, I'm not sure there is normally a good square to remove that knight to, to support a k-side attack.