Two questions on King Indian Defence.

#20
The King's Indian Defence is no longer mainstream at top level.
At the Yekaterinburg Candidates it was played twice: a win for white and a draw.

It is good to play for a win with black, but at high risk of losing.
As Bronstein, a pioneer of the King's Indian Defence, said :
"King's Indian is riskier for black than King's Gambit for white.
Fischer played it a lot, but did not dare to play it against the Soviets: Botvinnik, Taimanov, Petrosian, Spassky.
Kasparov played it against Karpov, who avoided the main line. Kasparov gave up on the King's Indian Defence after he lost to Kramnik. Also Radjabov gave up on the King's Indian Defence.

Sure, black can avoid the critical 7...Nc6 and opt for 7...exd4 or 7...Nbd7 or 7...c6 or 7...Qe8.

Thank You For your answers.

@najdorf96. I have no issue... As said i am just curious. As I read and learn about chess i started to get mixed info on KID. I would say, a mixture of awe and mistrust. Of both scepticism and immortal victories by black. And having played with the databese a bit I have spotted KID statistically scores very bad, engine also does not like it. KID seems to be just as good/bad as scandinavian defence which is not surrounded by a romantic aura.

When i was a total beginer, and needed to find my answer to 1.d4, i wanted KID to be my primary weapon. Foolish me! KID is very beginer-unfriendly. Now I aim for Tarrash defence. The structure with pawns on e6, d5 and c5 and rook to go to c8 is pretty universal, and definattely brings me better results.

@thillerFan and @pfren

I knew the position(s) You have shown me. Not that  have studied or analysed it, I merely knew about it - taking exd4 is one of options i mentioned. But may I ask You isn't this position ( or the one with pawn rather then knight on c6) just better for white?

I mean there is nothing TERRIBLE about black - but he has just given up his central power, white has spatial advantege and the Marozy bind ( which in sicilian is usually avoided by black), and smooth development ( pleasant choice where to place his c1 bishop -  all aviable squares look reasonable). All white needs is to decide where the dark squared bishop goes, place the queen on d2 ( or mayby c2?!), centralise rooks and the game playes itself. I can't really see a plan for black, save the obvious need of completing development, which is not that easy due to space disadvantage.

I have already mentioned the ...Nh5 plan for Black which gives pretty good play on the dark squares. There are a few possible white setups, but I will give one which is close to what you've described as strong.

As you can see, the whole plan is rather easy to implement.

KID is messy chess, but it has been sufficiently studied to the point that it has defanged a lot of its ferocious reputation. engines especially have introduced new defensive resources for white. It's still an excellent choice for must win games though or those that dont mind to trade some objectivity for a messy  long term battle. 

chess is a lot more preparation now than it was during the days of Fischer and Kasparov, and KID allows white an enormous variety of ways to push for some advantage, Engines are not  psychologically swayed by its complications (although a good player will keep in mind positional horizon effect possibilities, esp with blacks massive pawn storm). When you catch someone by surprise with it? KID can be great, but when you play someone that knows what you are likely to play like Super GM's do with each other, KID is HARD, so you simply dont want to play it too often even if its part of your repertoire.

Unfortunately, yes. To be fair, it's not immediately obvious that 12. Ba3 lands him in a lost position.