Why I Stopped Playing The King's Indian

Introduction

If you start with a first move other than 1.e4, you're going to have to be ready for the King's Indian Defence (KID).

The King's Indian is one of the most popular defences to 1.d4, due to three main reasons:

1. Black can play it against nearly anything White does;
2. It's one of the most aggressive openings vs.1.d4;
3. Many people's favourite chess player is either Fischer or Kasparov, and both of them played mainly the King's Indian as Black.

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/rjvGKNgD

My Early Experiences

I first learned the King's Indian at 9 years of age, when I was just starting to get into tournament play, under the instruction of my coach at the time, IM John-Paul Wallace. (Actually, he originally suggested the Benko Gambit for me, and nearly two decades later, I would use that opening to reach a top 50 ranking (twice) in online blitz, but that's a story for another time!)

The big advantage of learning the King's Indian as a kid is that it's a great learning tool. It forces you to play aggressively, put pressure on the opponent and learn how to play closed positions well (and some open structures too, with ...exd4/Nxd4).

Much like most King's Indian players, my big dream in this opening was to pawn storm my opponent's king on the kingside, and checkmate them in a beautiful attack. The following game (which I have analyzed previously in lessons and courses of mine) is a great demonstration:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/AnbM3WJV

The Flip Side

However, there are also some practical disadvantages to playing the King's Indian, which I started to experience when playing the King's Indian at the 1800+ level (and especially at the 2100+ level).

The first is that, even though the King's Indian is a 'system opening', in that Black plays the same first 5 moves each time, Black needs to know different ways to play against White's possible variations, or he can easily end up in a strategically difficult position without much counterplay.

The following upset loss of mine is one example, where I got move ordered into a Maroczy Bind structure with very little counterplay:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/cXuGguX3

Even Kasparov Gave Up The King's Indian

Incidentally, I'm far from the only player to stop playing the King's Indian. The all-time greatest KID expert, Garry Kasparov, also stopped playing this opening - mainly due to the Bayonet Variation with 9.b4!, which also gave me a ton of headaches as a junior. (It was so annoying that I even started playing it with White, with much better results).

Vladimir Kramnik was the big champion of the Bayonet Attack for White in the 1990s, and he defeated Kasparov several times in this variation (even before he claimed the World Championship title from Kasparov in late 2000). Here's one example, where Black's knight on f4 only gets in the way of his usual kingside pawn storm attack:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/r39xhnMS

Kasparov later tried to improve on Black's opening in a blitz game, but still lost:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/V6njwcB1

It's quite telling that, in their 2000 World Championship Match, Kasparov did not play the King's Indian once against Kramnik (preferring the solid Queen's Gambit Accepted and Nimzo-Indian after a Game 1 loss in the Grunfeld).

Giving White All The Choices

Before the 2007 Malaysian Open, I had admittedly faced some problems in the King's Indian in my games. However, I would analyze each game with my coach, then check the theory to make sure I was ready the next time I faced the same variation.

The problem with this, however, is that my opponent could choose what variation to play against the King's Indian, while I had to be ready for all of them.

The following two games of mine from mid-2007 show this problem. In the first game, against Igor Bjelobrk (who was not yet an IM, but already playing at that level), I deviated from a previous loss against him with 9...Nh5, only to mix up the plans for Black and get outplayed quite convincingly. (I realized that the KID wasn't a good opening to play against him, but at the time I didn't have any other defences to 1.d4).

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/Rr94IaHz

The next game was a lot more painful, as I lost to a lower-rated player who simply repeated a line I'd lost to previously, played solid moves and allowed me to self-destruct in my failed attempts to attack White's king:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/ezsjOQYO

The Feather, The Brick And The Truck

Such experiences may have been enough to convince most to give up the opening.

One of three things will get you to change: The feather, the brick or the truck.

