Main
Date: 07 Jan 2007 00:48:36
From:
Subject: Which Indian defence is:
1. Less theorotical?
2. More positional?
3. Playable against flank openings?

Thanks.





 
Date: 22 Jan 2007 05:01:33
From:
Subject: Re: Which Indian defence is:
How playable is the Bogo-Indian against flank openings?

How does the Queen's Indian fare on all three criteria.

hicetnunc wrote:
> I'd say :
>
> 1 - less theoretical =3D Bogo-Indian (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+), but
> it's tongue in cheek, as you need something against 3.Nc3 too :-) (you
> can play 3...d5 though)
>
> 2 - more positional =3D Bogo-Indian again - very few tactical shots
>
> 3 - playable against flank openings - clearly King's Indian Defence
> (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7) offers maximum flexibility (white can't
> avoid it)
>
> [email protected] a =E9crit :
> > 1. Less theorotical?
> > 2. More positional?
> > 3. Playable against flank openings?
> >=20
> > Thanks.



  
Date: 22 Jan 2007 14:06:14
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Which Indian defence is:
<[email protected] > wrote:
> How playable is the Bogo-Indian against flank openings?

I don't understand your question. How can you play anything like the
Bogo-Indian (which requires ...Bb4+) unless White has played d4 (or,
at least, d3) and c4?

> How does the Queen's Indian fare on all three criteria.

Try it and see?


Dave.

--
David Richerby Miniature Atlas (TM): it's like a map
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ of the world but you can hold in it
your hand!


 
Date: 10 Jan 2007 07:05:15
From: hicetnunc
Subject: Re: Which Indian defence is:
I'd say :

1 - less theoretical =3D Bogo-Indian (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+), but
it's tongue in cheek, as you need something against 3.Nc3 too :-) (you
can play 3...d5 though)

2 - more positional =3D Bogo-Indian again - very few tactical shots

3 - playable against flank openings - clearly King's Indian Defence
(1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7) offers maximum flexibility (white can't
avoid it)

[email protected] a =E9crit :
> 1. Less theorotical?
> 2. More positional?
> 3. Playable against flank openings?
>=20
> Thanks.