Kings Indian Defense: Samisch Variation & Yates Defense
King’s Indian Defense
Definition
The King’s Indian Defense (KID) is a hyper-modern response to 1. d4 in which Black allows White to occupy the center with pawns and then attacks it with pieces and pawn breaks. A canonical move-order is:
- 1. d4 Nf6
- 2. c4 g6
- 3. Nc3 Bg7
- 4. e4 d6
This setup can be reached through many transpositions (e.g., 1. c4, 1. Nf3, or even from the English and Réti).
Usage in Play
Black castles quickly, develops the king’s-side pieces, and prepares thematic pawn breaks:
- …e5 in the classical lines, challenging the d4-pawn.
- …c5 in the Fianchetto or Sämisch systems, striking the c-pawn chain.
- …f5 in the Four-Pawn and Bayonet Attacks, igniting a king-side pawn storm.
White chooses among solid systems (Fianchetto 3.g3), space-grabbing setups (Sämisch 5.f3), or the sharp Classical Main Line (7.0-0 and 9.b4).
Strategic & Historical Significance
The KID epitomizes hyper-modern strategy: control, rather than immediate occupation, of the center. Bronstein, Geller, Fischer, Kasparov, Radjabov, and Nakamura all used it as a principal weapon against 1. d4, while Karpov and Petrosian showed how to squeeze it positionally from the White side. Although computer engines once questioned its soundness, modern AI evaluations again view it as fully viable, keeping it popular at every level.
Illustrative Snapshot
Interesting Facts & Anecdotes
- When Deep Blue prepared for its 1997 match with Kasparov, the computer team largely avoided the KID because Kasparov’s understanding of its complications was considered “computer-proof.”
- David Bronstein claimed you could “write a romance novel” about the KID because “no other opening has so many tortured love stories on the king’s side.”
- Teimour Radjabov used the KID almost exclusively as Black in elite events during the early 2000s, prompting commentators to dub him “Mr. King’s Indian.”
Sämisch Variation (against the King’s Indian)
Definition
The Sämisch Variation is a combative system for White that appears after:
- 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6
- 5. f3
Named after German GM Friedrich Sämisch, the key move 5.f3 bolsters the e4-pawn, prevents …Ng4, and prepares a massive pawn center with g4 & h4 possibilities.
How It Is Employed
Typical continuations:
- 5…0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 exd4 8.Nxd4 Nc6 – classical central tension.
- 5…c5 – the Benoni-style counter.
- 5…a6 – the sharp Panno, preparing …b5.
White generally castles long (0-0-0) and storms the king-side pawns (g4–h4–h5) while Black counter-attacks on the queen-side with …b5–b4 or breaks in the center with …d5.
Strategic & Historical Notes
The Sämisch often leads to mutual opposite-side attacks, producing some of the most double-edged positions in chess. It gained theoretical depth in the 1950s–60s thanks to Geller and Gligorić, was revived by Kasparov in the 1990s, and remains popular in engine-backed preparation today.
Example Mini-Game
Engaging Tidbits
- The famous “Kasparov Immortal” vs. Topalov (Wijk aan Zee 1999) started as a Sämisch; Kasparov uncorked a queen sacrifice on move 24 and eventually mated with both knights.
- Friedrich Sämisch was so ahead of his time that many of his pet lines (including in the Nimzo-Indian) were considered dubious until modern engines vindicated them.
- Because the pawn structure after f3 can lock in the queen’s bishop, some amateurs jokingly call 5.f3 “putting the bishop in jail” – yet grandmasters routinely prove its dynamism.
Yates Defense (Queen’s Gambit Declined, Yates Variation)
Definition
The term “Yates Defense” generally refers to the Yates Variation of the Queen’s Gambit Declined (QGD), characterized by:
- 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7
- 5. e3 0-0 6. Nf3 h6 7. Bh4 Ne4
The move 7…Ne4 (instead of the more traditional 7…b6 or 7…Nbd7) is Black’s trademark idea, immediately challenging the pinning bishop and seeking rapid simplification.
Practical Use
Black hopes for:
- Bishop exchange: 8.Bxe7 Qxe7, reducing White’s attacking prospects.
- Central stability followed by …c5 or …f5, depending on piece placement.
- A favorable endgame if minor pieces come off early.
White can decline exchanges with 8.Bg3 or sharpen play with 8.Bxe7 Qxe2 9.Qc2, though Black’s structure remains solid.
Strategic & Historical Perspective
Named after English master Frederick Dewhurst Yates (1884-1932), the line was a cornerstone of his repertoire in the 1920s. Although less popular today than the Tartakower or Lasker QGD systems, it retains surprise value and solid strategic foundations.
Sample Continuation
Curiosities & Anecdotes
- In London 1922, Alekhine vs. Yates saw Black equalize effortlessly with this line, prompting Capablanca to annotate that “the simplest moves are sometimes the best defense.”
- Because it often liquidates White’s dark-squared bishop—the usual attacking piece against the QGD—some theoreticians call 7…Ne4 the “bishop-busting maneuver.”
- Modern engines show a near-equal evaluation throughout; therefore, a well-prepared underdog can reliably employ the Yates Defense to steer a game toward tame waters.