Two videos relevant to this presentation from Amber 2010.

Tarrasch Lesson - Gelfand on winning against Kramnik


(1/2) Kramnik on Karpov running for FIDE President

(2/2) Kramnik on his games in Amber

Watched the beginning as I was going to bed but fell asleep and don't remember, I'll have to watch again before I can comment! No offense, the video didn't put me to sleep, it was like 2 am

Thanks Dennis, I've never played this line with Black, but it was interesting to see the different ways that players with Black tried to cope with the sick knight on c7. Hmmm... A very strong player once harped on me about giving up my QB (with Black in the KID) in a couple of different systems, and maybe his advice holds true here as well. He admonished me that, while the bishop is often used as a 'can-opener' to White's king side, it is often a very valuable defensive piece for the light squares, especially e6 after Black has played f7f5. In this case it would seem that White's deal-closer was the infiltration of the bishop via d7.

As I mentioned, I don't play this line, but I suppose that if I were to consider it, I might want to keep the QB. True, swapping for the knight on f3 allows Black to exert more pressure on d4 & e5, but is the swap worth it? I don't know, after all, the knight on f3 will have to move at some point of it's own accord. Of course, in this line, keeping the QB might create a bit of a cluster-fort and cramped play, but then again, it is a KID.

I do have to admit that the knight on c7 is bad, not just bad, but BAAAADDDD! Unless there is some way to activate it I think this line is bust. Trying to activate via the king side would seem rather pointless - totally giving up on queenside play, for what?

Good stuff and much appreciated. I try to look at openings the same way. Zip through some lines pretty quick, pinpoint the problem areas/pieces and then start analysis. I also like how you pointed out that White should play exd5 in these lines with the knight on c7, you gave some good reasons for it.