Howdy, I am Jim and I am an intermediate chess player. I'd like some opinions from advanced players. I interested in the Indian Defense, i.e. 1. d4 Nf6 from White's perspective. When I look at Chess Explorer, I see that 2. c4 seems to offer the best odds for White, although I understand that the odds in Chess Explorer do not account for transpositions, and that player style and preference is relevant. As White, I am considering

1. d4 Nf6
2. c4

perhaps followed with nc3, nf3, e3 or e4, and d5 when I can.

My typical response to 1... Nf3 is 2. nc3, followed by e4 and d5 or e5 when I can, nf3, and perhaps be3 or bf4 and e3. I like 2. Nc3 because I want to rush d5, e4 or e4, e5 and nc3 facilitates this better than 2. nf3 or alternatives. Specifically, I want to delay moving the c pawn until Black castles, and if Black castles Kingside, I may want to move c3, not c4.

One problem with 2. c4 is that White has reduced the integrity of the Queenside pawns, and then may face ...g6 followed by ...bg7 and a castle. I like to delay castling then castle opposite my opponent so as to get the most dynamic play. I also tend to delay or avoiding castling into the attack of a fianchettoed bishop unless I am already prepared to attack the bishop. 2. c4 seems to limit and dilute my strategy. I think most White players that respond 2. c4 probably castle Kingside and take black in the middle, where the c pawn helps defend againts ...d5. I think a "modern style" Black will not push his d or e pawns and the principal benefit to the modern approach is that it gives Black good chances when White rushes the middle with d4, c4 followed by e3, nc3, and nf3 or bf4.

Another problem is that 2. c4 prevents a subsequent c3 for the purpose of thwarting the Black King's bishop or the Queen's knight. Here, c3 not only does not degrade from the Queenside castle, it promotes it by keeping the c file protected from the Black rook, and it supports a subsequent Qc2 for Queenside castling. I focus on the Black Kingside castle because either that or no castle is what I will typically face after 1. d4 Nf6.

Since 2. c4 seems to be the most common response, I like to get off the beaten path, even though 2. nf3 is not exactly pursuing an unknown line. However, I attack or swap before castling when it is advantageous so, and I think that while 2. c4 certainly is not an inflexible move, it is probably less amenable to open attack than 2. nc3.

Finally, while Chess Explorer does show the lowest percentage for a Black win against 2. c4, the percentage for a Black draw against 2. c4 seems really high, so it is not at all clear the opening will give better than average chances against a good player. In fact, it seems the statistics indicate many other responses give White better chances for a win. So 2. c4 seems drawish to me when I expect better. On the other hand, 2. c4 may not have good statistics because of transpositions, and 2. c4 may be the most common response because people win with 2. c4. Or 2. c4 may stay in the book longer which helps White because White can potentially pursue a long opening of White's choosing. This benefit probably would not help me because my openings are usually short.

Who likes 2. c4 in this situation? If you suspect the continuation of g7, bg6, O-O, how do you develop after 2. c4, and how do you plan to attack?

Thanks!

This is a good first post. I like that you're trying to understand the moves instead of just memorizing opening lines. I'll give you a brief overview of my understanding:

2 c4 and 2 Nf3 often transpose back into each other. 2 Nf3 is a slightly more flexible move as it prevents black from playing the Budapest, then white will play 3 c4 next move. You can play other systems with 2 Nf3 like the Colle or London, but mostly it's just a different move order.

If black plays ...g6 and ...Bg7, then we're entering King's Indian territory. White has numerous ways to attack this, but the most common is this:

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4.

White has 3 pawns in the center with a lot of space to work with. Here black will usually play 4...d6 to prevent the e4-e5 push, but sometimes he'll allow it and then try to chip at it with d6 and c5. Hypermodern play sounds all well and good, but with each of these moves, black will create his own weaknesses for white to exploit, while if he does nothing he will have no room to maneuver.

4...d6 5 Nf3 0-0 6 Be2. White is content to develop normally and keep his 3-pawn center. Black now is recommended to thrust at it with either 6...e5 or 6...c5. In either case, white will still retain a lot of space, but black will gain some himself and look for targets to hit. Slight advantage for white.

Also, if you're looking to castle opposite sides, I'd recommend playing 1 e4 instead.

Thanks Abba! Your response was the type of help I was seeking. I think I need to make a cheat sheet with all the main opening name and positions.

