The Black defenses to 1.d4, 1.Nf3 and 1.c4

This thread is about the Black defenses to 1.d4, 1.Nf3 and 1.c4. In this thread, let us divide these defenses in two categories:
- the system-like defenses: KID, QGD, Slav, Semi-Slav, they are setups that Black can adopt against almost everything other than 1.e4
- the non-system-like defenses: Grunfeld, Modern Benoni, Benko, Nimzo, Bogo, QID, QGA

.

- If Black plays the KID, then Black can play Nf6, g6, Bg7, O-O, d6 against everything other than 1.e4.
- If Black plays the QGD, then Black can play d5, e6, Nf6 against everything other than 1.e4.
- If Black plays the Slav ...Bf5, then Black can play d5, c6, Nf6, Bf5, e6 against everything other than 1.e4.
- If Black plays the Slav Chebanenko (Chameleon), then Black can play d5, c6, Nf6, a6 against everything other than 1.e4.
- If Black plays the Semi-Slav, then Black can play d5, c6, Nf6, e6 against everything other than 1.e4, except that if White doesn't play c4 then Black won't play ...c6 because it would just lose a tempo for no reason.

In some order. Like if White plays 1.c4, Black won't be able to immediately play 1...d5, Black will first have to play 1...e6 (QGD) or 1...c6 (Slav) and only then 2...d5.

.

But if Black plays a non-system-like defense, what does Black do when White plays 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 or 1.d4 2.Nf3? It seems that Black will likely need to play the Symmetrical English or the King's English (aka the Reversed Sicilian).

Nimzo/Bogo
Someone who chooses the Nimzo might try to play 1...Nf6 2...e6 3...Bb4 against everything other than 1.e4. So his Black repertoire would consist in the Nimzo, the Bogo, the Nimzo-English (1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4). But 3...Bb4 would not work when White delays playing c4, or when White plays c4 but delays moving his d-Pawn and his Queen's Knight until Black moves his King's Bishop anywhere other than b4 (for example, White can play Nf3, g3, Bg2, O-O).

Nimzo/QID
A Nimzo/QID player could play ...Nf6, ...e6, ...b6, ...Bb7 against everything other than 1.e4, and play the Nimzo against 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3. But the whole purpose of the Nimzo/QID is to prevent White from playing e4, so these two openings don't seem to make much sense against these White players (such as London system players) who would not play e4 even if they easily could. A Nimzo/QID player would need to learn the Hedgehog. What if White plays g3 and Bg2 before playing Nf3? Then Black would no longer be able to play his ...b6.

Mikenas
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 and White has prevented Nimzo, QID and Bogo.

Against 1.c4 Nf6 2.d4 e6 3.g3, Black might avoid playing ...d5 by playing 3...Bb4+. But against 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 e6 3.Bg2, Black is forced to play 3...d5 and transpose into the Catalan, which is a QGD. It seems much more economic to play the QGD against everything rather than to play the Nimzo/QID or Nimzo/Bogo and still be forced to learn the QGD Catalan anyway.

Modern Benoni
Someone who chooses the Modern Benoni would also need to learn the Symmetrical English. But what about 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.d5 (White's first and second moves can be interverted) and it's an Old Benoni. Is it impossible for a Modern Benoni player to avoid getting tricked into entering the Old Benoni rather than the Modern Benoni?

Grunfeld
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 and it's the Grunfeld. But what if White doesn't play exactly these three moves? 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 and Black can no longer play the Grunfeld. Maybe Black can develop 1...Nf6 2...g6 3...Bg7 4...O-O and whenever White plays Nc3 Black immediately answers with ...d5. Okay but what if White never plays Nc3? Then you'll never get a Grunfeld.

QGA
In the QGA, Black generally plays ...Nf6, ...e6, ...Be7, ...O-O, ...c5. Black also generally plays these moves in the QGD. So I guess that if White delays c4, the QGA player can just play all these moves, and whenever White plays c4 Black will answer with ...dxc4 transposing into a QGA. But if White never plays c4, there will be no QGA, and Black will have played the QGD. So why not play the QGD exclusively? Why learn two openings when you can learn just one? It seems that the QGA's only place is as a secondary weapon for QGD players.

.

Most people want to have only one weapon against 1.d4, 1.Nf3 and 1.c4. So these people should choose one of the system-like defenses.

The system-like defenses are better and more economic, because they can be played against everything, while the other defenses cannot. Why learn mutiple defenses when you can learn just one and be able to play it against everything?

I cannot answer your question because the premise is flawed. The “KID setup” will play much differently if played in a KID, a KIA, and an English. The same is true for all of the other systems as well. What will the Nimzo/Bogo player do against a KIA where Bb4+ is only Bb4 and can be kicked by c3? Questions like this simply don’t arise if one has a different defense for each opening.

