The Grünfeld Defense VS The King's Indian Defense

Sort:
cricket7890

Hi I'm back with a forum. if you think this is my grand blog that I was about to make this is not. Which one do you like and why? Personally I love the Grünfeld Defense but don't like the KID at alllllll. What about you I am curious to know!! By the way here is the Grünfeld:

Here is the KID (King's Indian):

What do you think!?!?!?!?!?

Uhohspaghettio1

What use is it to anyone to post the first moves of the openings?

Do you think someone who has never heard of the Grunfeld before is going to be able to come here, see the moves done out like that and have a valid opinion on it?

Not even the best player who ever lived could do that. Nobody even knew about the Grunfeld until the last century and it was regarded as suspect for the longest time. 

beginner7196

I would like having an active bishop so I would play the Grunfeld if I had to chose between them.

cricket7890

same

play4fun64

Gruenfeld Defense is more playable after Kramnik introduce the Bayonet Attack against the KID.

DasBurner

Personally I find the Grunfeld's objectives much simpler. Regardless of the system white employs, black is trying to diminish White's big center and create significant weaknesses. On the other hand, there are so many variations in the Kings Indian, and they all have completely contrasting plans and attacking ideas. Sometimes you're playing on the queenside, sometimes you're launching your kingside pawns, looking for many different pawn breaks, it's just too much for me. that's why I prefer the Grunfeld. just my opinion though

play4fun64

Go Gruenfeld! KID requires too much studies to play it successfully. 

Simon_ESIEE
play4fun64 a écrit :

Go Gruenfeld! KID requires too much studies to play it successfully. 

There's at least twice as much theory on the Grunfeld meh.png

tygxc

Both King's Indian Defence and Grünfeld are heavily analysed and are difficult to play. The main difference is that in the King's Indian Defence black gets an attack against the white king and white gets a won endgame because of his queen side pawns. In the Grünfeld black gets a won endgame because of his queen side pawn majority i.e. candidate passed b-pawn, while white gets an attack on the black king because of his strong center e4-d4. Grünfeld is the better opening. In the recent Yeketarinburg Candidates Tournament Grünfeld was played in 5 games, all draws.

cricket7890

Who said that in the King's Indian white can't attack...

chamo2074

Why do you dislike the KID it's very fun and sharp. Yes theory packed, but at least it's easier to understand than the Grunfeld. A great advice, don't touch the grunfeld until you're like 2000

cricket7890

I don't know why everyone likes the King's Indian

sndeww
chamo2074 wrote:

Why do you dislike the KID it's very fun and sharp. Yes theory packed, but at least it's easier to understand than the Grunfeld. A great advice, don't touch the grunfeld until you're like 2000

KID your position hangs on a knifes edge and you gotta play retreating and sideways moves to the edge of the board to stay equal

meanwhile in the grunfeld you slowly dismantle whites center :>

chamo2074
cricket7890 wrote:

I don't know why everyone likes the King's Indian

Because it's sharp attacking, and Hikaru's immortal game

AunTheKnight

Grunfeld!

cricket7890

@chamo2074 you are all alone...

chamo2074

You went from saying everyone liked the KID a moment ago. I doubt I'm all alone lol

chamo2074
tygxc wrote:

Both King's Indian Defence and Grünfeld are heavily analysed and are difficult to play. The main difference is that in the King's Indian Defence black gets an attack against the white king and white gets a won endgame because of his queen side pawns. In the Grünfeld black gets a won endgame because of his queen side pawn majority i.e. candidate passed b-pawn, while white gets an attack on the black king because of his strong center e4-d4. Grünfeld is the better opening. In the recent Yeketarinburg Candidates Tournament Grünfeld was played in 5 games, all draws.

Yes because your opponent who's 1000 (even 1500-2000) ish is going to play the bayonet attack and then get a better endgame due to a small pawn structure difference and convert with 99% accuracy they aren't gonna blunder mate after you make an unsound sacrifice on move 30. And when you play the Grunfeld you'll draw all the games with 95+% accuracy and be satisfied. That's how amateur chess works.

It honestly annoys me when amateurs start saying they don't like an opening because of it's results at the higher level despite how fun it is.

cricket7890

Well on this forum you are alone...

cricket7890

also though you do make a good point