This Benoni with the pawn at e7 is rather favorable for White and Black's play is limited. However, in general queenside play is a perfectly correct strategy. It takes a lot of preparation to attack successfully a king protected by a fianchetto. The attacking side often makes concessions elswhere which the other side can exploit (typically, opening the center in favorable way or the queenside attack reaching the backrank to create enough counterplay). Another point to keep in mind is that it's not because a piece stands somewhere that this piece cannot be used elswhere or improved. There are many Benonis King's Indians and Benkös where the Bg7 takes an important part in a kingside attack because Black is able to play Bg7-e5 or Bg7-d4 with good effect (two Bd4 examples from the same tournament : Nikolic - Topalov Linares 1997 and Gelfand - Topalov. Also Karpov- Kasparov, game 11 1990).
What is the idea behind defenses which fianchetto their bishop on the same side opposition castled?
It would be nice if one could have a strong attack on the king in every game. But such attacks aren't just there for the taking. They have to be well prepared, and there aren't a lot of games where black quickly recovers from being a tempo down and then gathers forces with such efficiency as to generate an effective kingside pawnstorm. I mean, I'd love to do that every game, but I'd also love a weekly stipend for a stuffed pizza air-mailed from Chicago. So far I haven't sold any bosses on that.
Particularly in the Benoni, it seems like you're wanting too many things. What's the point of the non-developing move c7-c5 if not to play on the queenside? You can't have everything.
That said, there actually are a few lines where black's kingside fianchetto is combined with a kingside pawnstorm. The most famous is the Mar del Plata line of the King's Indian, which you might enjoy. There, it's true that the fianchettoed bishop plays little role in the attack, but black has surprising resources for making all the other pieces and pawns work together. Such ideas can occasionally be made to happen, under just the right circumstances in other openings too (e.g., the Dutch), but they should be taken as very much the exception. It's good to be ready to take advantage of the opportuntiy when it arises, but most of the time (including in most other variations of the KID), Black has to be flexible about where they're going to direct their attention.
Also, how often to you have problems getting checkmated on the kingside in a same-side-castling situation, while you're playing on the queenside? A king castled behind a fianchettoed bishop isn't typically very vulnerable to a piece-based attack. It *is* often vulnerable to a pawnstorm after white has castled queenside (e.g., the Yugoslav Attack vs the Dragon), but that depends on White leaving their rook on h1 and escorting their king to the other side of the board.
In a nutshell if you fianchetto a bishop, you have two strategies to choose from.
The first one is to gradually extend bishop's range, and to attack the side opposite to the fianchetto. It doesn't have to be the side where the opponents king is. In that case your aim is to win material, create weaknesses ( and only then win material), create passed pawns, or win 7th rank, rather then swiftly mate.
2. The second is to close the center ( and keep it closed as long as possible), and advance the pawns in front of Your King. Here bishop works as a defender, and is often an obstacle for attacking pieces. Such attacks most commonly happen in King Indian Defence, but also in closed sicilian, King Indian attack or vienna game.
Don't forget that fianchettoed bishop is great defender of Your King. While he is susceptible to pawn storms, piece attacks are unlikly to work. So in same side castlings, Your King is safe ( it is risky to lunch a pawn storm exposing one own's King), while you can attack the other side.
Thanks so much nerwal, tlay 80, michalmalkowski. This is the first time I got 3 responses in a row that all answered my questions and were great.
@Nerwal: Those games were great. Thanks a lot. I would have never have realised my self fianchetto bishop can come to the centre and attack the king side also.
@Michal: Is it possible for you to give me an example of 2nd option (closing centre and attacking on king side) I would like to see a master game on that. Fascinating
@tlay 80: You were right. I just played one benoni game today and I won. I was shocked to see how difficult it was for opponent side to attack my king side with that fianchetto structure. Normally I play the london with the london, and they do pawn sacrifices etc on my castled king side and destroy me. Now with this funny structure, pawns were placed perfect to prevent that.
@Everyone:
Question 1
Ok how do I deal with this annoying move in this benoni setup. If you can reply with a diagram it would be great, as I am not good at coordinates. Again these moves are from the top of my head, will not be perfect
Now if I lose this bishop am I as good as lost.What should I do here, how to prevent this and if it occurs what to do. Thank you.
Question 2
I feel very uncomfortable with this move. Is my centre going to collapase, what should I do?
@Michal: Is it possible for you to give me an example of 2nd option (closing centre and attacking on king side) I would like to see a master game on that. Fascinating
I'm not Michal, but this collection of games is probably the sort of thing you're looking for. This is the famous Mar del Plata variation that I mentioned too. Najdorf's win over Taimanov in the 1953 Candidates tournament is a particular classic. (It was only a few months after Gligoric had first trotted out the line -- in a win against Najdorf himself.) Reshevsky-Lombardy too.
As for question 1, black looks fine to me there, and I wouldn't be worried about the bishop trade. White's giving up their good DSB too, and without it, there's no obvious way to exploit the weak dark squares. In this particular line, black's doing quite well, since b4 Nd1 Nxe4 wins a key pawn. But even if white had seen about that, black's queenside prospects look good.