If you pick a system-like defense, you'll be able to play it against everything. So after the first 5 or so system moves, there will be like a dozen different possible setups that your opponent can adopt, then of course you will play much differently based on which setup your opponent has adopted.

If you pick a non-system-like defense, you won't be able to play it against everything, so you'll also have to pick a second non-system-like defense to cover the holes (and perhaps also a third one). So against some openings you'll play the first defense, against some openings you'll play the second defense, and against some openings you'll play BOTH defenses depending on what move-order your opponent uses. And so, if your opponent plays one of these openings, by carefully selecting his move-order he will literally be able to choose what defense you will adopt. For example, imagine you play the QGA, and your opponent plays the Catalan against everything, he will literally be able to choose to prevent you from playing the QGA by choosing the move-order 1.d4 2.Nf3 3.g3 4.Bg2 5.O-O 6.c4 rather than the move order 1.d4 2.c4 3.Nf3 4.g3.

"What will the Nimzo/Bogo player do against a KIA where Bb4+ is only Bb4 and can be kicked by c3?" > So the Nimzo/Bogo cannot be played against everything, which is exactly why I classified the Nimzo and the Bogo in the category "non-system-like defenses".

sampson system

unrefutable god tier

100% win rate (for white)

you could play the dutch/english defense

but you would have to study them. they provide fun games that white usually does not know. and this is not some dubious opening either and has been played by GMs

I generally respond with either 1.Nf6 or c5; both have their advantages.

also

KID isnt just playable vs everything white can do except d4 in the way you say

d4 Nf6 Bg5 g6 Bxf6

good kid setup here, huh?

london vs proper kid is bad for black, afaik

h4 systems? hello?

also, "d5 e6 Nf6" isnt a system

its a set of three moves played almost everywhere

there is no system here, and you "system advantage' doesnt really apply

slav Bf5...

d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5?! cd5 cd5 Qb3 or something like that

a universal "black london" system like that doesnt really work

"d5 c6 Nf6 a6"

if white doesnt play c4, whats the point of a6?

semi slav is fine (as a "universal" system) ig but suggesting to go to your "qgd" if white doesnt go c4 baffles me

so... there

just refuted your claims for all but one of your "system like" openings using criticisms similar in level to your criticisms of "non system like" openings

this whole idea is flawed anyway

dont you get bored of playing the same thing over and over

I'd play 1.e6 against 1.d4 , 1.Nf3 and even 1.c4 . Occasionally even maybe trying 1.b5 against 1.c4

in general I would think that e6, d5, and c5 with Nf6 mixed in at the appropriate time as necessary is the closest one would get to a system opening against d4. you could play it against e4 as well since it is the French.

indeed. @chessterd5 soo essentially, you're suggesting playing a QGD Tarrasch with a 1. ... e6 move order (possibly provoking a French if 2. e4). I think it's cool (especially if you play the French as your main vs 1. e4) but I think 1. ... e6 is too committal in my opinion to be a flexible system.

you could try 1.c6 as well

Najdorf96, 1) d4,e6 could also lead to Nimzo/Bogo positions as well as Modern Benoni if you wait on ...,d5 and play c5 first so it can be somewhat flexible. The test might be against Catalan type structures. I don't know.

Eingorn in "Rock solid opening repetoire" recommend 1...e6 against everything. 1.d4 e6 2c4 Bb4ch leading to a modified Bogo after 3Bd2 a5 were hope to gain something from delaying Nf6, (3...BxB is also very solid the catalan positions after 4QxB Nf6 5g3 d5 suprisingly difficult for white to crack because it turns out Qd2 is misplaced. 2010 -2014 lots of high level games including Carlsen). 3Nc3 c5 Nimzo indian like positions were again some difference from delay of Nf6.

actually, yes.

In many cases you could go from 1.e6 against 1.c4 to Black Openings against 1.d4 like the Semi-Slav , the QGD or the Ragozin Defence from the QGD

Does this mean the defences against 1.d4 , 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 are similar more to the point of exact similarity ?

Englund is best

It depends on what matters more to a player: consistency, or variety.

Some players like consistency most of all. For these players, system setups make a lot of sense.

Other players like variety more. For these players, choosing different defenses against different setups/structures is more ideal.

Different players have different preferences and/or needs.

Depends, some systems play well based on the imbalance positions alone like a Botvinnik System, which I prefer against a KID.

The Grunfeld, after some feel and experience plays similar to a system with either colors because of the piece placement, activity and plans stay consistent.