King's Indian Attack Done Right

Originally posted by exigentsky
"KIA is definitely not for the layman. "

Oh really, the reason I even selected it was because I thought it was meant to be a good opening for beginners. That's what I read on Exeter Chess, here: http://chessb.demonweb.co.uk/chessweb/Openings/sic10.html

What do you guys, think is KIA too much for a novice?

BTW: What's the purpose of a2-a4 in the KIA?

Oh, hogwash, you always have someone saying that about every opening. The fact is you should start with the Guioco Piano as a beginner, because it teaches you rapid develop of your pieces and many other Morphian principles. Paul Morphy games are the best games to study for beginners, because they are straight forward and are based in solid principles. But, if a beginner plays the KIA and learns development of the center - and the many other beginning principles ( i.e. don't develop your Queen early, fight for control of the center four squares, castle early) - then I don't see anything wrong with it. But, wouldn't a player who has never played chess and is just learning fair better beginning with the Guioco Piano? Yes!

Originally posted by powershaker
Oh, hogwash, you always have someone saying that about every opening. The fact is you should start with the Guioco Piano as a beginner, because it teaches you rapid develop of your pieces and many other Morphian principles. Paul Morphy games are the best games to study for beginners, because they are straight forward and are based in solid principles. ...[text shortened]... o has never played chess and is just learning fair better beginning with the Guioco Piano? Yes!

Well done, you've managed to contradict yourself quite spectacularly!

First you say that he shouldn't play KIA as it is not suitable for someone who has a weak tactical ability, then recommend the Guioco Piano, which can contain some very complicated tactical lines!

The KIA is a positional opening for the most part, especially compared with some of the 1) e4 lines. Maybe he is a positional player, and the KIA may suit his style, maybe he is a tactic player, in which case a sharper opening will be more fitting.

Don't just rubbish what the guy is saying and then make broad sweeping statements a la 'Morphy's games are best to study' 'GP is best opening for beginners'...

Its usually taken that tactical ability is developed a lot faster than positional play, hence most weaker players games are decided by tactical oversights, not a bad positional plan. Most beginners can improve a fair bit just by studying a tactics book for a bit ('Mastering Chess Tactics' by N. McDonald is one i personally like). Positional play can take a lot more time to develop.
For example, most weaker players have very poor endgames (not all, admittedly, but most), and can quite easily lose against a stronger player even if they reach a good endgame. More than coincedentally, the endgame is mainly positional as opposed to tactical.

So in retrospect, if he is not an attacking, tactically-based player, he may choose the KIA, with which he may struggle at first, but the benefit to his positional game over time will be well worth it.

playing an universal setup like the KIA will reduce the amount of time spent studying chess openings, but it will make the person pretty boring chess-wise. you'll see the same themes, the same strategies, the same pawn structures ... variety is the spice of life.