Book Suggestions on the Queen's Indian Defence

Hello dear friends, from the start of my chess career I have been a King's IIndian Defence. However, in my last tournament I realised that such double-edged type of positions are not really to my liking. Of cource I have never stop liking this opening but, I want to have something more solid in my repertoire! Searching for a long time, I realised that the Queen's Indian defence was an excellent choice being solid and dynamic simoultaneously!

I want to start studying as fast as possible because my next tournament starts in no more than two weeks! 

Do you have any reccomendations about books that explain the main plans and basic ideas bhind the QID?

Your help will be much respected!

Yours,

John

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chess-Explained-Queens-Peter-Wells/dp/1904600492

ISBN-10: 1904600492

Wells is a superb author, and the book is excellent.

The book chyss mentioned is decent, but the best one is "Play the Queen's Indian" by Andrew Greet.

That said, keep in mind that you can't always play the Queen's Indian and it doesn't work as a one stop shop defense!

After 1.d4 Nf6, what's the purpose of 1...Nf6?  Stop e4!

Then comes 2.c4 e6.

Now, if White plays 3.Nf3, he is doing nothing to fight for control of e4, and therefore, Black has AT LEAST 2 moves to control e4.  Therefore, this is where the Queen's Indian comes into play.  Black plays 3...b6 and 4...Bb7, controlling the e4 square.

HOWEVER!

If White plays 3.Nc3, he now threatens to take over the center with 4.e4.  3...b6? is now a HORRIBLE move, and 4.e4! gives White a "CLEAR ADVANTAGE!"

Instead, Black must play something that will prevent 4.e4 (had he wanted to allow 4.e4, he should have fianchettoed his Bishop instead and we'd be back in the King's Indian Defense).  Black has 3 main options:

A) 3...d5.  Black adds another piece to the control of e4.  This is a direct transposition to the Queen's Gambit Declined.

B) 3...Bb4.  Instead of adding another piece or pawn to control e4, he indirectly defends d4 by pinning the guard of the e4 square.  This is known as the Nimzo-Indian Defense

C) 3...c5.  This is known as the Modern Benoni.  Most players that play the Benoni via 1...Nf6 and 2...e6 will only play 3...c5 against 3.Nf3, so as to avoid the Flick Knife Attack.  Here, White can go into that attack, and Black achieved nothing compared to 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6.  It's still playable though.

You will also need something against the Catalan (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3!).  Here again, 3...b6 is just bad!

But the big one to remember is 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 b6? 4.e4 is a CLEAR ADVANTAGE FOR WHITE!  The Queen's Indian should only be played against 3.Nf3!

Or you could play 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 b6 3. Nc3 Bb7 4. Nf3 e6 transposing. 

Sure, if White is going to roll over and die and play that for you.

The reason nobody plays that is because now 4.Qc2! (A knuckhead would play 4.Nf3 - giving Black what he wants and failing to take advantage of the inferiority of 2...b6) e6 5.e4! Bb4 6.Bd3 scores about 70% for White.

Also, if you look at any opening book on the Classical Nimzo-Indian, 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2, you will notice that Black has basically 3 options:  4...O-O, 4...d5, and 4...c5.  Black doesn't have time for 4...b6?! in that line, and basically you've just transposed into that.

This is why you never see 2...b6 at the GM level and why everyone plays 2...e6 first, and only after 3.Nf3, a slower line for White than 3.Nc3, does Black play 3...b6.

4. Qc2 is too slow to be dangerous. Black just changes tack with 4. ... d5. The percentages in that line look a fairly normal 53% for white, which is nothing special really. I have 191 games in my database with 4. ... d5 with an average black rating of 2312. The people playing this are not patzers!

But even if there is a recent idea of 4...b6 and 5...c5 against the Nimzo-Indian Classical Variation, it would still make chyss's idea inferior as 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.Qc2 e6 5.e4 Bb4 is not the same as your line (replace ...Bb7 with ...c5 and you have the line you propose), and so now 6.Bd3 gives White a clear advantage.

Your line against the Classical Nimzo-Indian proper might be correct, and I won't argue it as I haven't played the Nimzo for at least 5 years or against it for 2+, but I'm almost certain about the inferiority of 2...b6 to 2...e6 because of the line mentioned.  Was just comparing it to a bad version of the Classical Nimzo for Black, not saying the Classical Nimzo proper would be the exact same thing.

I didn't suggest the line you're saying I suggested. You are silly!

Never denied that.  As I mentioned earlier, 4...O-O, 4...d5, and 4...c5 are all legit lines, and possibly pfren's idea of following 4...b6 with 5...c5, but 4...b6 followed by 5...Bb7, which is what your 2...b6?! idea from post #4 would lead to, is clearly inferior.

And your post 9 is a lie!  See above - a copy of Post 4!

You did propose 2...b6, expecting White to Transpose.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 b6?! 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.Qc2! Advantage White!

