<<What is more important than to say that Black plays f5 and g5 vs white playing h4 is to understand and explain WHY that is!>>
Erm, I believe I did. Black plays f5 and g5 intending to crash into white's kingside and smash it up. White plays h4 as a support for piece play on the K-side.
Hint: build on other people's posts, because there are too many people needlessly criticising. A case in point are the threads where the insane ones lurk. Threads about whether chess is a draw.
Regarding the KIA, the old masters used to say that the KIA is much better against the Caro-Kann than the French. They said it doesn't get anywhere against the French. (Of course, we know that there are two entries for the KIA as white: either a straightforward Nf3 and K-side fianchetto or as a response to black defences to 1. e4.) Anyway, it used to be said that it's no good against the French because there, black hasn't wasted a move with c6 but has played the excellent e6. So .... play e6 against the KIA!
I used to play the system 1. Nf3 ...e6 2. g3 ...b5. It was ok.
I used to really like it and play it often, can't think of any reasons why if you like it you shouldn't play it. I used to like that it was a fairly safe system against almost anything
Regarding the KIA, the old masters used to say that the KIA is much better against the Caro-Kann than the French. They said it doesn't get anywhere against the French. (Of course, we know that there are two entries for the KIA as white: either a straightforward Nf3 and K-side fianchetto or as a response to black defences to 1. e4.) Anyway, it used to be said that it's no good against the French because there, black hasn't wasted a move with c6 but has played the excellent e6. So .... play e6 against the KIA!
I used to play the system 1. Nf3 ...e6 2. g3 ...b5. It was ok.
why would KIA suppose to play against the Caro Kann instead of the French? A big theme of KIA is the Kingside attack, if Black plays e5 then you can never play e5 the kingside attack is not so promising not to mention you allow black to put 2 pawns in the center and you have to switch to attack the queenside or to play for controlling the center, and eventually get some awkward and unclear position. 
Black is technically winning in this position.
The whole point of c6 is to protect the d5 pawn and also weaken the light square bishop on the long diagonal. if white later plays f4 to activate the bishop you still block off the diagonal with c6d5. So the statement of "wasting a tempo" is wrong. You can see this common idea in any fianchetto opening such as Nimzo-Larsen attack, Owen's defense, Modern defense
It makes sense to play the King's Indian Attack as white if you play the King's Indian Defence as black.
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044267
Regarding the KIA, the old masters used to say that the KIA is much better against the Caro-Kann than the French. They said it doesn't get anywhere against the French. (Of course, we know that there are two entries for the KIA as white: either a straightforward Nf3 and K-side fianchetto or as a response to black defences to 1. e4.) Anyway, it used to be said that it's no good against the French because there, black hasn't wasted a move with c6 but has played the excellent e6. So .... play e6 against the KIA!
I used to play the system 1. Nf3 ...e6 2. g3 ...b5. It was ok.
why would KIA suppose to play against the Caro Kann instead of the French? A big theme of KIA is the Kingside attack, if Black plays e5 then you can never play e5 the kingside attack is not so promising not to mention you allow black to put 2 pawns in the center and you have to switch to attack the queenside or to play for controlling the center, and eventually get some awkward and unclear position.
Black is technically winning in this position.
The whole point of c6 is to protect the d5 pawn and also weaken the light square bishop on the long diagonal. if white later plays f4 to activate the bishop you still block off the diagonal with c6d5. So the statement of "wasting a tempo" is wrong. You can see this common idea in any fianchetto opening such as Nimzo-Larsen attack, Owen's defense, Modern defense
You've completely lost me but the old theory was that the KIA is good against the Caro because black haas played c6, and relatively poor against the French, because black played e6.
It brings to mind a recent thread where we were discussing playing against the London as white, where white opens with a Reti-type configuration. I remember that I recommended an approach where white plays d3, Nbd2 etc and plays for e4. Bizmark reckoned that was positionally incorrect because it gives black's f5 bishop a target. The point really is that in all these openings, there's more than one "correct" way to play against them. I've had good games as black against the KIA where I've taken everything off the diagonal from g2 to a8, so white has no target, and I've won. I've also played in a much more controntational style, with e6 and ultimately, d5, and won. The fact is that one player doesn't lose because the positional system they use is out of favour with grandmaster X. Instead, they lose because they either play worse than or make more mistakes than theie opponent. If a player is playing well, they'll give anyone a tough game, no matter what the rating difference and the style they choose.
#27
black is not winning by any means.
That's right. Typically, white plays Bg2 there, and Ndf1. Then the N can either go to e3 or, after h2-h4, to h2, although I think e3 is better in that position. The game is just beginning and black isn't better. The engine might think black is better, but white should be better.
As I pointed out to dybken, white plays on the kingside and spearheads the attack with h4.
#27
black is not winning by any means.
That's right. Typically, white plays Bg2 there, and Ndf1. Then the N can either go to e3 or, after h2-h4, to h2, although I think e3 is better in that position. The game is just beginning and black isn't better. The engine might think black is better, but white should be better.
As I pointed out to dybken, white plays on the kingside and spearheads the attack with h4.
Unless black pushes d5-d4, white shouldn't play h2-h4. He should probably play in the center with Re1 and try to pressure e5.
#27
black is not winning by any means.
That's right. Typically, white plays Bg2 there, and Ndf1. Then the N can either go to e3 or, after h2-h4, to h2, although I think e3 is better in that position. The game is just beginning and black isn't better. The engine might think black is better, but white should be better.
As I pointed out to dybken, white plays on the kingside and spearheads the attack with h4.
Unless black pushes d5-d4, white shouldn't play h2-h4. He should probably play in the center with Re1 and try to pressure e5.
