Saemisch KID crash course

Greetings all, I've waffled around quite a lot with my KID repertoire over the last few years - starting with the classical setup (with white I usually start with whatever is considered THE main line and deviate later), then an Averbach, then a Saemisch with Bg5. The pin can be very powerful, and I've grabbed an h6 pawn countless times in blitz (after Qd2)....but I've been starting to feel like I've really outgrown this offbeat Saemisch/Averbach hybrid - like I should just be playing the big girl Saemisch with Be3.

Who here plays the mainline Saemisch? Which professional players are the greatest experts on the subject? What are some of the best games in the Saemisch? Tell me war stories!

The biggest Guru of the Saemisch is probably GM Daniel King.

It sounds like you are looking to play it as White.  Quality Chess has a 2 book set on Playing 1.d4.  The first is on 1...d5, the second on Indian Defenses.  The second chapter of the one on Indian Defenses is the King's Indian Defense, and the line he covers is the line you are referring to, the Be3-Saemisch.

You might find a few other ideas as well.  I don't own those two books, but if I remember right, I believe he covers 4.e3 in the Nimzo-Indian, 5.f3 against the Benko Gambit, not sure if he gives Classical, Modern (7.h3) or Flick Knife Attack against the Benoni, and I think the Russian System against the Grunfeld, but I can't swear to that one.  I know for certain however that his recommendation against the KID is indeed the Saemisch!

4 World Champions specialized in the saemisch and studying their games is bound to help . Spassky most recent though so much might be dated . 

Saemisch KID is interesting. I had heard that Fischer did not like playing against the Saemisch and I think his record against it wasn't that great. Especially against top masters. Maybe because it seemed to get a plus or maybe even equalize, Black sometimes gives up a pawn for an advantage but maybe not a tangible one. Could be that went against Fischer's classical sensibility.  

Being a pawn down with some initiative but not a clear decisive attack did not seem to bother Kasparov. Who seemed to win his share on the Black side. But if you could survive his attack, White could show the material mattered like in a nice win by Gulko in 1990. But blunting the initiative was difficult like shown in Timman-Kasparov 1988 0-1.

Interesting in the 2014 Rapid and Blitz WC, Carlsen played a seemingly slow Saemisch against Grischuk and Polgar. I didn't look at the games very closely but I'm not sure White got much out of the play in either game. But of course Carlsen won both games. Might be a interesting computer analysis look. I think there are clips of both on youtube.

Personally, I'd rather not go into Saemisch sac lines so usually don't consider playing the KID unless White leads Nf3.

I'm not a fan of Saemisch. I have played myself the Bg5 systems, but the results weren't great. In the Be3 lines, Black has a pleasant choice between the c5 gambit line, the modern Byrne variation (...a6 and ...c6 without a quick ...0-0), and finally Kasparov's pet variation with ...e5, ...c6 and ...Nbd7. Black's setup is IMO too slow to cause Black any real problems.

It doesn't matter what you play, just have fun. If you want to win more games at your level, work on tactics. There are great websites out there like chesstempo.com that will help. I didn't even know what the King's Indian Defense was until I broke 1500 a year ago. That's just my advice.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1158947

Yeah, personally I've never been attached too much to an opening but I prefer the engine variation. lol

In my view the fact that the pseudo-Sämisch has become such a popular choice against the Grünfeld on top level (white players offering black to enter the Sämisch King's Indian), and the fact that I cannot even remember a recent top-level game where black made use of that choice, seems to be quite a mark of quality of the Sämisch. But maybe it is rather a mark of quality of the Grünfeld. If they are willing to play the classical Benoni a tempo down, a Sämisch no tempo down looks like a great alternative. A GM friend of mine considers the Grünfeld to be kind of the d4-player's Berlin, the opening against which white cannot get an advantage.

Boris Alterman has a 6 pt. DVD series.  

Alexey Dreev plays the Saemisch.

But as Thrillerfan points out, Daniel King is the way to go.

They won't be playing the boring stuff I've been playing, the engines are unanimous. It's bad for ya :))

Could be taking the Saemisch offering in the f3 anti-grunfeld is pretty good compared to the alternatives. In recent Nakamura's f3, Kasparov went for what looked basically KID saemisch and seemed to get pretty much what he wanted out of the opening. I thought much more than the laid back hypermodern lines p!ayed by So and Xiong v. Nakamura recently.

Though there also has been success with the same saemisch transition by Grischuk and MVL, I'm guessing the computers suggest a different approach. Maybe technically correct but not as clear practically, IMO.

The most probable reason Black players are rather reluctant to enter a Saemisch via the 3.f3 move order, is that white may do without an early Nb1-c3, and play either the other knight at c3 (usually the e2 knight is an obstacle to smooth white piece development), or place the knight at a3, if Black aims at Kasparov's variation.

How many world champions played the saemisch ?  Karpov , Spassky , Tal , Petrosian , Botvinnik  is 5 that I can think of with several of them specializing in it .  I doubt there are many openings with such an impressive endorsement by world champions . 

Good point, didn't think of that. Yes, that certainly looks like a favourible Sämisch.

As has been pointed out, there are lots of players to follow if you want model games of the Sämisch.

Since I have taken up this line it has brought me plenty of wonderful games, including a clean 7/7 in online chess on this site, so I can wholeheartedly recommend taking it up.

There's probably more to say to a6,Nc6,Bd7,h5 ( on Be3,h4,Nge2 ), but the main point is probably that black is the one fighting for equality.

True, but that's not why I've never played it, It's all about prerogatives, and style. It's too materialistic for my liking.

The Saemisch has a higher win % for white than most or all other lines in the KID, 45% is a figure I have seen.  That is a very serious reason to play it.  So is the number of top players who have played it, add Kasparov to the world champions who have used it, and Beliavsky was another top player who specialised in it.

I have been playing it for 35 years or thereabouts.  I have lost with it but its my fault not the openings.

Reasons against playing it-

1 There is so much theory.  I mean absoluteley gargantuan, huge gobby, near infinite lots, and then some.

2 It is so immensely complicated.  I have heard of a prominent coach who won't let his students play the Sicilian till they are 2400, and the same logic would apply to the Saemisch.

Hope you are well Alison.

One database maybe, maybe not.

I have heard similar figures elsewhere and on GM videos on the KID Saemisch.  The variation does in fact score well for white and this is very relevant, perhaps the most relevant thing in considering its value.

Of course database statistics are useful. But they are only useful when you know how to read them. For starters, you need to use filters. Games from the U8 girls championship of Bangladesh just have a tendency to be less useful than games among 2700 players. Next, a mix of chess education and common sense may help. Why does 6.h3 score better? Because it's less often played by weak players than the natural developing move 6.Nf3 or the well-known and somewhat schematic 6.f3.

Lastly, only giving the white scores of moves produces completely useless information, as obviously some lines have a higher draw rate than others.