|The Chess Exchange
|KID Classical (Mel del Plata)
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||kstevens67 [ Sun Sep 08, 2013 4:12 am ]|
|Post subject:||KID Classical (Mel del Plata)|
I have been going through a book entitled 'The Kaufman Repertoire for White'. I have been interested in taking up a d4 opening and this book seems a good place to look for a repertoire. What has my curiosity peaked though is the line recommended against the King's Indian Defense as most of the players I have played d4 against are KID players and do play this line as Black. The ratings range from anywhere from 1400 to 2200. The claim is made that the line recommended is a near refutation of this main line in the KID. I respect Larry Kaufman and like some of his work, but I'm not so sure about this statement. Is this really a near refutation of this line? Has there been any new developments for Black that has tipped the scales the other direction?
Here is the line mentioned in his book.
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Nd7 10. Be3 f5 11. f3 f4 12. Bf2 g5 13. Rac1 Rf6 Note that Rac1 is the move in this system (Nd3 is usual) Nd3 Rh6 c5
When looking at the position, White looks to me to be following the correct plan. based on the pawn structure, White's pawn break should be c5 and the Bishop, Knight, and Rook are all looking at this square. Black of course should be focusing on the King side as that is where is pawns point and he has more space in this area. According to GM Kaufman, White wins material on the Queen side and just beats off the attack on the King side. He provides game after game of these plans with White winning of course.
Is this a near refutation of the KID main line? I don't mind taking up this line if that's the case, but would rather know if there has been any new developments in this line to turn in Black's favor. Any comments and does anyone have any experience playing the repertoire in this book with or without success?
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group