The feather is the gentle nudge, that tickles you into the thought that maybe you should do something else. (my loss to Igor)

The brick hits you and hurts quite a bit as it knocks you down, but you're able to get back up. The pain is enough to dissuade many from repeating the experience, but not all. (my loss to Ian)

The truck, on the other hand, completely takes you out, causing grievous bodily harm and ensuring that you will never have the same functioning again.

The Fateful Tournament

In my case, the 'truck' was the 2007 Malaysian Open, where I performed amazingly as White (with 5/6), but only achieved one draw in 5 Black games! (and the draw was from a Sicilian).

Going into the tournament, I felt confident that I was improving and could perform well above my rating, especially after a round 1 draw with Li Chao (who was already rated over 2500 at the time, and went on to win the tournament). But the King's Indian was my sore point that really let me down.

The first game is one where I prepared an interesting idea on move 12 to surprise my opponent, but still got outplayed:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/ypgaf5Rb

That was the 'feather' - it would not be fair to blame the loss on the opening, given that my opponent outrated me by nearly 300 points.

In the second game, I surprised my FIDE Master opponent in the opening and gained an early time advantage, only to misplay a fantastic endgame out of the opening, and in a sense, outplay myself:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/UP9dQ3hL

That was painful (the brick), but I could justify things by saying that the opening was objectively a big success.

The Truck That Killed The KID

Here's the game that made me finally give up the King's Indian:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/F2GCEyX1

What likely frustrated me the most about the game was not just that I lost to a lower-rated player, who honestly didn't make any serious mistakes this whole game. But rather, that I had spent a lot of time preparing this 12...Na6 sideline against the Four Pawns Attack using a Yearbook Survey by GM Grivas, only to be blown off the board as if I'd never looked at the King's Indian in all my life.

That was the moment where I finally realized...

The King's Indian just doesn't suit my style at all!

And You Thought I Was Stubborn...

Even though I eventually gave up the King's Indian (and gained nearly 200 rating points in all time controls very soon after I did), I know many more players in Australia who kept playing the King's Indian through their entire career, rarely playing anything different against 1.d4.

Because the King's Indian takes quite a lot of effort to understand (at least compared to the 1.d4 d5 systems), once someone starts playing it, they normally never give it up.

It becomes a twisted addiction, where no other defence to 1.d4 satisfies that craving to attack White's king (or, failing that, to channel your inner Kasparov or Fischer).

In my own experience, I faced the King's Indian more than any other defence to 1.d4 - and I was playing 1.d4 a lot in my youth!

The 1.d4 Player's Greatest Fear

In my experience, the opening that 1.d4 players typically fear the most is the King's Indian.

While most other defences to 1.d4 allow White to relax a little bit and steadily build up our position in a strategic middlegame, the King's Indian creates an early war where all guns are blazing, and our opponent is clearly dead-set on killing us.

I remember that back in 2020, when I was trying to break 3000 blitz on the dark side with a 1.d4/2.c4 repertoire, I was performing at a 3000+ level against the Nimzo and in the Queen's Gambit, but would lose a lot of the time against GMs in the King's Indian, in a fashion somewhat resembling this game:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/lnnQDAcz

If I had played the system I now know to be the strongest today in those games, I am pretty sure that I would have won at least half the games I lost, and easily broken the 'magical' 3000 barrier. (Perhaps it's not too late for me?)

Close But No Cigar

In my view, the most effective system against the King's Indian (both from a practical and an objective perspective) is the h3 variation of the King's Indian. The h3 systems are called 'The Makogonov Variation', after this win against one of the pioneers of the KID at a high level:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/xQbRUwPR

However, it turns out the move order is surprisingly important in terms of extracting an opening advantage as White.

While could definitely enjoy good results with the 5.Nf3 0-0 6.h3 variation by deeply studying the games of the two biggest experts, GMs Michal Krasenkow and Evgeny Tomashevsky. The problem is that Black is able to anticipate White's standard plan of 6...e5 7.d5 and the g4 break (taking the sting out of ...f5) by first playing 7...Nh5!, preparing ...f5 but also allowing Black to meet g4 with ...Nf4.

