KIA question, please help

Ah that is sad.

I know what you are going through.

I lost my chess score book from 1981-83/84 over 300 games some were
glorious wins from when I was at my peak. I gave up playing after that for 10 years.
Except for league chess and the occasional tournament.
(not cos I lost the book - it was work).

Then I chess bonkers and would often have a game every night of the week
I was a member of three clubs so could play in 3 club championships.
I won the 1st Dragons C.C. during this time and the Scottish Open - but
have thes games thanks to bulletin and games appearing in print.

Paul in another thread asked to see some other games I played,
I wish he had not cos it brought back pangs of despair.
I feel like an artist who has lost all his work in a fire.

Ah well.....

In that book is a game in 1983 where I played my first postional move.
I was graded over 2000. It was the first time I ever made a move
with the sole purpose of positional play.

(it was a wee combo that won no material just left him pawns on
the same colour as his bishop - and I won it easily).

See SG and ask him to retro the game for you. 😉

(PS - the system found your game that dull it just decided to scrap it) 😉

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Rob.

" I want to play positional chess. "

Then why are you weakening your pawn structure to fianchetto a Bishop?

I like the piano reference but beauty is in the eye (or in the case the ear)
of the beholder.

There was a guy in the Royal Oak who used to play a melody on the bar piano,
he started of with the boogie-woogie, some rag time, t ...[text shortened]... enger ship with Captain Timid at the helm, break out the cucumber sandwiches.} [/pgn]

When you look at the GMs who have played the KIA against the French, such as Fischer, Stein, and Bronstein, I don't think timidity is the right word.

I think sometimes we get caught up in single moves during the opening, when in reality they can only be judged in the context of the other moves played, and it is the resulting position after several moves that allows us to define the character of the game.

(One of my favorite examples as a long-time King's Indian Defense player is watching the Four Pawn Attack evolve from the 1. c4 move order. White plays 1. c4 with all the attendant English Opening positional stereotypes, but the game becomes progressively sharper with every move until after move 5 when White ends up with a huge pawn phalanx and thoughts of the English have all but disappeared).

The KIA scores well against the French, and it very often yields positions where White actually gets an attack, as opposed to the otherwise unavoidable Exchange Variation.

I also think that there is a bit of a psychological element in that 2. d3 guarantees that the game will take on a position and character that is not part of the "normal" French Defense motif, and takes the game down a different path. White makes sure e4 is solid, and then uses it as a pivot to swing his army around like a roundhouse punch right into the black king position.

Black gets his share of play, but it's certainly no worse than any other system against the French, and it's a great deal better than many.

The King's Indian is a Black opening, playing it as White is cheating.

You might just as well sit down and spin the board around giving yourself
the Black pieces.

If Morphy had gone for the KIA at the Opera. !.e4 e5 2.d3 then the
world would not have seen the greatest game ever played.

I think when you were at high school you played chess for the hand
of the lovely Jenifer Eccles and lost her to Bully Beefo because you
had an undefended Bishop on c4.

Since that fateful day you have set yourself a quest to see every White
King's Bishop condemned to a miserable existance on g2.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
The King's Indian is a Black opening, playing it as White is cheating.

You might just as well sit down and spin the board around giving yourself
the Black pieces.

If Morphy had gone for the KIA at the Opera. !.e4 e5 2.d3 then the
world would not have seen the greatest game ever played.

I think when you were at high school you played chess for ...[text shortened]... t yourself a quest to see every White
King's Bishop condemned to a miserable existance on g2.

I definitely wouldn't play 2. d3 against 1. ... e5, especially since 2. f4 is available.

And starting out with a light touch is a very effective technique to lead to mate, at high school or any time! 😉

Chess openings should come with a warranty. I would not have learned Alekhine's defense had I known that no one plays the 4 pawns attack

Originally posted by CaptainBIdseye
Chess openings should come with a warranty. I would not have learned Alekhine's defense had I known that no one plays the 4 pawns attack

That's too funny! I quit playing the Sicilian because no one plays 3. d4. 😞

Gee, I don't know Rob, maybe try playing a NORMAL French.

Originally posted by ChessPraxis
Gee, I don't know Rob, maybe try playing a NORMAL French.

ok my friend, now you are repeating yourself, do tell, what is a normal French?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ok my friend, now you are repeating yourself, do tell, what is a normal French?

That is the million dollar question.
I have tried everything but the KIA against it.

Originally posted by ChessPraxis
That is the million dollar question.
I have tried everything but the KIA against it.

then you must become a disciple of the KIA, it is your destiny!

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
That's too funny! I quit playing the Sicilian because no one plays 3. d4. 😞

The irony of the Sicilian is at the club level you will just face Alapin's, Grand Prix and Smith Morra's and then when you get to the level where people play it you will ditch it because your opponents have memorized the drawing lines in the sveshnikov or such.. haha.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Against the french i usually try the KIA, its easy and the strategy is fairly simple, get in e5, try to
dominate the dark squares kingside, swap off blacks dark squared bishop and see if you can mate his king,
however i have always had trouble when black denies me the opportunity of getting in e5,there is no plan b so to speak.
In a recent gam ...[text shortened]... t
contest the d5 square which is now firmly in white control - kind regards in advance Robbie.

Whats wrong with 9.Nc4 right away? if 9...Qxd1 10.Rxd1 Nxe4 11.Nfxe5 if 11...Nxe5 then 12.Nxe5 Nf6 13.Nc6! trading off the dark bishop or 12...f5 13.g4! g6 14.gxf5 gxf5 15.Bf3 or 14...Bxf5 15.Bxe4 Bxe4 16.Rd7

Originally posted by tomtom232
Whats wrong with 9.Nc4 right away? if 9...Qxd1 10.Rxd1 Nxe4 11.Nfxe5 if 11...Nxe5 then 12.Nxe5 Nf6 13.Nc6! trading off the dark bishop or 12...f5 13.g4! g6 14.gxf5 gxf5 15.Bf3 or 14...Bxf5 15.Bxe4 Bxe4 16.Rd7

nothing is wrong with it, its perfectly playable as the knight is destined for d5 via e3, its just the pawn structure that was of interest, how one might better exploit whites theoretical advantage. In the game that i lost i played tactically and suffered as a consequence of a dodgy combination.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
The King's Indian is a Black opening, playing it as White is cheating.

You might just as well sit down and spin the board around giving yourself
the Black pieces.

If Morphy had gone for the KIA at the Opera. !.e4 e5 2.d3 then the
world would not have seen the greatest game ever played.

I think when you were at high school you played chess for ...[text shortened]... t yourself a quest to see every White
King's Bishop condemned to a miserable existance on g2.

Hey GP i think you're being a little harsh here. Larsen who, we all know was one of the most attack minded players ever was a lover of the KB Fianchetto. He woulld often play simple reverse openings such as The Pirc and what he referred to as Alekhines defence reversed which was really a Pirc set up as white with a delayed d3 which invites black to play e4 dislodging the N on f3. He had some spectacuar wins with this type of opening.
Here's one against Donner from 1959
Game posted below.

A real corker!