What about 7...Bxd5 ?
Why Don't Pros Push Pawn to D5 in King's Indian Defense?
Sort:
Jun 16, 2014
0
#3
Your line of play is horrid. Why are you pushing both e6 and g6?
White's line of play is just as stupid. Like the other poster mentioned, why not 7...Bxd5?
After 1.d4 Nf6, 2.d5 is just a waste of time. Just play 2...e6 here and attackt he pawn. At this point, abandon the fianchetto. And before you go on this rampage saying "but I play the King's Indian". Well, White didn't play 2.c4, did it? It's no longer a King's Indian now, is it? That's what I thought!
Therefore, 2...e6! It demonstrates why GMs don't play stupid moves like d5, overextending himself before he develops anything.
Clearly, if you can't see hanging pieces, you can't see that taking the Knight on f6 loses the queen (not that playing ...Ke7 is much better), then the validity of you questioning why the pros don't play such-and-such is about ZERO! You should be learning the basics of how not to hang pieces rather than questioning the best moves in the opening.
Jun 16, 2014
0
#4
Well, Thriller is a bit harsh with his comments 
Basically, pros don't play those moves because theory has shown that they are inadequate. It doesn't mean they're unplayable or stupid, just that they are not strong enough for pro players.
At my level, 2.d5 doesn't looks unplayable, and if you think this move is interesting, you may want to try it from the white side of the board, and see what happens
I honesly think you should stop worring completely about opening theory, just try to put one or two pawns in the centre, develop pieces and stop any pawns breaks before rooks are connected. Also you weaken your king a lot by playing e6 after g6.
The problem is that you hanging pieces in a very silly way - Maybe some basic tactical training for 1000elo players would help.
Similar to your previous post were you saying you were destroyed in Sicilian and you kind of put responsibility for a bad play on the opening choice, but the opening has nothing to do with it.
Apr 27, 2023
0
#6
Any given move is only good or bad in its specific situation.
Any pawn move loses control of the squares diagonally forward from the previous square it was on. Advanced pawns can be isolated and a source of continued irritation. They can also become overextended. Most good players try to develop pieces to effective squares more than pushing pawns around unnecessarily.
Apr 28, 2023
0
#7
Ultimate-trashtalker wrote:
That's such a bad move by white as it is not backed by the opening principle "don't move same piece twice in the opening".... it's as simple as that
Plenty of openings have pieces moving more than once. Think of the Open Sicilian where the g1 Knight often goes from g1-f3-d4-b3 or the Ruy Lopez where the b1 Knight hops from b1-d2-f1-e3 while the f1 Bishop goes to b5-a4-c2.
In this game, in which I got crushed early, the opponent pushed Pawn to D5 early. I resigned after losing the Queen:
This is a continuation of my series entitled, "Why Don't the Pros . . ." Previous threads featuring my getting crushed also include:
"Why Don't Pros Push Pawn to E5 Against King's Indian Defense?"
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/why-dont-pros-push-pawn-to-e5-against-kings-indian-defense
"Why Don't Pros Push Pawn to E5 Against Scicilian Defense?"
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/why-dont-pros-push-pawn-to-e5-against-scicilian-defense