Why's that? If black has 0-0, why not attack? d5-d4 by black temporarily frees c4 for white and blocks black's dark square B. But why not h4? I would have thought that when d5-d4, that's when white can counerattack in the centre.
Well, there’s still tension in the center, so a wing attack is unprincipled.
It just makes it more difficult to calculate but I often play on both sides in OTB and 3-day. Occasionally I come unstuck, of course.
<<What is more important than to say that Black plays f5 and g5 vs white playing h4 is to understand and explain WHY that is!>>
Erm, I believe I did. Black plays f5 and g5 intending to crash into white's kingside and smash it up. White plays h4 as a support for piece play on the K-side.
Hint: build on other people's posts, because there are too many people needlessly criticising. A case in point are the threads where the insane ones lurk. Threads about whether chess is a draw.
But you never said WHY Black plays f5 and g5 and that White plays h4. With your post, someone will go out there and throw our f5 and g5 without White having locked the center with d5. Instead, White plays dxe5 and you will get smashed.
There again, am I supposed to explain every possible nuance that may affect everything or just get on with it and let people find out for themselves or ask further questions?
Unless black pushes d5-d4, white shouldn't play h2-h4. He should probably play in the center with Re1 and try to pressure e5.
The move h2-h4 is not played as part of a Pawn storm. It is played (in conjunction with Bf4 and Ng4) in order to establish a positional bind, to dominate the dark squares on the K-side. White plans to attack with pieces on the K-side. The Pawn moves are intended to constrict Black on that flank, not to pry open files.
I mentioned above that I'm not normally a fan of pushing the h4 Pawn on to h5 and h6, For one thing, this reduces the attacking frontage from three files to two. For another, the center is still fluid, not locked.
Unless black pushes d5-d4, white shouldn't play h2-h4. He should probably play in the center with Re1 and try to pressure e5.
The move h2-h4 is not played as part of a Pawn storm. It is played (in conjunction with Bf4 and Ng4) in order to establish a positional bind, to dominate the dark squares on the K-side. White plans to attack with pieces on the K-side. The Pawn moves are intended to constrict Black on that flank, not to pry open files.
I mentioned above that I'm not normally a fan of pushing the h4 Pawn on to h5 and h6, For one thing, this reduces the attacking frontage from three files to two. For another, the center is still fluid, not locked.
Thanks. I tried the KIA as white in a couple of 3-day games. Didn't quite know what I was doing. Will try to find one and maybe you can comment on it? I could only remember one person ever playing it against my Sicilian in what I would think was a proper manner. I was very impressed by that, however. And yes, he got a positional bind, played it beautifully and won. That was OTB.
Have you looked at my game in post #5 of this thread, above? It was played OTB in the Provincial Closed Championship against an opponent rated nearly 2000.
As White, I played the aforementioned h2-h4 to establish a bind, then transferred all my pieces into the K-side. Black tried to prevent a sacrifice on e6 (after Bh3 and Ng5xe6) by the wrong defensive method, and ended up so tied down that I was able to switch to a Pawn storm despite the fluid center formation.
It was a Sicilian starting point but I took the opportunity to try to play a KIA. I didn't really know what I was doing and it should have been a draw more than likely, but I was the stronger player. Regarding the game you posted earlier, I haven't looked at it yet and I will look but I'm just in the middle of cooking and I'm hungry! Just a veg, fried rice.
#7 "it's playable" isn't a reason to play an opening.
Yeah, but enjoying the opening is a reason to play an opening.
Because if you lay down pros and cons it goes like this:
pros:
1. it's fun to play
2. it works on many defenses
cons:
1. it doesn't fight for an advantage
the con here can be translated into a pro:
3. it doesn't lose
hence, there are basically no cons for playing a less ambitious opening if you enjoy playing it.
Actually, it's a different thing from the KID. In the Kid, when white plays classically, black typically advances the f and g pawns and tries to crash into white's king's position while white is otherwise engaged on the q-side. The KIA typically is played with h4 and it involves more piece-play on the K-side, often when black doesn't have a real attack going elsewhere. Instead, white fights for better piece placement than black, on the k-side and it can be a real tactical battle there. Black's counter-attacks are likely to be directed against the q-side but black's a move behind and can find it hard going, because white can often keep things even on the q-side.
What is more important than to say that Black plays f5 and g5 vs white playing h4 is to understand and explain WHY that is!
In the King's Indian Defense, White has played c4, d4, and e4. Playing all 3 moves makes the d4-square weak since no pawn can ever cover d4. This is why Black attacks d4 with e5, c5, or Nc6, or some combination of them. The goal is to force White to play d5. By getting White to play d5, this opens the door for Black to play f5 and g5 because the center is closed. If Black plays f5 BEFORE White plays d5, then White should trade on e5 rather than advance, and use the d5-square as a launch pad to attack Black's airy king! This is why Black must entice d5 first. For the same reason that against 3.Nc3 in the French, Black must hold off from ...c5 until he has forced White to play e5, taking all pressure off of d5. Same concept! Why do you think I preach that French players should play the KID and vice versa?
As far as the King's Indian Attack, completely different ball of wax! Black's pawn structure is usually c5-d5-e6, making d5 NOT weak. The weakness here for Black is the Kingside light squares and the lack of space on the kingside, making it hard to defend squares like h7. In the KID, White often plays f3 to hold the e4-square. In the KIA, black almost never plays f6 because it would fatally open the e-file and expose e6. So Black does not get the same space to maneuver that White gets in the Classical KID. So White does not need to storm pawns to take over key squares, like a g6 pawn push to control h7 and f7, not necessary. Also, with ...d4 not played and e5 usually played by White, not Black, playing f4 for White is dicey. He advances h4 to control g5 and brings all of his pieces to the Kingside where Black lacks the space to maneuver his pieces to defend his King.
KIA and KID are stale apples and fresh oranges!