Indian Defence
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moves | 1.d4 Nf6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ECO | A45–A79 D70–D99 E00–E99 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parent | Queen's Pawn Game |
In the game of chess, Indian Defence or Indian Game is a broad term for a group of openings characterised by the moves:
They are all to varying degrees
The usual White second move is 2.c4, grabbing a larger share of the centre and allowing the move Nc3, to prepare for moving the e-pawn to e4 without blocking the c-pawn with the knight. Black's most popular replies are
- 2...e6, freeing the king's bishop and leading into the Queen's Indian Defence, Bogo-Indian Defence, Modern Benoni, Catalan Opening, or regular lines of the Queen's Gambit Declined,
- 2...g6, preparing a fianchetto of the king's bishop and entering the King's Indian Defence or Grünfeld Defence, and
- 2...c5, the Benoni Defence, with an immediate counter-punch in the centre,
but other moves are played as detailed below.
Instead of 2.c4, White often plays 2.Nf3. Then Black may play 2...d5 which may transpose to a Queen's Gambit after 3.c4. Or Black may play
On the second move, White can also play 2.Bg5, the
History
The earliest known use of the term "Indian Defence" was in 1884, and the name was attributed to the openings used by the Indian player
In the following game, Moheschunder (Black) plays the Grünfeld Defence against Cochrane in 1855—some 38 years before Ernst Grünfeld was born.
- John Cochrane vs. Moheschunder Bannerjee, May 1855:
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Be2 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 9.0-0 cxd4 10.cxd4 Nc6 11.Bb2 Bg4 12.Rc1 Rc8 13.Ba3 Qa5 14.Qb3 Rfe8 15.Rc5 Qb6 16.Rb5 Qd8 17.Ng5 Bxe2 18.Nxf7 Na5 and White mates in three (19.Nh6+ double check Kh8 20.Qg8+ Rxg8 21.Nf7#).[5][6]
Another of the games between these players transposed to what would today be called the Four Pawns Attack against the King's Indian Defence. This time Moheschunder, as Black, won after some enterprising (and perhaps dubious) sacrificial play:
- 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f4 0-0 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bd3? e5! 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.d5 Nxe4!? 10.Nxe4 f5 11.Neg5 e4 12.Ne6 exf3! 13.Nxd8?! fxg2 14.Rg1 Bxd1 15.Ne6 Bg4 16.Nxf8 Kxf8 17.Rxg2 Nd7 18.Bf4 Nc5 19.Kd2 Rc8 20.Kc2 Bf3 21.Rf2 Nxd3 22.Kxd3 Be4+ 23.Ke3 b5 24.cxb5 Bxd5 25.Rd2 Bc4 26.Rad1 Bf6 27.Bh6+ Kg8 28.Kf4 Re8 29.b3 Bxb5 30.Rc1 Be2! 31.Re1 Re4+ 32.Kg3 Bh4+ 0–1[7]
The term "Indian Defence" was popularized by Savielly Tartakower in the early 1920s. In his 1924 book Die hypermoderne Schachpartie, Tartakower classifies the Indian Defences under the broad headings "Old Indian" (...d6 and eventual ...g6) and "Neo-Indian" (...e6 and eventual ...b6). Under the heading "Old Indian", he considers the openings now known as the King's Indian and Grünfeld Defences. He also proposes the names "Proto-Indian" for 1.d4 d6, "Pseudo-Indian" for 1.d4 c5, "Semi-Indian" for 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 and "Three Quarter Indian" for 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nd2, none of which came into wider use.[8]
The modern names "
Main lines beginning 2.c4
2...e6
Nimzo-Indian Defence: 3.Nc3 Bb4
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
Advocated by Nimzowitsch as early as 1913, the Nimzo-Indian Defence was the first of the Indian systems to gain full acceptance. It remains one of the most popular and well-respected defences to 1.d4, and White often chooses move orders designed to avoid it. Black attacks the centre with pieces and is prepared to trade a bishop for a knight to weaken White's queenside with doubled pawns.
Queen's Indian Defence: 3.Nf3 b6
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
The
Bogo-Indian Defence: 3.Nf3 Bb4+
The
Blumenfeld Countergambit: 3.Nf3 c5 4.d5 b5
The Blumenfeld Countergambit bears a superficial but misleading resemblance to the Benko Gambit, as Black's goals are very different. Black gambits a wing pawn in an attempt to build a strong centre. White can either accept the gambit or decline it to maintain a small positional advantage. Although the Blumenfeld is playable for Black it is not very popular.
Catalan Opening: 3.g3, 4.Bg2
The Catalan Opening features a quick fianchetto of White's king's bishop.
Others
- 3.Nf3 b5 Polish Defence
- 3.Nf3 Ne4 Döry Defence (see 1.d4 Nf6 sidelines)
- 3.Bg5 Neo-Indian Attack (see 1.d4 Nf6 sidelines)
- 3.a3?! Australian Attack [citation needed]
2...g6
Grünfeld Defence: 3.Nc3 d5
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
Ernst Grünfeld debuted the Grünfeld Defence in 1922. Distinguished by the move 3...d5, Grünfeld intended it as an improvement to the King's Indian which was not considered entirely satisfactory at that time. The Grünfeld has been adopted by World Champions Smyslov, Fischer, and Kasparov.
King's Indian Defence: 3.Nc3 Bg7
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
The King's Indian Defence is aggressive and somewhat risky, and generally indicates that Black will not be satisfied with a draw. Although it was played occasionally as early as the late 19th century, the King's Indian was considered inferior until the 1940s when it was featured in the games of Bronstein, Boleslavsky, and Reshevsky. It was Fischer's favoured defence to 1.d4, but its popularity faded in the mid-1970s. Kasparov's successes with the defence restored the King's Indian to prominence in the 1980s.