The following recent classical game is a standard example, where Black was able to continually disrupt White with active counterplay, and the newly-minted Croatian GM was unable to keep control over the position:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/KCxRs1g0

Black won a lot more games like this in the database recently, suggesting that in practice his chances are by no means inferior.

The Best Square For The Bishop

If 6.Nf3 is not the best move, it has to be either 6.Be3 or 6.Bg5 - but which one?

In the past, 6.Bg5 was thought to be the more precise bishop development, as it avoids 6...e5 due to 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Nd5, winning a pawn. It was played quite successfully in Australia by the Victorian players Bobby Cheng and Kanan Izzat, who were possibly following John Watson's 6.Bg5 recommendation from his book 'A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire For White'. (To be fair, Watson does also touch on 6.Be3 as an alternative).

Perhaps the most famous game with 6.Bg5 is the following brilliancy from the 2021 FIDE Grand Swiss tournament, where White plays a very strong dynamic and strategic queen sacrifice for two minor pieces:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/S3wjBtxb

However, there are two (related) disadvantages for White in playing 6.Bg5 over 6.Be3.

The first is that Black can play in the spirit of the Benko Gambit with 6...a6 7.Nf3 c5 8.d5 b5, when White is unable to win a pawn on b5 due to ...Nxe4! and ...Qa5 tactics. The following game is a nice demonstration of Black's chances:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/46Gikxeo

The second issue is that Black can transition to a Modern Benoni with 6...c5 7.d5 e6 8.Bd3 exd5, where 9.exd5 is no longer effective when Black can give a check on the e-file (avoiding the ideal Nf3/0-0 setup), but after 9.cxd5, Black can play by analogy to the 'Modern Main Line' of the Modern Benoni (with Nf3 in place of Bg5) by 9...b5!, sacrificing a pawn but getting good play for it on the dark squares after 10.Bxb5 h6 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Nf3 Nd7 and ...Rb8.

In the highest-level game to feature 9...b5, Tomashevsky tried declining the 9...b5 gambit, but was soon worse:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/FZyCHANN

While 6.Bg5 may catch out an inexperienced King's Indian player, it's not as strong as my main recommendation.

Why I'll Never Play The King's Indian Again

The real reason I will never play the King's Indian again is the 5.h3 0-0 6.Be3! variation, known as the 'Karpov Variation' by those who really want to show off their chess erudition.

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/Qq2eTgY5

This system is currently the most trendy against the King's Indian at the high level, and it's noteworthy that many of the biggest King's Indian experts as Black like to play this way as White too!

No Kingside Pawn Storm For Black

The first point is that after 6...e5 7.d5, White will continue with g4 and make it hard for Black to get kingside counterplay with ...f5. The following game shows why the structure with the e4-outpost after the exchanges on f5 is so grim for Black:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/FyJzTCdp

As we see, the endgames are typically quite passive for Black in the King's Indian. Also note that 7...Nh5 (which was annoying with Nf3 in place of Be3) is longer no effective after 8.g3!, when Be2 next move will kick the knight back to f6, making the whole knight expedition pointless.

Move Ordering Into A Maroczy Bind

The other difference is that we can meet 6...c5 with 7.Nf3, transposing to a Maroczy Bind structure after 7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 that is very promising for White. The game below, between the two top French players, shows how even the world's best players can greatly struggle without enough space for their pieces:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/71DkkcVz

By the way, if you prefer the Benoni structures, you can also play 7.d5 for a significant advantage as White. It's one of the things I love about the 5.h3 0-0 6.Be3 variation - you can play it quite a few different ways, and even if you forgot the exact move to play at some point, White has enough strong moves to choose from (due to the strategic nature of the position) to maintain an advantage.

White's The One Attacking On The Kingside!

One of the things people love most about this 5.h3 0-0 6.Be3 system against the King's Indian is that, instead of Black attacking White on the kingside, we are the ones charging our kingside pawns forward and attacking Black's king instead!

