Ladies Indian Defense

Ladies Indian Defense
a b c d e f G H   8th 8th 7th 7th 6th 6th 5 5 4th 4th 3 3 2 2 1 1   a b c d e f G H
Trains	White: d4, c4, Nf3; Black: Nf6, e6, b6
ECO key	E12 - E19
Named after	Fianchetto on the queenside
Played first	1914

The Queen's Indian Defense is an opening of the game of chess that emerges from the Indian Defense . It is one of the closed games and is classified in the ECO codes under the keys E12 to E19.

The Queen's Indian Defense begins, often with a change of train, with the moves:

1. d2-d4 Ng8-f6 2. c2-c4 e7-e6 3. Ng1-f3 b7-b6

history

The women's Indian defense was introduced into tournament practice by Aaron Nimzowitsch in 1914 and further developed in the following years by the former world chess champion Alexander Alekhine , among others . However, its inventor Nimzowitsch did not give it the name it bears today, its namesake was the Viennese master Hans Kmoch , who suggested in 1927: "The Indian can also be divided and registered as follows:" King's Indian "if the king's runner is fianceted ," Ladies 'Indian "when the ladies' runner is fianceted." In parallel with the Nimzo-Indian Defense , which is in a sense her sister ( Savielly Tartakower viewed Queen's Indian and Nimzo-Indian as "two opposing sides of the same opening"), the solid Queen's Indian, which was considered an "active, almost aggressive alternative to the Queen's Gambit " became increasingly popular and has been ever since 1930s standard repertoire among world class players.

It reached a high point of its popularity in the 1980s, when the then world chess champion Anatoli Karpow used it together with the Nimzo-Indian Defense as the main weapon against 1. d2 – d4. During the supremacy of world champion Garry Kasparov , it fell a little sidelined, as Kasparov preferred more dynamic and combat-oriented openings as a black, especially the King's Indian Defense . Recently, the Queen's Indian Defense has become extremely popular. It is played regularly by the former world champions Viswanathan Anand and Wladimir Kramnik as well as several world-class players, including Péter Lékó , Michael Adams and Sergei Karjakin .

Basic strategic idea

The Damenindische Defense owes its basic idea to a realization by Aaron Nimzowitsch : it is not absolutely necessary to fill the center with pawns. It is also sufficient to control it with your own characters. Black takes advantage of the fact that White did not support the center-square e4 with 3. Ng1 – f3 and thus does not threaten to take over the dominance in the center on the fourth move with e2 – e4 . Black uses this time to fianchette his queen bishop with 3.… b7 – b6 and then 4.… Bc8 – b7 and thus control the central squares d5 and e4 with his knight from f6 and his bishop from b7. He remains flexible with his center pawns and, depending on the course of the game, can continue with d7 – d5, c7 – c5, d7 – d6 along with e6 – e5 or f7 – f5.

variants

	a	b	c	d	e	f	G	H
8th									8th
7th									7th
6th									6th
5									5
4th									4th
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	G	H

The classic main line after 7.… Nf6 – e4.

Main variation with 4. g2 – g3

With 4. g2 – g3 White prepares a fianchetto of his bishop after g2, from where he can attack the squares e4 and d5. A basic idea here is that the black bishop on b7 is uncovered, while the white bishop on g2 will be covered by the white king on g1 after the short castling . This can repeatedly lead to tactical threats, which White sometimes uses to achieve positional goals. This way of playing is very popular with white players and is preferred by Wesselin Topalow and the former world chess champion Vladimir Kramnik , among others .

• 4.… Bc8 – a6. This move was introduced by Nimzowitsch and is now played more often than the classic 4.… Bc8 – b7. White should either move a piece to cover the pawn c4 or weaken himself with 5. b2 – b3. If White covers the pawn with the queen, sooner or later Black will come to c7 – c5 because White can no longer answer with d4 – d5. In return, White can play e2 – e4. This position has been played countless times at the highest level in recent years. An extensive theory has developed from this. A possible continuation after White's main move 5. b2 – b3 is 5.… Bf8 – b4 + (the idea is to make the structure Nbd2 and Bb2 more difficult) 6. Bc1 – d2 Bb4 – e7 (Bd2 is unfavorable. White will invest a little more tempo to put this bishop better.) 7. Bf1 – g2 c7 – c6 8. Bd2 – c3 d7 – d5 9. Nf3 – e5 Nf6 – d7 10. Ne5xd7 Nb8xd7 11. Nb1 – d2 0–0 12. 0–0 .

• 4.… Bc8 – b7. The classic black answer. After 5. Bf1 – g2 Bf8 – e7 6. 0–0 0–0 White has the choice:
  • the ambitious pawn sacrifice 7. d4 – d5 e6xd5 8. Nf3 – h4 (makes use of the pin on the long diagonal: Black cannot play 8.… d5xc4 because of 9. Bg2xb7) 8.… c7 – c6 9. c4xd5 Nf6xd5 10. Nh4 – f5 leads to a complicated double-edged game. This variation is generally not popular with black players and has contributed to the popularity of the modern 4.… Bc8 – a6.
  • 7. Nb1 – c3 Nf6 – e4 is solid. See diagram on the right - a typical black motif: a minor piece is placed on e4 so that the white e-pawn cannot advance. Otherwise White would have an advantage with Qc2 and e2 – e4. Aaron Nimzowitsch moved 7th… d7 – d5 in the Immortal Zugzwang game , which is theoretically doubtful from today's perspective. In the case of 7.… Nf6 – e4, after 8. Qd1 – c2 Ne4xc3 9. Qc2xc3 f7 – f5 (or 9.… c7 – c5) there is a positional middlegame with chances on both sides.

