In the game of chess, Indian Defence or Indian Game is a broad term for a group of openings characterised by the moves:
- 1. d4 Nf6[1]
Quick Facts Moves, ECO ...
Indian Defence
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | | 8 | | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | |
|
Moves | 1.d4 Nf6 |
---|
ECO | A45–A79 D70–D99 E00–E99 |
---|
Parent | Queen's Pawn Game |
---|
Close
They are all to varying degrees hypermodern defences, where Black invites White to establish an imposing presence in the centre with the plan of undermining and ultimately destroying it. Although the Indian defences were championed in the 1920s by players in the hypermodern school, they were not fully accepted until Russian players showed in the late 1940s that these systems are sound for Black. Since then, the Indian defences have become a popular way for Black to respond to 1.d4 because they often offer a balanced game with winning chances for both sides. Transpositions are important and many variations can be reached by several move orders. It is also possible to transpose back into classical openings such as the Queen's Gambit and the Slav Defence; these are not considered "Indian" openings.
The usual White second move is 2.c4, grabbing a larger share of the centre and allowing the move Nc3, to prepare for moving the e-pawn to e4 without blocking the c-pawn with the knight. Black's most popular replies are
- 2...e6, freeing the king's bishop and leading into the Nimzo-Indian Defence, Queen's Indian Defence, Bogo-Indian Defence, Modern Benoni, Catalan Opening, or regular lines of the Queen's Gambit Declined,
- 2...g6, preparing a fianchetto of the king's bishop and entering the King's Indian Defence or Grünfeld Defence, and
- 2...c5, the Benoni Defence, with an immediate counter-punch in the centre,
but other moves are played as detailed below.
Instead of 2.c4, White often plays 2.Nf3. Then Black may play 2...d5 which may transpose to a Queen's Gambit after 3.c4. Or Black may play 2...e6 which retains possibilities of transposing to a Queen's Gambit or Queen's Indian Defence. Alternatively 2...g6 may transpose to a King's Indian Defence or Grünfeld Defence, while 2...c5 invites transposition to a Benoni. White can deny Black any of these transpositions by refraining from c2–c4 over the next several moves.
On the second move, White can also play 2.Bg5, the Trompowsky Attack. Black can respond 2...Ne4 (see 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4), or 2...e6 (see 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 e6), among other moves. A third alternative for White is the rarer 2.Nc3. Then Black may play 2...d5, after which 3.Bg5 is the Richter-Veresov Attack (D01, see 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5). Black may also play 2...g6 (see 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6).
The earliest known use of the term "Indian Defence" was in 1884, and the name was attributed to the openings used by the Indian player Moheschunder Bannerjee against John Cochrane.[2] Philip W. Sergeant describes Moheschunder as having been as of 1848 "a Brahman in the Mofussil—up country, as we might say—who had never been beaten at chess!"[3] Sergeant wrote in 1934 (substituting algebraic notation for his descriptive notation):[4]
The Indian Defences by g6 coupled with d6, or b6 coupled with e6, were largely taught to European players by the example of Moheschunder and other Indians, to whom the fianchetto developments were a natural legacy from their own game. The fondness for them of the present Indian champion of British chess, Mir Sultan Khan, is well known. But they are now so widely popular that Dr. S. G. Tartakover was able to declare, some years ago, that "to-day fianchettos are trumps." A sequel hardly to have been anticipated from the discovery of Moheschunder in the Mofussil!
In the following game, Moheschunder (Black) plays the Grünfeld Defence against Cochrane in 1855—some 38 years before Ernst Grünfeld was born.
- John Cochrane vs. Moheschunder Bannerjee, May 1855:
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Be2 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 9.0-0 cxd4 10.cxd4 Nc6 11.Bb2 Bg4 12.Rc1 Rc8 13.Ba3 Qa5 14.Qb3 Rfe8 15.Rc5 Qb6 16.Rb5 Qd8 17.Ng5 Bxe2 18.Nxf7 Na5 and White mates in three (19.Nh6+ double check Kh8 20.Qg8+ Rxg8 21.Nf7#).[5][6]
Another of the games between these players transposed to what would today be called the Four Pawns Attack against the King's Indian Defence. This time Moheschunder, as Black, won after some enterprising (and perhaps dubious) sacrificial play:
- 1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f4 0-0 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Bd3? e5! 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.d5 Nxe4!? 10.Nxe4 f5 11.Neg5 e4 12.Ne6 exf3! 13.Nxd8?! fxg2 14.Rg1 Bxd1 15.Ne6 Bg4 16.Nxf8 Kxf8 17.Rxg2 Nd7 18.Bf4 Nc5 19.Kd2 Rc8 20.Kc2 Bf3 21.Rf2 Nxd3 22.Kxd3 Be4+ 23.Ke3 b5 24.cxb5 Bxd5 25.Rd2 Bc4 26.Rad1 Bf6 27.Bh6+ Kg8 28.Kf4 Re8 29.b3 Bxb5 30.Rc1 Be2! 31.Re1 Re4+ 32.Kg3 Bh4+ 0–1[7]
The term "Indian Defence" was popularized by Savielly Tartakower in the early 1920s. In his 1924 book Die hypermoderne Schachpartie, Tartakower classifies the Indian Defences under the broad headings "Old Indian" (...d6 and eventual ...g6) and "Neo-Indian" (...e6 and eventual ...b6). Under the heading "Old Indian", he considers the openings now known as the King's Indian and Grünfeld Defences. He also proposes the names "Proto-Indian" for 1.d4 d6, "Pseudo-Indian" for 1.d4 c5, "Semi-Indian" for 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 and "Three Quarter Indian" for 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nd2, none of which came into wider use.[8]
The modern names "King's Indian Defence", "Queen's Indian Defence", "Old Indian Defence" and "King's Indian Attack" were attributed by Richard Reti to Hans Kmoch, though Réti himself did not approve of these terms. Réti also attributed to Kmoch the terms "All Indian Defence" (where Black fianchettoes both bishops after 1.d4 Nf6) and "Queen's Indian Attack" (where White opens 1.Nf3 and 2.b3) but these did not come into general use.[9]