In some of those positions (not this one, I think), it can even make sense to play Bxh6 on the theory that white's queen will be misplaced on h6.
@samchessman123,
Question 1: Though I am not an expert at the benoni as black, in your given position, I believe that b4 followed by Nxe4 is winning. In general, losing the fianchettoed bishop is not always losing. There are many possible ways to protect the king and attack the queenside.
Question 2: Taking on e4 and then taking on d5 seems like the most obvious approach as it wins a pawn. The move e4-e5 is not often a good move as it weakens d5.
And in question 2, again, isn't black just winning a pawn?
Diagram
Just saying here, 12... Qxd5 does not prevent the trading of the Dark Square Bishops (DSBs) as it will eventually be lined up on the diagonal.
And in question 2, again, isn't black just winning a pawn?
Diagram
Just saying here, 12... Qxd5 does not prevent the trading of the Dark Square Bishops (DSBs) as it will eventually be lined up on the diagonal.
As you were writing that, I was adjusting the diagram to remove that objection. But I believe the only way to force a bishop trade would be to start with a queen trade, and once queens are off, there's no reason to worry about giving up the DSB.
Thanks again tlay80 and also ninja888. I really like the responses here. Questions I have now
1. What is this dark square/light square weakness people talk in openings. I never understood it. In this old benoni defense as black, which squares dark or light are weak and why? tlay80 , what do you mean when you said after trading off bishops, white doesn't have a bishop to attack weak black dark squares. I don't understand why my dark squares are weak, which squares are weak for white in this one.
2. Mar del plata variation is great. This is the sort of style I enjoy. Is it possible for me to play this with this benoni setup, because I like benoni also. Also what video should I watch to learn mar del plata attack, youtube videos don't have much. I really like hanging pawn youtube channel and it has video on kings indian- classical, saemisch, fianchetto, four pawns attack, avaerbak variation. Which hanging pawns KID youtube video should I watch if I i like mar del plata style.
3. So since that bishop trade is not bad. I have 3 responses to this bishop move. Tell me which one should I do, which one is bad?
Response 1
Response 2
Response 3
A few quick answers.
1. The risk in playing g6 is that it weakens the dark squares around your king, especially h6 and f6. Of course, if you have a bishop sitting on g7, that bishop can protect those squares. But, as you sense, you want to be careful about letting that bishop get traded off. That's especially true if white's dark squared bishop remains on the board -- if you merely traded your g7 bishop for a knight, then black's DSB and queen would have great chances for an attack on your king. On the other hand, if white's DSB is coming off at the same time as yours, the situation may not be so perilous. In most of the positions you've shown, I don't see obvious ways for white to exploit the weakened dark squares. (In other positions, a knight might have chances to infiltrate, or a rook on h1 might support a queen hitting h6).
2. The Mar del Plata is a very specific line within the King's Indian, and it depends on an e5 thrust rather than a c5 thrust, in order to close the center, control the f4 square, and start building a pawn chain pointed at the white king (black's f- and g-pawns will continue building the chain). That said, there are other lines in the King's Indian where black can play c5, either playing in the spirit of the Benoni or transposing directly into it. Many people choose a repertoire in which they play e5 against some of white's choices (e.g., the Classical) and c5 against others (e.g., the Saemisch).
I don't know any particular videos on the Mar del Plata, but it's the most famous line within the Classical Variation of the KID, so you'll likely find it discussed in that video.
3. It seems a little artificial to choose between those three, when the fourth alternative (2. ... b5, followed by Nxe4) seems so much better than any of them. I guess 2 and 3 seem better than 1, since black's queenside play is a tempo ahead in those.
Thanks tlay80, I have a much better understanding of these type of defenses now. Certainly better than I started with. I have a final question
1. Can't trading bishops be detrimental when opposition castles queenside or doesn't castle at all? Example now white pushes all pawns on king side and attack king, also might not castle on queen side making my fianchetto bishop useless even if it was not traded.
Very quick, and possibly wrong answer. Yes, that’s certainly an idea against kingside fianchetto formations (though white’s h-pawn usually moves up the board before they play Bh6). On a quick glance, though, white’s kingside play seems slower in this line, relative to black’s queenside counterattack, than it does in the comparable lines of the Dragon or Pirc.
In benoni there is no attack. You should choose KID, if you want to attack king.
Ok thanks everyone.
Hello everyone,
I was looking at some old benoni defense. Something like this. Please this move order maybe wrong i'm doing this in the top of my head, rather answer my question.
Now I like this defense but the problem is I'm a player who likes to attack the castled king, with pawn pushing etc and using lots of tactics on the castled side. Now my bishop is facing opposite side of opponent's king, so even if I can do some damage on the queenside, what is the point since I'm not attacking opposition players king, they can checkmate me while I continue doing queenside attack. So what is the aim of defenses like this, when I fianchetto bishop like this should I attack queenside, or attack their king as well. I have no professional knowledge of chess, so hope you understand my question. Thank you.