2...c5
Benoni Defence
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
The
Benko Gambit (or Volga Gambit): 3.d5 b5
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
The Benko Gambit (known as the Volga Gambit in Russia and Eastern Europe) is one of Black's most popular ways of meeting 1.d4, though it is less common at elite level. Black plays to open lines on the queenside where White will be subject to considerable pressure. If White accepts the gambit, Black's compensation is positional rather than tactical, and his initiative can last even after many piece exchanges and well into the endgame. White often chooses instead either to decline the gambit pawn or return it.
Other 2nd moves for Black
Old Indian Defence: 2...d6 3.Nc3 e5
The
Budapest Gambit: 2...e5
The Budapest Gambit is rarely played in grandmaster games, but more often adopted by amateurs. Although it is a gambit, White cannot hold on to his extra pawn without making compromises in the deployment of his pieces, so he often chooses to return the pawn and retain the initiative.
Others
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
- The Accelerated Queen's Indian Defence is playable; however, it is considered less accurate than the standard Queen's Indian move order (2...e6 3 Nf3 b6) due to the possibility of 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.Qc2 d5 (otherwise e4 will follow) 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Nf3! and White was better in Alekhine–König, Vienna 1922.[10] James Plaskett and Raymond Keene analyse this line in their 1987 book on the English Defence.
- 2...c6
- This normally transposes into the Slav Defenceif Black subsequently plays ...d5, however it may also transpose into the Old Indian or even the King's Indian if Black instead follows up with ...d6. One of the few independent lines is the offbeat 2...c6 3.Nf3 b5!?, sometimes called the Kudischewitsch gambit after the Israeli IM David Kudischewitsch.
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
8 | 8 | ||||||||
7 | 7 | ||||||||
6 | 6 | ||||||||
5 | 5 | ||||||||
4 | 4 | ||||||||
3 | 3 | ||||||||
2 | 2 | ||||||||
1 | 1 | ||||||||
a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h |
- 2...Nc6 Black Knights' Tango
- The Black Knights' Tango or Mexican Defence introduced by Carlos Torre in 1925 in Baden-Baden shares similarities with Alekhine's Defence as Black attempts to induce a premature advance of the white pawns. It may transpose into many other defences.
- 2...d6 3.Nc3 Bf5 Janowski Indian Defence
- 2...d5?! Marshall Defence
- The Marshall Defence (normally reached via the Queen's Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6?!) is better for White.
1.d4 Nf6 sidelines
- 2.c4 e6 3.Bg5 Neo-Indian Attack
- 2.Nf3 and now:
- 2...e6 3.Bg5 Torre Attack
- 2...g6 East Indian Defence
- 2...g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bf4 Bg7 5.e3 0-0 6.Be2 Barry Attack
- Another option is the Barry Attack, popular with club players. White usually follows up with Ne5 and h2–h4–h5, a direct attack on the black king. The Barry Attack has also been tried out at grandmaster level by Mark Hebden and Julian Hodgson.
- 2...b6 3.Bg5 Torre Attack
- 2...h6 3.c4 g5 Nadanian Attack
- The Nadanian Attack is an aggressive attempt by Black to unbalance the position. The early 2...h6 and 3...g5 are designed to deal with drawish variations such as Colle System, London System and Torre Attack. The line was introduced in 2005 by Ashot Nadanian, but has never enjoyed widespread popularity among top-flight players.
- 2...Ne4 Döry Defence
- The Döry Defence (2.Nf3 Ne4 or 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Ne4) is uncommon, but was the subject of a theme tournament (won by Paul Keres) in Vienna in 1937. It will sometimes transpose into a variation of the Queen's Indian Defence but there are also independent lines.
- 2.Bg5 Trompowsky Attack
- The Neo-Indian Attack, Torre Attack, and Trompowsky Attack are White anti-Indian variations. Related to the Richter–Veresov Attack, they feature an early Bg5 by White and avoid much of the detailed theory of other queen's pawn openings.
- 2...e6 3.a3 Australian Attack [citation needed]
See also
References
- ^ ECO A45: Queen's Pawn, Indian
- ^ "Indian Defence", Chess Player's Chronicle: 172, 22 October 1884, retrieved 2008-07-22 In this case the opening moves were 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6.
- ^ Philip W. Sergeant, A Century of British Chess, David McKay, 1934, p. 68.
- ^ Sergeant, pp. 68–69.
- ISBN 1-888690-04-6.
- ^ Cochrane–Moheschunder
- . Retrieved on 2009-03-18.
- ^ Savielly Tartakower, Die hypermoderne Schachpartie, Verlag der Wiener Schachzeitung, Vienna, 1924, pp411-425.
- ^ Richard Reti, Die Meister des Schachbretts (Masters of the Chessboard), p121, p160 (1930)
- ^ "Alekhine vs. König, Vienna 1922". Chessgames.com.
Bibliography
- ISBN 978-0-8129-3084-9
- ISBN 978-0-19-280049-7
- ISBN 978-0-8050-3409-7
- ISBN 978-1-85744-221-2
- Bosch, Jeroen (2006), "8", Secrets of Opening Surprises, vol. 5, New in Chess, p. 144, ISBN 978-90-5691-170-6
Further reading
- Palliser, Richard (2008), Starting out: d-pawn attacks. The Colle–Zukertort, Barry and 150 Attacks, ISBN 978-1-85744-578-7