Kids playing KID

I noticed there are many kids who play the KID, almost exclusively against everything but 1 e4.  Is there a particular reason for this?  Is the KID easier to understand or easier to play?

They're little puss puss scaredy cats who can't play a real defense, that's the reason!  If they had some real men to look up to instead of these feminized weenie 2000's modern males they would play some tough defenses like I did when I was growing up.

For pun purposes possibly?

Just wondering: Does having a good memory help more in the KID versus in other openings?  

Cuz I hardly find any kids playing Nimzo-Indian, where one has to think analytically and critically most of the time, rather than being able to rely on memorized analyses from well-known GM games.

It might just be common where you live. I know of a lot of adults in my area that play the KID, but relatively few kids who play it (Which is a little surprizing because the adults I know who play it are coaches). I come across more kids who play the Nimzo, Semi Slav, and QGD where I live.

On the other hand if you are coming across these kids from a lot of different areas playing it online, then I'm not really sure what the reason could be other than for the pun. 

Although there is tons of theory in the KID, it is hardly just a "play from memorization" defense, if that is your approach then you will get steamrolled.  There are tons of different positional ideas that you have to know to be able to correctly handle the space disadvantage.  I don't understand why you think that the Nimzo requires "analytic and critical" thinking as opposed to any other opening, all positions require said thinking and the Nimzo has just as much theory as the KID!  

Huh?  Sad attempt at trolling, but the KID is one of the balliest defenses that Black can play against 1.d4.  

Probably because nearly every line of the KID involves black attacking on the kingside.  Kids often enjoy attacking and combinations and the KID often offers a position where this type of play is available and correct.

The KID and Nimzo both have massive amounts of theory, but the Nimzo is much more dynamic in terms of plans.  In one line black is trying a mating attack, in another it's white.  In one line you aim for an endgame, in another piece play in the middlegame.  Your play is in the center now it's on the queenside and on and on.

So also appealing is the KID also offers (usually) a very clear cut plan for both sides in every game.

How can anyone who does not know the first thing about the KID claim to understand the Nimzo?

If you want to frustrate the ever attacking player in the KID you could try the g3 variations.  There's also a sideline I saw once with g4 being played (forgot which variation, sorry)... I guess it makes f5 less playable?  It looked anti positional to me but it was some GM playing so it must have ideas.

@waffllemaster I think your answer sounds pretty good.

@majipoor They're different openings.  So, you can know about the Nimzo-Indian without knowing much about the KID.

@Fixing_A_Hole First, some of the kids described do get steamrolled, so maybe they do use memorization.  Second, it is true that the KID has a lot of strategy and positional play.  For instance, Soltis devotes at least one chapter of "Pawn Structure Chess" to the KID.  But, I think that if one wants to use memorization as the main way to learn the opening, it might be easier to do so with the KID than the Nimzo, given the many permutations in strategy in the Nimzo (as described by waffllemaster).  

@Mersaphe I said "many kids."  That is in a descriptive sense - "many" based on what I observe with the kids I know and "kids" to describe their general age (under 12).  It is not to demean anyone.  Also, "many kids" (as opposed to "all kids") allows for the possibility, even the probability, that some kids do play something other than the KID, such as the Nimzo-Indian or the Grunfeld or whatever.

g4 is played somewhat regularly in the Samisch/Makaganov lines.  Or do you mean in the fianchetto lines?  I think I've seen the g3/h3/g4(not consecutive) idea before as well but not sure if that's what you are referring to.  

Generalize much?

IRONLUNGCANCER: The Chess.com version of Jeff Dunham's cantankerous character "Walter"! 

This, with some caveat. Past somewhere between 1800 and 2100, playing the KID like a barbarian (ie not caring about the move order or White's options) will get you slaughtered. It is not really that there is less theory than in the Nimzo, it is that the theory relies on specific lines whereas in the Nimzo you cannot go very wrong if you know the ideas of each line.

So as it seems easy to play the KID ("attack, attack, attack") and hard to play the Nimzo ("OMG so many lines !"), it is just an illusion that dissipates at higher levels.

That's the g4 variation wafflemaster

LOL!!!! NomadicNight, you nailed it! First thing I thought of after reading that post was Walter :-)