From the White side, my all-time favorite is Mikhail Gurevich's Queen's Indian Defense: Kasparov Variation. He wrote the ECO section on the QID, and was a world-class GM for a few years. Amazon is offering it for $0.01!

http://www.amazon.com/Queens-Indian-Defence-Kasparov-Batsford/dp/0805023151/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1437068099&sr=8-1&keywords=Mikhail+Gurevich+Queen%27s+Indian

Karpov's book, The Semi-Closed Openings in Action, is dated, but still contains valuable insights into how to play the QID.It's not encyclopedic, but it does give the reader some good ideas on plans in a few different variations.

I also have Geller's book on the QID. It's more or less complete, as the title suggests, but I don't recommend it very highly. 

It would be nice to see Quality Chess tackle the QID.

I also have noticed the Quality Chess must not think too highly of 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 for Black.

Everything they cover from that position is all Catalan (GM Repertoire) and Nimzo-Indian (Playing 1.d4: Indian Defenses and Challenging the Nimzo) from White's perspective.

That is probably QC's one weak spot is they beat the same horse again and again.  TONS of books on the Sicilian (Experts vs, GM Rep 6, Cutting Edge books, Sveshnikov Reloaded along with GM Rep on the Sveshnikov, etc) and agressive lines against 1.d4, like the Grunfeld, KID, Modern Benoni, Benko, Semi-Slav, etc.

Very little on solid stuff against d4.  A recent book on the Classical Slav is about it.  No NID/QID for Black, no QGD, no QGA, etc.  Makes you wonder if they are trying to send a message that solid play against 1.d4 isn't worth their time to analyze and publicize.

Also, if you look at any opening book on the Classical Nimzo-Indian, 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2, you will notice that Black has basically 3 options:  4...O-O, 4...d5, and 4...c5.

ThrillerFan: Is the Milner-Barry, 4...Nc6 followed by d6, e5, dead?

BTW, nice summary at #3!

That's the sort of thing I was never clear on as a teenager when I was trying to figure things out by playing over GM games.

Do I have to spell everything out for you? It's not a lie. I did suggest the transposition but I didn't suggest meeting 4. Qc2 with 4. ... e6, which you implied that I did suggest. You're just setting up one straw man after another. Silly you. And don't call me a liar, that's rude, especially when I haven't lied. 

Post #4 refers to 4. Nf3, not 4. Qc2, so again you're setting up a straw man. 

You did strongly imply that strong players don't play 2. ... b6. When I pointed out that the line 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 b6 3. Nc3 Bb7 4. Qc2 d5! has an average rating for black of 2312 you then implied that that's not what I was talking about. Are you foolish or confused? 

Also, pfren is right, you are getting the lines completely confused. Have you actually got a chess set out to make sure you're looking at the right positions, or are you trying to do it in your head and failing miserably? 

There are fewer than 500 master games (both players rated +2200) with 2...b6?/?! in my database, and White has a clear practical advantage. The reason for this is simple, as others have already pointed out. 

I'm slowly learning though that offbeat openings that are known to be inferior by strong players will have incredibly loyal fans in the U2000 population. Once it's finally proven that White has easy ways to an advantage, they'll start arguing that White gets an advantage from any opening therefore it doesn't matter.

You just can't win discussing something that can be proven objectively in chess. 

Btw, going back to the Gurevich book on the QID, he points out that the position after 1.d4 Nf5 2.c4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb7 4.d5 e6 5.a3 (as in Petrosian-Keene)  Be7 6.e4 gives White a clear edge.

No, 2. ... b6 is very playable. Masters don't play it because they don't want to avoid the Nimzo. There's nothing wrong with it. 4. d5?! weakens white's dark squares for no good reason and just gives black a target. Black can either blockade with e5 or try to undermine it with e6.

We're sort of on the same journey - I began as a Dutch player, but the ultra-sharp responses are kryptonite to my 'builder' sensibilities, so, a few months ago, I undertook the QID/Nimzo complex, and it's been a very interesting (if frustrating) switch. One of my friends on this site suggested "The Semi-Closed Openings in Action" by Karpov - it's a little outdated, and Karpov is a kind of dry writer, but I doubt that there is much dispute as to who is probably the greatest QID player in chess history - Karpov! 

The main features of the QID are known (mostly 'fight for the e4 and c4 squares'), but the PAWN STRUCTURE is one of the most complicated animals in chess - because it's so amorphous. If you study the games of Karpov, he will teach you certain elements about the pawn structure - where the levers are in certain variations, when it might be OK to sacrifice a pawn, these kinds of very deep, very difficult judgments. My suggestion is to take a good look at Karpov's games in the QID and the Nimzo. He is not an easy mentor to work with, but he is by far the most respected WCC in this particular opening

IRVING CHERNEV!!!!!

Even masters play dubious moves. Look at some of Carlsen's openings! :)

@pfren

very condescending...

and GO CHERNEV!!