which do you pefer, kings Indian defense or nimzo-

The Nimzo is better because it controls the centre more

You really can't say that.  The point of both openings is completely different.  One of them is another way, besides declining the Queen's Gambit, to prevent e4.  The other specifically allows e4 out of White and tries to chip away at White's big center.

Trying to say that the Nimzo-Indian is better than the King's Indian is like saying that Trouble is better than Hungry Hungry Hippos.  Both are kids games, but that is about all they have in common.  The Nimzo-Indian and King's Indian are both Queen Pawn Openings.  Beyond that, they aren't even comparable!

They are only comparable in the sense that both of them is a hypermodern opening... i.e. controlling the centre with pieces rather than pawns. For players who prefer slugfest positional and dynamic battles, King's Indian is ideal for them.... as it was mastered by two of the greatest aggressive player Kasparov and Fischer whereas for a calm, patience player like Capablanca or Karpov preferred the Nimzo-Indian Defence.

both are lame, grunfeld is where its at.

The Grunfeld sux!

I'd play a sorry London System as White before I'd play the Black side of the Grunfeld again, and that says a lot given what I've had to say about the London System in the past!

Grunfeld is thuglife, not for mamas boys XD

the nimzo is positional, the KID is aggressive BUT i think this is a bit oversimplified for the KID. they are strong positional elements in the KID as well, and black should be wise not to forfeit these for the sake of an attack or white will leave black in a very sorry endgame. 

compare the KID to french advanced lines where black goes for the big queenside pawnstorm. are those lines positional or aggressive? the thing is, in the KID the winning kingside expansion happens to lead to checkmate, in those french advanced lines, the queenside expansion if successful leads to a won endgame . to call the KID aggressive just bc the kingside happens to be where white king is, misses the positional elements,

now compare sicilian with KID. with the exception of the closed sicilian, black doesnt rely nearly as much on long pawn chains and "tides" of pieces aiming at a side of the board. forcing tactics and concrete lines is more what you see.

tl  : dr version:   agressive vs positional plane doesnt do a dynamic opening like KID justice. it has strong elements of both.

This is very close to hitting the mail on the head.

Those that have followed other threads about pawn structure have seen me say that the concept of "sister openings" where Black's pawns are identical, like the KID and Pirc or QGD and French or Slab and Caro-Kann is bogus and that openings should be paired up based on the type of center, not Black's pawns alone, and have always advocated the French Defense to Kings Indian players and vice versa.  They mesh together because the ideas are the same even though one sees white attack kingside and the other sees black do that.

it is no wonder that my primary defense to e4 is the French with the Petroff as my secondary and to d4, it is the King's Indian with the Dutch via 1...e6 being my secondary.

The French, say it aint so,  Only three openings worth considering, English, Sicilian and Grunfeld, all else are paint by numbers   KID was busted with the Bayonet attack by Shirov and Krambo.

True. Small detail: I have stopped playing the bayonet because black is absolutely fine in the 9...Nh5 lines.

This just shows how little you keep up with theory.  The Bayonet Attack put a scare to the King's Indian back in 1996 and 1997.  Since then, answers were found for the Baynoet and nobody plays it any more because 10 years after that problem period in the mid-to-late 90s, what has been found for Black not only survives, but fully equalizes now-a-days that nobody plays 9.b4 any more.

You assure me an Anti-Sicilian and I'd play the Sicilian all day and twice on Sunday.  Open Sicilian?  White's better.  PASS!

The Grunfeld gives White too mobile of a center - NO THANKS!

English?  Eh, it's ok.  I play it myself sometimes - Predominantly the Symmetrical Variation as I open 1.Nf3, not 1.c4, and against 1...c5 I'll go into a Symmetrical English, but against other lines, I usually transpose elsewhere, and avoid 1...e5 of course.

For example,

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.d4 is a King's Indian.

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.dxc3! is an Anti-Grunfeld

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 is a Queen's Gambit - 3...dxc4 = Accepted, 3...e6 = Declined (I'll play 4.g3 and you are now in a Catalan), 3...c6 = Slav.

So outside the Symmetrical, even the English I mostly avoid!

damn, the bust is bust!

I wont be taking any lessons from a Frenchie, that for sure.

Your loss!

I prefer the  Dzindi  King's Indian!!!

Nimzo is  easier  to understand.All world champion  has been playing nimzo.Even fisher the greastest KID expert has use nimzo as second defence aganist d4.

Baloney!

Plus, what's with the handle?  Sam Waterson is not dead!  Still kicking at 77 years of age!

Here is my game against the KID 9....Nh5 line when I used to play 1.d4 before I became of age and switched to 1.c4, Black is practically busted!  I never won the game because I did not find the correct continuation, but it was nothing to do with the opening.  If I had found 28.g4 instead of playing the wussie 28.g3 I think I could have done better.  Notice the beautiful exchange sacrifice 19.Rxe5 which I think was Shirovs idea.