Why is the grunfeld defense so drawish?

@Proustino yes, having Kings Indian / Grünfeld style setups against London is one of the main reasons why i play 2...g6 and not 2...e6. Also, it is not easy to play for win in the Queens Indian (3.Nf3) and i dont want to transpose to dull Queens Gambit lines.

@tpr

There are thousands of game, i think there is a sort of "law of large numbers". Your comment will suggest than the players playing black and grunfeld were better player (so a better elo) than white player, which is not possible given the law of large numbers and the high number of games i quoted.

Moreover, i could have said the same about sicilian. All the people saying (never play sicilian before ur elo > X), its only bullshit.
The stats are fine for black whatever the level of the player, so playing these openings are fine, more important is that u like it.

There are so many bullshits spread in chess forums. Like "dont learn openings", "Better to have a plan than a bad plan", dogmatism generally proved to be totally irrelavant in chess IMO.

It's pretty hard to unpick the exact relative strengths of moves either way based on the Lichess database - there's too much information lost in just presenting W/D/L percentages. You can argue that the average rating of people playing 3... d5 is higher than the average rating of people playing 3 Nc3, but then the average rating of people playing 4 cxd5 is higher again, and that doesn't have dramatically different numbers.

But basically, it does seem hard to argue that an opening is totally infeasible for black to play at a given level when the stats are more-or-less even for players within that grade range.

With regard to the initial question. The Grunfeld is a very concrete opening - the pieces and pawns come into contact early which makes it susceptible to deep analysis. In that regard it differs from at least some lines of the Kings Indian, say. It's also a very interesting opening and very challenging to White. As a result lots of lines have been analysed in great depth - and many of those lines do lead to drawn positions. At high levels White will either sidestep a theoretical debate (accepting an equal position but heading for one that is not dead drawn) or enter into a topical theoretical line hoping that a novelty will set problems that cannot be solved on the day. At lower levels we are unlikely to study and remember so much theory - and we might well win or lose a position that would be drawn by grandmasters.

Here is the full quote of MVL
"At the time I started, the Gruenfeld was a very different opening than it is nowadays. These days there are lots of variations to memorize. In most lines, you need to know what you are doing. I keep the challenge on because now I know so much about it that I can afford to do so. But if I had to learn the opening from scratch now, I am not sure I would do it.

But this opening does give a lot of counterplay options and if your opponent wants to achieve something, he either can play a long forcing line hoping you don't remember it, with the risk of a quick draw without any chance, or he has to take some risks and allow counter-chances and a playable position. This is the good thing about Gruenfeld compared to say Queen’s Gambit where white can press for an advantage for free."
en.chessbase.com/post/mvl-i-was-very-motivated-to-get-back-to-winning-ways

who says, I have a great effect in that with white figures

I certainly never think of the Grunfeld as drawish.

"with the risk of a quick draw without any chance" - MVL

Fundamental difference between the Grünfeld and the King's Indian: In the Grünfeld black gets a won endgame, but white gets an attack. In the King's Indian white gets a won endgame, but black gets an attack.

At the level of the original poster, I would recommend neither the Grünfeld nor the King's Indian Defence: just play the natural 1...d5.

@tpr I play the Budapest Gambit after 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 as black, and nornally, the game turns out to be just fine (I have seen multiple situations where I turn out better as black). I have tried the King's Indian, but I don't like the closed position because I often make a lot of mistakes in closed, maneuvering middlegames. On the other hand, in open or some what open middlegames, I play just fine. Anyways, people are so desperate to play the London at my level even though I hate playing against the London as black.

#19 The Budapest Gambit is not in the same league as the Grünfeld Defence. The Grünfeld Defence saw play in World Championship matches, the Budapest Gambit did not and probably never will. Mamedyarov plays the Budapest Gambit, so it should be OK for us. In the Top Chess Engine Competition Superfinal both games with the Budapest Gambit ended in draws, so it should be safe to play. The main practical problem with the Budapest Gambit is that it does not happen if white plays Nf3 before c4.