Regarding "no room to maneuver", I agree. I think the fianchetto was named for Bob Fianchetto, a frustrated hypermodern player who was looking for a place to park his bishop. I am somewhat of a classical/open player myself; I wouldn't waste two moves looking for a pretty place to park a minor piece.

I am interested in your thinking or a reference behind the KP game being better against an opposite-side castling strategy. I am sure your comment is reasonable but I don't understand the rationale. Similar to castling, it doesn't make a difference to me which way I open. I sometimes use e4 if I see my opponent open d4 or if I know it is my opponent's preference. I pick d4 because it is less common than e4, and I think perhaps the most important thing for White strategically is to avoid the Sicillian. It does not seem to me Black has an response to d4 analogous to the Sicillian response to e4.

Wow. I don't even know where to begin with this one.

Go buy the book "Logical Chess: Move by Move" by Irving Chernev and read it from cover to cover. Then come back to this thread and let us know if you still need us to answer anything from this paragraph. Really, the short answer is that there is no short answer. That book is pretty good for the long answer.

In the mean time, stick to 1. e4. If you don't understand chess well enough to understand why 1. e4 and 1. d4 lead to completely different types of games, then you've got bigger problems than just worrying about the Sicilian. Besides, you can't play in fear. Attack the Sicilian! Don't fear it, or any other opening.

--Fromper

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 is poor.

The problem is that black can just played ... d5! and all of a sudden he's got a foothold in the center and you can't pressure it via the normal means, because you've blocked your c-pawn). Black already has equality.

At your level, "avoiding the sicilian" is a silly reason to pick an opening. Yes, the sicilian is the (statistically) best scoring opening for black at a high level ... but it still loses more than it wins.

1 d4 Nf6 2 Nc3 is only reasonable if after 2 ... d5 you are willing to play a Blackmar Diemer with 3 e4.

2 c4 is the most testing response to 1 ... Nf6, and is theoretically the best response, but there are plenty of other decent options, and although they offer Black at least equality, that shouldn't matter too much right now. There is the Colle (2 Nf3, 3 e3, 4 Nbd2, 5 Bd3, 6 O-O, etc.), London (2 Nf3, 3 Bf4, etc.), Stonewall (2 f4, 3 e3, 4 Nf3, 5 Bd3, etc.) Trompowsky (2 Bg5), Blackmar Diemer (2 Nc3 d5 3 e4), and even the Omnigosh (2 e4) and Bronstein Gambit (2 g4), which can all be investigated further if you want to play them.

I'll give it a quick shot. In most 1. d4 openings, both sides will initially have less space. White can't develop naturally and castle queenside as his pieces will often be awkward. In order to gain necessary space to maneuver, white will often move his c-pawn, which opens avenues for black to attack easily should white castle there.

One major difference is that in 1. e4 openings, white is able to easily play d2-d4 at some point, open things up, and have enough queenside space to place pieces on useful squares. In 1. d4 openings, white can't easily play e2-e4 without moving his c-pawn to obtain necessary space to prepare it. Without this break, both sides suffer from some lack of space as the center is locked.

There are some times when it is ok to castle queenside in 1. d4 openings, but it is rare as the c-file will usually be open. White should know that he will have to quickly move his king into the corner for safety, which he may not actually have time to in a sharp game. With 1. e4 openings, white only moves his king into the corner as a luxury when he has time. The king is fairly safe on c1 in those openings, but not in 1. d4 openings.

I hope this helps?

I suggest 2. c4 over 2. Nc3, as White just doesn't have enough room to get his pieces to comfortable posts. Sure, you will have a weaker queenside, but with practice, all of the Bob Fianchettoes of the world will be that much less of a nuisance. But since fianchetto is Italian, wouldn't it be more like Dante Fianchetto?

If Black indeed fianchettoes his king-bishop (a la the King's Indian Defense), I'm not sure if queenside castling is that good of an idea anyways.

I understand chess well enough to understand why E4 and d4 lead to different games. I do not understand why one is preferred over the other from a castling opposite sides perspective. I have too many other areas for study so I have no time for chess books. I thought I might ask some experts. If you are too bright to explain to an intermediate player, then why bother posting at all?

I am OK with 1. d4 nc3 2. nc3 d5 3. bg5 for example. You say that black already has equality, but I do not think this is true. Does not the game transpose to standard closed games where white may have the advantage even if black makes no mistakes? I do agree white has gained nothing on black, but white has the move and that is what white started with.

If statistically I play better against other than the sicilian from white, why is avoiding this opening silly? What motive do you have for selecting an alternate opening?