King's Indian Defence, Four Pawns Attack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article uses algebraic notation to describe chess moves.

The Four pawns attack in the King's Indian Defence is a chess opening that begins

1. d4 Nf6

2. c4 g6

3. Nc3 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. f4

White immediately builds up a large "pawn center" in order to have a space advantage. Black first develops its pieces, then tries to break White's center by means of various pawn advances like e7-e5, c7-c5 or f7-f5 depending on circumstances.

The main variations of the Four Pawns Attack are:

• The main line 5.f4 O-O 6.Nf3 c5 when after 7.d5 Black can attack White's center with the pawn sacrifice 7...b5 or the more casual 7...e6. This can transpose into a Benoni Defense.

• The modern alternative 5.f4 O-O 6.Nf3 Na6!? which aims at sacrificing a pawn with 7...e5 and go into tactical complications.

Contents 1 The main line 1.1 The old main line with 9...Re8 1.2 The new main line with 9...Bg4 1.3 White varies on move 7, 8 or 9 2 The modern alternative 7...b5 3 The modern alternative 6...Na6 4 Notes 5 References

[edit] The main line

The main line and sharp version of the Four Pawns Attack of the Benoni Defense occurs after 6... c5 7. d5 e6 8. Be2 exd5 9. cxd5 when Black now has a choice of the old main line with 9...Re8 or the New main line with 9...Bg4

[edit] The old main line with 9...Re8

Highly tactical possibilities abound in which the critical position occurs after 10. e5 dxe5 11. fxe5 Ng4 12. Bg5. A position which is perhaps better avoided by Black.^[1]

[edit] The new main line with 9...Bg4

A common sense move with the idea of exchanging the bishop for the knight and takes the energy out of White's e5 attacking plan.^[2] Also the development of the bishop frees Black's queenside for smooth development and active play.^[2] Invariably development continues with 10. O-O Nbd7 when White faces the possibly of kicking the bishop with h3 or delaying with Re1 first.^[3] In the game Jesus Nogueiras-Garry Kasparov White opted for the immediate kick, 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Re8 in a game that was eventually drawn.^[4]

[edit] White varies on move 7, 8 or 9

White can in the King's Indian with 7. dxc5 or 7. Be2 this allows Black to equalize with accurate play.

Of the various alternatives at move eight:

• 8. dxe6 opening the d5 square has gained interest.^[5] The reply 8....Bxe6 leaves White a possible f5 push at an appropriate moment, so normally 8...fxe6 is played when White has a choice of the solid 9. Be2 or the aggressive 9 Bd3.^[5]
• 8. Be2 exd5 9. exd5 although once common the f4 pawn looks out of place and White's weakness on e4 is clear.^[6]

White varying with 9. e5 has a certain logic to quicken the center play however the reply 9...Ne4 seems to adequately halt the plan.^[6]

[edit] The modern alternative 7...b5

Having similar ideas to the Benko Gambit, this b5 push remains unchartered.^[7] After 8. cxb5 (8. e5 is to be considered) 8....a6 White is choices between the possibly of taking the a-pawn and face the sting or support the pawn on b5.^[7] The common response is to support with 9. a4.^[7]

[edit] The modern alternative 6...Na6

Black first develops one additional piece before reacting in the center. The idea is to bring in the push e7-e5 instead of the main line c7-c5. This is a gambit, in which Black hopes to take advantage of the slight underdevelopment of White forces in order to win back the sacrificed pawn or to directly attack the White king. The Na6 is designed to come on c5 (once the d4-pawn has left) in order to attack the e4-pawn. An important difference between this move and Nbd7 is that Na6 does not block the queenside bishop.^[8]

After the normal 7.Be2, Black must immediately unleash 7...e5!? when White has several possibilities but only a capture in e5 is assumed to make sense:

• 8.O-O is not well-considered for White because of the tactical hidden idea 8...exd4 9.Nxd4 Nc5 10.Bf3 Re8 11.Re1 Bg4! when White cannot win the piece in g4 without losing the Nd4 (by the Bg7).
• 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 was considered dubious but is better than its reputation, e.g. 9...c5 10.Be3 cxd4?! 11.Bxd4 Qe7!? (Gallagher) 12.Nf3! and White is a full pawn up because Black cannot take back the e4-pawn without running into trouble: 11...Nxe4? 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Qd4+ Nf6 14.Nd5 Qd6 15.Ng5! and White wins.
• 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.d5 is a sound alternative in order to bring the game in more strategic fields (e.g. Lautier-Kasparov , Amsterdam 1995).
• 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.Nxe5 (9.Qxd8 is considered slightly less good because it develops Black Rf8) 9...Nc5 10.Bf3 Qxd1+ 11.Kxd1 Rd8+ 12.Kc2 Nfxe4! (temporary piece sacrifice, e.g. game Hansen-Berg, Aarhus 1991) 13.Nxe4 Bf5 14.Re1 Bxe5 15.fxe5 Rd4 (thus Black regains its piece) 16.b3! Nxe4 17.Kb2 Nc5 when White still has a slight advantage thanks to good diagonals for his Bishop pair, but Black controls the D-column and can try to pressure the e5-pawn.
• 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.fxe5? is bad because Black can gain back the e5-pawn and leave White with a poor pawn structure

[edit] Notes

1. ^ * Colin Crouch (1992). Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack. Trends Publications, page 6. 
2. ^ ^{a b} Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 13
3. ^ Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 16
4. ^ Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 17
5. ^ ^{a b} Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 24
6. ^ ^{a b} Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 22
7. ^ ^{a b c} Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 27
8. ^ Crouch, Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack, page 33

[edit] References

• Golubev, Mikhail (2006). Understanding the King's Indian. Gambit. 

• de Firmian, Nick (1999). Modern Chess Openings: MCO-14. Random House. ISBN 0-8129-3084-3. 

• Gallagher, Joe (1996). Beating the anti-King's Indian. Batsford.  (only presents the 6...Na6!? line)

• Burgess, Graham (1993). The King's Indian for the Attacking Player. Batsford. 

• Crouch, Colin (1992). Trends in the King's Indian Four Pawns Attack. Trends Publications.