Seems like a roundabout way to get a Gruenfeld....in traditional move order, it looks weird
There are many roads leading to Rome, and it's all a matter of taste. Also, as my137thataccount points out, often players duck out of other openings.
In Boris Avrukh's 1.d4 repertoire (the original one) he himself admits that this line of the Grunfeld is the weak point of his repertoire and that he struggled to find anything convincing for white here. His original recommendation was scrapped in the newer edition of the repertoire
In Boris Avrukh's 1.d4 repertoire (the original one) he himself admits that this line of the Grunfeld is the weak point of his repertoire and that he struggled to find anything convincing for white here. His original recommendation was scrapped in the newer edition of the repertoire
What did Avrukh recommend instead? This is one of the reasons I don't play Nf3 and g3 against the Slav via the normal move order (which otherwise would fit in naturally with my repertoire given that I play the Catalan). When facing the Grünfeld directly I prefer to wait with the development of my king's knight in the fianchetto variation, and against the c6-d5 Grünfeld, I like to follow Botvinnik's old recipe of Ng1-h3-f4.
In Boris Avrukh's 1.d4 repertoire (the original one) he himself admits that this line of the Grunfeld is the weak point of his repertoire and that he struggled to find anything convincing for white here. His original recommendation was scrapped in the newer edition of the repertoire
What did Avrukh recommend instead? This is one of the reasons I don't play Nf3 and g3 against the Slav via the normal move order (which otherwise would fit in naturally with my repertoire given that I play the Catalan). When facing the Grünfeld directly I prefer to wait with the development of my king's knight in the fianchetto variation, and against the c6-d5 Grünfeld, I like to follow Botvinnik's old recipe of Ng1-h3-f4.
IIRC this is his new recommendation:
The original line involved something with b3.
Whatever want to call it, it is one of the solidest lines going for black. In the game that Allison shows, for example, 10axb3 "And white had easier play for rest of game" personally think black is fine, and might even marginally prefer black.
Whatever want to call it, it is one of the solidest lines going for black. In the game that Allison shows, for example, 10axb3 "And white had easier play for rest of game" personally think black is fine, and might even marginally prefer black.
It's a perennial line, for sure.
For me 1. d4 has always sort of been what is wrong with chess. Trying to like the Queen's Gambit never worked, and the Nimzo/Queen's Indian complex became so intricate, over the years, that--well, forget it. I naturally tried the King's Indian on and off, for ever, but you don't necessarily equalize and again, long lines. Ditto with the Benoni (the Czech Benoni works wonderfully as a surprise, at least). Chess is rather analyzed out--unlike, say, fingerpainting. 
For me 1. d4 has always sort of been what is wrong with chess. Trying to like the Queen's Gambit never worked, and the Nimzo/Queen's Indian complex became so intricate, over the years, that--well, forget it. I naturally tried the King's Indian on and off, for ever, but you don't necessarily equalize and again, long lines. Ditto with the Benoni (the Czech Benoni works wonderfully as a surprise, at least). Chess is rather analyzed out--unlike, say, fingerpainting.
Why specifically 1.d4? Are you talking about from black's perspective? White has various ways to avoid deeply analysed lines
Seems like a roundabout way to get a Gruenfeld....in traditional move order, it looks weird
In the Grunfeld black only plays d5 either once white has already played Nc3 (most cases) or else if it's supported with c6 in the case of the Fianchetto Variation. The Fianchetto Grunfeld line with c6+d5+g6+Bg7 is very solid and often used by GMs to draw as black, including King's Indian Defense players who may duck into this line at the last minute to avoid the Fianchetto King's Indian