Pushing one of the pawns (b2, b7, g2, g7) creates a triangle with the two other pawns beside it. Next you have the bishop go into that triangle like a person going into the tepee. It's just a matter of connecting the dots, or pawns in this case.
(I think you didn't SWIDT )
Heh, now i do, and how!
Let's see how many Indian defenses there are.
Scamming and cheapness are the only ones i can think of. Oh wait, we are talking about chess. (I am an indian btw)
Bogo, Nimzo, Queen's, King's directly have indian in them
and other openings branch off 1..nf6 which are still technically classified as indian defenses.
Scamming and Cheapness?Be careful with what you say.
lol, well a lot of "us" are pretty cheap if you ask me.
Regardless of what you think,you are offending people.Intentionally or Unintentionally,idk and idc.So,please stop these derogatory comments and let's focus on the chess,shall we?
Why is there no Pakistani opening? Zindibado!
Makes NO SENSE, being old or older is not a prerequisite for having a chess opening named after you, the Jobava attack is named after Baadur Jabova who was born in 1983.
First against 1.d4 in Europa in times of Lasker almost Always 1...d5 was the responce. In this way you get for example 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 etc and you have a Queens gambit declined.
A very populair opening at that time. Also 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 the Slav defence is possible.
Later some others introduced the move 1....Nf6. And after 1.d4 Nf6 for example you have 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 the Nimzo-Indian defence. Or 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 the Queens Indian defence. Also possible is 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 the Kings Indian defence. Or after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 the Grünfeld - Indian defence. I believe that Aljechin didn t want to take this last one even serieus because I think he thought it was not even sound. Now all these defences are considert to be more modern. In this time it was new and revolutionairy and they give it the name Indian defences to them. I gues because it was new and completly different approach of the game as how it was played till then. The idea behind it was to not occupy the center with pawns but to let white have it and then later undermine it.
Or after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 the Grünfeld - Indian defence. I believe that Aljechin didn t want to take this last one even serieus because I think he thought it was not even sound.
I believe you confuse it with his assessment of Benoni (both 1...c5 and 1...Nf6 2...c5) -- see his annotations to the game vs. Levenfish at St. Petersburg 1912 in his Best Games collection. Alekhine employed the Grünfeld a dozen times, as early as the year of the above-mentioned tmt and several times in the 1935 Wch match, although there he scored only 1.5/5 with it because of blunders.
I mean this with absolutely no offense to anyone, but I always imagined it was because the Bishop reminds me of a man wearing a Pagri, so an Indian man.
So the King's Indian would be the opening with the Pagri wearing traditional Indian man on the King Side fianchettoed.
I know it is a pretty stupid theory. Please do not take it as an offense, it is not meant as one.
mohishunder is great