Kings Indian Defense Orthodox Variation
King’s Indian Defense – Orthodox Variation
Definition
The King’s Indian Defense (KID) – Orthodox Variation is a branch of the King’s Indian in which White develops the king’s bishop to e2 (or occasionally f1) and castles quickly, while Black adopts the classic “e5–d6–Nf6–Bg7” structure. The most commonly cited tabiya (starting position of the variation) arises after: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6
Typical Move Order
Several transpositional paths exist, but the characteristic sequence is:
- 1. d4 Nf6
- 2. c4 g6
- 3. Nc3 Bg7
- 4. e4 d6
- 5. Nf3 O-O
- 6. Be2 e5
- 7. O-O Nc6 (or 7…exd4 8. Nxd4 Re8)
The move 6.Be2 is the defining ingredient that separates the Orthodox Variation from the Saemisch (6.f3), Four-Pawn Attack (6.f4), or Fianchetto (g3) lines.
Strategic Themes
- Classical central tension: Black allows White to occupy the center with pawns on d4 and e4, intending to undermine it later with …e5, …c5, or …f5.
- Pawn storms on opposite flanks: White often expands on the queenside with b4, c5, and a4, while Black looks for a kingside assault based on …f5–f4, …g5, and a knight hop to g4 or h5.
- Piece placement: White’s Be2 is less aggressive than Bg5 (as in the Averbakh) but keeps the f1–a6 diagonal protected and supports the thematic d4–d5 break. Black’s light-squared bishop, parked on g7, eyes the long diagonal and plays a crucial tactical role in many combinations.
- Timetables: Both sides race to open the position on “their” side of the board before the opponent’s counterplay lands.
Historical Significance
The Orthodox line has been a mainstay of top-level play since the mid-20th century, popularized by players such as David Bronstein and Garry Kasparov as Black and Tigran Petrosian and Anatoly Karpov as White. Its rich strategic complexity helped establish the King’s Indian as one of the most combative answers to 1.d4.
Famous Games
- Kasparov vs. Karpov, World Championship (Game 16), Moscow 1985 – Kasparov’s thematic …f5 break and exchange sacrifice on f3 illustrated Black’s attacking chances.
- Petrosian vs. Fischer, Candidates 1959 – Petrosian showed the positional squeeze potential of White’s queenside play with b4 and c5.
- Radjabov vs. Karjakin, Wijk aan Zee 2006 – A modern illustration of the “pawn storms” concept culminating in a spectacular perpetual check.
Example Line (Main Tabiya)
Below is a sample continuation highlighting both sides’ plans:
[[Pgn| d4 Nf6|c4 g6|Nc3 Bg7|e4 d6|Nf3 O-O|Be2 e5|O-O Nc6|d5 Ne7|b4 a5|Ba3 axb4|Bxb4 b6|a4 Nd7|a5 f5| fen|r2q1rk1/pp1nnpbp/1p1p2p1/PP1Ppp2/1BP1P3/2N2N2/2P1BPP1/R2Q1RK1 w - - 0 14|arrows|g7a1,f5f4|squares|e5,f5]]Here White stakes space on the queenside (a4–a5, b4) while Black directs resources toward …f5–f4 and a kingside attack. Both sets of ideas are on full display.
Interesting Facts & Anecdotes
- The name “Orthodox” does not imply a quiet or drawish line; rather, it distinguishes the traditional Be2 placement from newer aggressive setups like the Saemisch.
- In the 1970s, Bobby Fischer surprisingly avoided the KID as Black, believing White’s queenside plan in the Orthodox gave too much space. Garry Kasparov later revitalized Black’s prospects with dynamic piece play.
- Modern engines often evaluate the Orthodox Variation as roughly equal, yet practical results favor the better-prepared attacker—making it a favorite choice when players need to “unbalance” a must-win situation.
Related Ideas
- Mar del Plata Attack (White plays 9.Ne1 followed by 10.c5 and 11.f3/f4) – the sharpest branch within the Orthodox.
- Panno Variation – Black replies to 6.Be2 with 6…Nc6 and follows up with …a6 and …Rb8, aiming for …b5.
- Averbakh System (6.Be2 instead of Bg5) shares many move orders but features an early Bg5, pinning the knight on f6.