The Grunfeld Opening

I just received the latest quality chess opening book on the Grunfeld along with an everyman series one. I like this for black. Obviously play it all of the time but its not part of my deep study openings. 

What are your opinions? Any tricks I should looks out for playing with the black pieces?

Study the Russian variation very hard.

I thought about the Grunfeld. Seemed very interesting. Then I realized everytime I tried to enter a Grunfeld as black white would always divert the game away from it. 

I gave up on the Grunfeld

After 1 c4 g6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 d5 or whatever, that's already a Grunfeld. What are whites doing? Refusing to play Nc3 maybe?

Interestingly, Bobby Fischer used to save the Grunfeld for his attempts at a "Game of the Century"... his game against Botvinnik, for example. On lesser occasions, he played the King's Indian, the Nimzo or the QGD Ragozin.

Makes sense .... it's best used as a surprise weapon.

No the Grunfeld is usually a main defense. Ex: MVL, one of the strongest GMs in the world plays it (alongside the Najdorf) exclusively with Black

Hi

There are some GMs who have used it as a main defence. That gives them the opportunity to be proficient in all variations. However, there are a lot of surprises available for white, which is why I suggested what I suggested.

From someone who played the GrunF extensively previously, I have literally never faced the Russian system. But yes, you should study it.

Grunfeld is solid enough to be a main defense, imo. Especially a booked-up grunfeld player.

Compared with the KID, if you need to win as black and white wants a draw, it's not easy.

Who was the chess master/GM in the 60s who played the Grunfeld and in a tournament or something he played it when he was blind drunk, against 1. e4 and said "I never knew the Grunfeld dropped a pawn"? Was it Spassky?

nah mate I have loads of wins with it before I dropped the GrunF

I was playing it all the time for about ten years until a year or two ago. Now people know it better and I'm playing Bf4 more often. Before I took up the Russian I was playing 4. e3 and doing well but I was a better player then.

I think the main downsides are that it is move-order sensitive, and also likely requires some study of other fianchetto lines that don't have d5 due to some anti-grunfeld lines, so tons of theory, and timing is everything especially when black tries to dismantle white's center, so not very beginner-friendly. The semi-tarrasch could be a close-ish relative and definitely easier to get the pawn structure against most white tries, so maybe start here instead, but only a suggestion. So by semi-tarrasch i mean, d5, c5, e6 nf6, and if white takes on d5, take with the knight. So this may lead to a less sexy grunfeld because there is no bg7 and instead there is be7, but the structure is quite similar in a lot of respects.

Excellent new book for the black pieces by quality chess although thats another forum. When I am white and I face the grunfeld I played the russian as my main line. Most seemed to know the line fairly well. But they probably wouldn't have opened with the grunfeld w/o knowing the line somewhat.

I've found the exchange to be a fun opening. The long black bishop seems effective and also I don't see myself getting into trouble early in the grunfeld compared with other openings. 

Thx for all the comments. 

@benonidoni The reason I played GrunF was because of the exchange... was really fun giving white their hopes and dreams and taking it away LMAO.

You never faced a player who could play the white side well??

no.