My objective is to minimize the amount of theory I need to learn. Can the following three openings be all that I need? Hyper Accelerated Dragon, King's Indian Defense, English. A sensible opening repertoire depends on context. I started playing this June on lichess. My rating there is currently around 1900. I don't intend to play Chess professionally but I see no reason not to be as strong as possible. The context is then: would my opening repertoire be enough to be competitive, even if one day, I was playing against the best in the world? If not enough, is it at least a good base from which I add more openings?
As Black, My reasoning starts with the HAD in response to e4. It's sound and suits my style of play. Nothing more needs to be said. I then need a response to d4. My thought is create as much positional similarity as possible to reduce complexity. The simplest way I found to achieve positional similarity with the HAD is to fianchetto kingside. This leaves the KID and the Grunfeld. I decided the KID because the Grunfeld is notorious for being theory heavy. Though I did read that Kasparov dropped the KID because it was too much work to keep up. Is the KID is theory heavy as well?
As White, the English allows me to transpose into both the Reverse Dragon or the KID meaning no additional theory needs to be learned. Of course, the English can be played as the English which isn't an issue because I need to know the English anyway for when I'm Black and White plays it.
Another reason for the KID over the Grunfeld is in the following position for the English, d4 gives Black the option between the KID or the Grunfeld. However, playing e4 forces the KID. Would this allow me to never have to learn the Grunfeld at all?
