Chess Forum
[ mod this thread ] << - < - > - >>
| From | Message |
| spurtus 3/12/2004 06:30:53 [ report this post ] |
 Subject: KID questionMessage: You know when playing most KID lines, for black it is deemed wise to get in e5 or c5 as early as possible, typically this piece can be taken back immediately by a white pawn on d4, although from my experience often not, an advance reaction is seems quite typical. Question is, what is the theory or specific advantage black can get if the pawn is taken?... and is it roughly the same advantage and theory across most KID lines? Thanks, Spurtus. |
| philaretus 3/12/2004 06:56:55 [ report this post ] | The usual reason... Message: ....why White pushes on to d5 instead is that exchanging leads to a drawish position, with the d-file open and a symmetrical pawn-structure. If White (as is normally the case) is playing to win, and if he has sufficient positional sense, he will avoid such a continuation. |
| tyekanyk 3/12/2004 12:32:41 [ report this post ] | a more positional aproach Message: I would further say that the exchange of pawns on e5 instead of the usual advance gives Black a tiny positional edge namely d4. In all respects the d4 square is insailable where d5 is easily controled by playing c6. A model performance of such a game is the candidates match between Fischer and Larsen (6-0! Fischer). I can't remember the specific number of the game but that should be enough info to track it down. Hope the game will be enjoyable and my advice worthwhile. |
| philaretus 3/12/2004 15:18:46 [ report this post ] | ? Message: Meeting d5 with c6 can't be recommended. After dxc6, the Black Queen's pawn will be left weak and backward. Thereafter, White's game will almost play itself. The indicated strategy for Black is to try to undermine White's pawn-chain with f5 or (more difficult) b5. |
| atrifix 3/12/2004 15:36:34 [ report this post ] | Message: The Larsen-Fischer game is in Fischer's MSMG, which was written long before the candidates match (played in Monte Carlo, 1967). It was an interesting game. The reason KID exchange games are not quite as drawish as other exchange variations is because the pawn structure is asymmetrical (white has a hole on d4, which is his main problem in all of the KID variations). The resulting queenless middlegames are interesting, but theory shows that Black can equalize rather easily, which is not the case in other variations like the Bayonet attack. "Meeting d5 with c6 can't be recommended." I think what tyekanyk is saying is that after dxe5, Black can control the square d5 with the advance ...c6, but White cannot control d4 with a pawn, which is more or less accurate. "After dxc6, the Black Queen's pawn will be left weak and backward. Thereafter, White's game will almost play itself. The indicated strategy for Black is to try to undermine White's pawn-chain with f5 or (more difficult) b5. " This is simply not true. The KID is one of the most complex and difficult openings to play, and generalizations like this are usually false. |
| philaretus 3/13/2004 00:43:18 [ report this post ] | . Message: A "most complex and difficult opening". Hmmm....this could be a euphemism for "mediocre", or even "gets Black into trouble". I've heard it remarked on this forum that the King's Indian is more or less busted as a tournament opening. |
| atrifix 3/13/2004 02:43:12 [ report this post ] | Message: Well, it could be a euphemism, but it's not. I don't want to comment on the soundness of the KID. I won't offer any reams of theory (especially since I'm not really familiar with it), but suffice it to say that Black has had troubles with the Bayonet Attack. Whether or not the KID is "busted" is probably better left to the experts. What I meant was just what I said: that the positions resulting from the KID are complex and difficult, and making sweeping generalizations like "after dxc6, White's game will play itself" will very regularly get you into trouble, unless your opponent is Tarrasch. It happens that in the vast majority of cases when Black plays ...c6 (after a d4-d5 by White), White prefers to allow Black to capture on d5 and recapture cxd5, although in some cases dxc6 is clearly better, and in some cases even exd5 is better (and in others, even Nxd5). I'll outline a couple features of dxc6, but I won't go into much detail: First, and most obviously, dxc6 is a commital move. White relinquishes his cramping pawn in the center in exchange for play against d5 or d6, and further is allowing Black to activate his pieces. Black can respond with either ...Nxc6 or ...bxc6. ...Nxc6 is intended to rapidly develop and put more pressure on d4 (which is already very weak), while ...bxc6 gives Black a better structure and more of a hand in the center, plus an open b-file. Quite often Black will combine ...bxc6 with the advance ...d6-d5. Whether or not dxc6 is good or not depends upon the position. The trick to playing the KID (and chess in general) is to know when dxc6 is good and when it is not. Some examples: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 0-0 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 c6 (the main line) 8. dxc6?! and now either Nxc6 or bxc6 is good, but bxc6 followed by a quick ...d5 will at least equalize for Black. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 0-0 6. Be2 Nc6 7. 0-0 e5 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 c5 10. dxc6? bxc6 will again at least equalize for Black. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 0-0 6. Be2 Nbd7 7. 0-0 e5 8. d5 c6? 9. dxc6 bxc6 10. Qxd6+- OK, this is a little extreme, but cases where dxc6 is good for long-term structure are not too common. Of course, the best example of dxc6 is Averbakh-Spassky, where Spassky was willing to give up an entire piece to force dxc6! In short: beware of sweeping generalizations, and always look at all factors of the position. |
| baseline 3/13/2004 02:57:04 [ report this post ] | philaretus Message: I have a friend that says Neil Armstrong never walked on the moon, it was all a hollywood stunt. The KID is still being played in tournaments, but it has lost alot of it's popularity now that the big names are not using it. To play the KID well requires a tremdous amount of skill and judgement. Indeed it is easy to get into trouble. |
| spurtus 3/17/2004 03:38:30 [ report this post ] | Message: Thank you for your kind input... quality stuff!.... I too find the KID is a nightmare to play well, but a mate of mine tells me that it is all in how you play your knights as black, moving them to seemingly obscure or bad positions, only to pounce back with initiatives later on. Can anybody offer advice on how to play the knights in typical KID lines? I cant visualise these tactics at all! Regards, Spurtus |
| caldazar 3/17/2004 12:59:45 [ report this post ] | Message: There's no such thing as a "typical KID line." The various lines are quite different. Will Black try for ...c5 or ...e5/f5? Apply pressure to e4 or d4 (or somewhere else)? What is White doing? All this planning determines where the knights should be posted. A (relatively) easy way to determine knight play (and piece play in general) is to envision a fantasy position. Visualize a position for which you're aiming and figure out which squares the knights should be placed on in order to help you continue to carry out the idea behind your fantasy setup. For instance, in a classical setup, you might think of a d6, e5, f5, g6 pawn structure with a bishop on g7, king on g8, rook on e8. There, you might want knights on e7 and f6, e7 and h5, or f6 and h5 (just as an example, maybe you don't want the knights there at all; maybe you want a knight on c5, etc...). The rest is then just a matter of choosing the most efficient route to get your knights to those fantasy posts (which is not necessarily the shortest route). |
| caldazar 3/17/2004 13:01:16 [ report this post ] | Err.... Message: That should be "...king on g8, rook on f8." Doesn't make much sense to play for ...f5 with a rook on e8. |
| ccmcacollister 3/19/2004 06:37:37 [ report this post ] | Spurtus, yes... Message: Sac the knights |
Post a reply to this message: |
