Choosing a Ruy Lopez Line for Black

There is no King's Indian Defense line in the Ruy Lopez. There is 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. c3 Bd7 6. d4 g6 but after 7.Bg5 neither 7...Be7 or 7...f6 look like the King's Indian at all. 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. O-O Bd7 6. c3 Nf6 7. d4 g6 8. Re1 Bg7 9. d5 is more like it. play can countinue 9...Ne7 10. c4 O-O.

Not being harsh here at all, but people see the Breyer as a drawing weapon when it's really not. Blak builds a sound position with great middle game potential. I have played Breyer to win many times before and have succeeded.

No, it really is a drawing weapon where black is always slightly worse, at least at a semi-high level. Trust me, I have been told by GMs not to play it simply because black is playing for two results, draw or loss.

3...f5. Play the lines with the pawn sac. There are good tactical chances.

Check out the Classical (C64; 3...Bc5) and Schliemann Defenses (C63 3...f5) and if they don't cut the mustard for you (whatever that means) the Open Defense (5...Ne4 instead of 5...Be7 Closed Defense) has many interesting sidelines such as the Dilworth Attack; finally I think the Modern Steinitz Defense (C71-76; 3...a6 4.Ba5 d6) is worth investigating since it appears to be relatively obscure at the amateur level and IMHO few opponents will be (properly) prepared  to face it 

Alright, the Breyer is not to everyone's style. I get that. I play the ruy as white and have taken on the Breyer successfully. Anyway, for the purpose of this forum, I would have have to agree with nimzo Roy's ideas above. Personally, I would recommend Sanino Brunello's incredible 'Attacking the Spanish.' Really, just go out and buy it. Excellent work there.

Brunello's book is pretty solid. The Marshall coverage is not very thorough and out-of-date, but I learned a lot about the Schliemann (played it in some blitz but never a serious event) and the coverage of the Gajewski is quite good.

I have heard good things about Tiviakov's treatment of the Schliemann in NIC Yearbook 104 as well.

How about this?

1. e4 e5  2. Nf3 Nc6  3. Bb5 d5

I had one guy play it against me and as one who had only played the Ruy lopez about 2 or 3 times, it really surprised me!  I don't think that this line has been analyzed very thoroughly or played very often, but I think it is fairly sensible.

@ mainline_novelty I imagine the ruy lopez kings indian variation it would look something like this, lawl.

Personally i play the Berlin. It has the name to be drawish but in fact under 2500 the best positional player wins. The Berlin creates a very unbalanced position where both parties have there positional trumphs. The lack of apperent tactics just helps the better player with the better understanding of the position. 

Having said there i do not believe the Breyer is a play for 2 results why else would Carlsen play it he is always playing for a win :)

I thought the Cozio was under rated a few years ago. I am no longer sure that is case. Leko-Mamedyarov just featured the related 1. e4 e5 2. Nf2 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nge7 5. c3 g6 line. Not intended to be a main defense, but perhaps it is a playable secondary weapon, booked up low rated White players are unlikely to be familiar with issolated queen pawn positions.

Look at the games of Ivan Sokolov, Tony Kosten, Mickael Adams, Vlad Tkachiev, Anatoly Karpov and Peter Svidler. Then pick the lines you prefer to win.

edit : sorry, Mark Hebden, not Kosten - my mistake

I'm 1700+ FIDE and USCF and I would recommend the Modern Steinitz.  As somebody pointed out it has both aggressive and safe lines, but also it has the Noah's Ark Trap, and in 100 or so tries with the Modern Steinitz I have probably a half dozen wins due to that trap.

I agree about the Modern Steinitz and find Taylor's "Slay the Spanish" useful there. I've done the Schleiman stuff and some f5 gambits in the Classical as well as flirted with the Marshall and it's all just a mess. Some people thrive on that, but you get a good solid position with attacking chances out of the MS so you can get down to just playing chess. I've gotten a slower f5 in so many games in that line after g6 and the fianchetto... possibly the line being called "King's Indian" above, though the jokers are right, that's not the right name.

3... d5 is not sensible at all except in Blitz and it has been analyzed to death (as far as I know.) It's not played or talked about much because it doesn't work. It is trappy. If White tries to win a piece s/he will end up losing a pawn or the Bishop pair and Black will have at least equality, but 4. Nxe5 Qg5 5. (not falling for it) Nf3 and Black won't have enough for the pawn.

Now that I have had aweekend to think about it, the Siesta would likely be rejected by the OP on the same grounds that he rejected the Jaenisch; it is just too goddamn long and narrow and results in positions with reduced material that Black cannot play for a win. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. c3 f5 6. exf5 Bxf5 7. O-O Bd3 8. Re1 Be7 9. Bc2 Bxc2 10. Qxc2 Nf6 11. d4 e4 12. Ng5 (12...Nfd2 has also been played) d5 13. f3 h6 14. Nh3 (A few games had 13. Ne6) 14...O-O 15. Nd2 exf3 16. Nxf3 Rf7!. You have to take that as the starting position for your mainline. Either White winds up with an advantage or he does not,  but playing to win with Black will be difficult.

I have yet to reach an opinion on the 1 e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. O-O Bg4 6. h3 h5 lines, but just so I don't cause someone to post a nonsensical response I will point out that White's options are 7. d4 or 7. Bxc6 not 7.hxg4?? hxg4 8. Ne1 Qh4.

I agree, Siesta is tough to play for a win. White will win if anything....