The following game is a pretty clear demonstration of White's standard attacking plan:

https://lichess.org/study/8q6X3jgB/LWt63NtG

I remember that when I was about 11 years old (back in 2004), I would try to execute a similar attack in the Samisch King's Indian, with 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 c6 8.Qd2 Nbd7 9.d5 cxd5 10.cxd5 a6 11.g4 and Ng3/h4-h5. However, the problem is that Black can easily avoid this with 6...c5 or 6...a6 for a decent game, whereas Black's attempts to avoid ...e5 in the 5.h3 0-0 6.Be3 systems lead to passive positions with minimal counterplay.

Ready To Play h3 Against The King's Indian?

We are nearing the end of our journey through the King's Indian, and we can draw some clear conclusions:

- The King's Indian is a very dynamic opening where the price of one mistake by either side will be quite high (especially in the lines where Black pawn storms our king);
- I found the King's Indian too demanding to play, but it's something you will face a lot in your own games;
- The initial move orders are important - playing h3 with Nf3 or Bg5 will only give White the better side of equality.

And most importantly:

- The h3/Be3 systems are very easy for White to play and win with, since our plans are easy to understand and execute. Even if we forgot something or play a second-best move, we'll still come out of the opening with an advantage.

The Computer's Verdict

In the past, the computers would be quite weak in closed positions like the King's Indian, due to not having the depth of analysis or understanding to find the right plans, or to appreciate the long-term nature of the kingside pawn storm attack.

However, now the chess engines play very close to perfect chess (at least when given enough time) - even the world's best correspondence chess players are hard-pressed to beat a 'pure' engine player nowadays.

So when Stockfish 15 gives White an evaluation of +0.80 after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.h3! 0-0 6.Be3!, we should take it seriously and realize that Black is going to have a very hard time getting his usual KID counterplay in this line, let alone equalizing the chances. (To be fair, I think White is only slightly better after 6.Be3, but Black has to play very precisely to prove it).

However, all too often I see players just look at the engine evaluation and stop there, instead of really understanding the position, how it plays out and how to convert that advantage into a win in our games.

That's where the next step comes in...

The Next Step

If you got this far, it's clear that you are serious about improving your chess, and about never having to worry about the King's Indian Defence in your games again!

Instead, you will be extremely happy and a bit excited whenever your opponent plays this opening...

Once you have my brand new course 'Crushing The King's Indian With 5.h3', with 5.5 hours of world-class video training from me, you'll know how to:

• Get The Advantage Against All Of Black's Frequent Continuations;
• Execute The Strongest Plans And Ideas In The Typical Middlegame Positions;
• Convert Your Clear/Winning Advantage Into Victory With Over 40 Analyzed Model Games

You already have a pretty good feel of my coaching style from this blog, so if you liked this free post, you'll love the paid course!

A Sneak Peek Inside The Course

Of course, I understand that you want to make the most informed decision possible, and therefore, you may want to enjoy the free sample of 2 training videos from the course.

The first video features one of the earliest Grandmaster games in this 5.h3 0-0 6.Be3 variation, where one of the greatest modern champions of the King's Indian, Teimour Radjabov, convincingly wins as White:

https://vimeo.com/768139850/8cd219e7c2

(Incidentally, I recommend 7.g4! in the course - this will make a lot more sense when you watch the other videos inside the course)

The second video shows how White gets an advantage that even persists deep into the endgame in the symmetrical Delayed Benoni structures with exd5:

https://vimeo.com/768140098/f24e566701

(This video features my alternative recommendation of 5.h3 0-0 6.Be3 c5 7.d5 - my main recommendation is 7.Nf3!, but both moves significantly favour White).

If you found the videos helpful, make sure to get the full version of 'Crushing The King's Indian With 5.h3' here, before the price goes up. (I should really have charged $97 for this course, but I decided to be generous)

Here's the checkout link.