Petrosian system 4. a2-a3

With 4. a2 – a3 White prevents the pegging of the planned Nb1 – c3 with Bf8 – b4 and wants to come to e2 – e4. The move a2 – a3 does not itself contribute to the development. Although it was tried by world-class players as early as the 1930s, for example by the Indian chess master Mir Sultan Khan (he beat José Raoul Capablanca in Hastings in 1930), by Aaron Nimzowitsch , by Salo Flohr and Alexander Alekhine , it bears his name after Tigran Petrosjan , the world champion of the years 1963–1969, who had worked it out in detail since the 1950s. Another famous supporter of this white system was Garry Kasparov , the world chess champion of the years 1985-2000, who used it with great success, especially in the 1980s.

• 4.… Bc8 – b7. Initially, black does not care about the white ideas and continues to develop quickly. A possible continuation is 5. Nb1 – c3 d7 – d5 (otherwise White moves 6. d4 – d5 and 7. e2 – e4) 6. c4xd5 Nf6xd5 (after 6.… e6xd5 the b7 bishop is unfavorable) 7. Qd1 – c2 ( prepares e4) 7.… Nd5xc3 8. b2xc3 Bf8 – e7 9. e2 – e4 0–0 10. Bf1 – d3 c7 – c5.
• 4.… Bc8 – a6. Similar to the main variation with 4. g2 – g3, Black wants to lure the white queen away from the d5 square in order to be able to play c7 – c5. It could follow: 5. Qd1 – c2 Ba6 – b7 6. Nb1 – c3 c7 – c5 7. e2 – e4 c5xd4 8. Nf3xd4 Nb8 – c6 with a complicated game.
• 4.… c7 – c5 after this direct counterattack in the center a pawn structure arises like in the modern Benoni defense . E.g. 5. d4-d5 Bc8-a6 6. Dd1-c2 e6xd5 7. c4xd5 g7-g6 8. Nb1-c3 Bf8-g7.

The variant 4. Nb1 – c3

This move is most often played along with 4. g2 – g3 and 4. a2 – a3. However, it usually transfers to other systems by changing trains . With 4.… Bc8 – b7 5. a2 – a3 the game changes into the Petrosjan system and after 4.… Bf8 – b4 there is a line of the Nimzowitsch-Indian defense . 4.… Bc8 – b7 5. Bc1 – g5 Bf8 – e7 6. e2 – e3 0–0 7. Bf1 – d3 d7 – d5 often arises from the Queen's Gambit rejected .

Other sequels on move 4

• The central system 4. e2 – e3 is very solid, but does not pose serious problems for Black in the opening. It could be 4.… Bc8 – b7 5. Bf1 – d3 d7 – d5 6. 0–0 Bf8 – d6 7. Nb1 – c3 0–0 or 5.… c7 – c5 6. 0–0 Bf8 – e7 . In the latter case, 7. Nb1 – c3 threatens to narrow d4 – d5. 7.… c5xd4 8. e3xd4 d7 – d5 fends off that. 9. c4xd5 accepts Isolani after Nf6xd5 10. Nf3 – e5. 9. b2 – b3 is ready to have "hanging pawns" made on d4 and c4. White is predestined for this pawn structure in the central system because 4. e2 – e3 adjusts the diagonal c1 – g5 and suggests the way out on the long diagonal. b2 – b3 would then have a double function. 9.… 0–0 10. Bc1 – b2 Nb8 – c6 reached the game Keres - Smyslow, Candidates Tournament Zurich 1953 .

• 4. Bc1 – f4 ( Miles variant) 4.… Bc8 – b7 5. e2 – e3 Bf8 – e7 6. h2 – h3 (after 6. Nb1 – c3 follows 6.… Nf6 – h5 and White loses the pair of bishops .) 6.… 0–0 7. Nb1 – c3 d7 – d5 8. c4xd5. Here Black would best hit back with 8.… Nf6xd5, so that his bishop on b7 could get better into play. White can win a pawn after 9. Nc3xd5 Qd8xd5 with 10. Bf4xc7, but after 10.… Be7 – b4 + 11. Nf3 – d2 Nb8 – c6 Black has more than sufficient compensation, so that White is better with 10. a2 – a3 or 10. Bf1 – d3 should continue after which Black equalized the game.

• 4. Bc1 – g5 usually goes over after 4.… Bc8 – b7 5. e2 – e3 Bf8 – e7 6. Nb1 – c3 by switching to the variants according to 4. Nb1 – c3. For example in the game Spasski – Polugajewski, Moscow 1961 .

literature

• Jerzy Konikowski : Petrosian system 4. a3 in the women's Indian defense (E12) . Current Chess Openings Volume 7. Joachim Beyer Verlag, Hollfeld 1995, ISBN 3-88805-260-2 .
• John Emms: Starting out the queen's indian. Everyman Chess 2004, ISBN 1-85744-363-2 .

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Hans Kmoch: The Art of Defense , Berlin / New York 1982 (4th ed.), P. 33.
2. ^ ^{A b} Andrew Soltis : Understanding the Queen's Indian Defense , Great Neck / New York 1982, p. 1. [from English]