Kingston Defence

Chess diagram|=
tright|
=
rd|nd|bd|qd|kd|bd|nd|rd|=
pd|pd|pd|pd| | |pd|pd|=
| | |__|pd|__|__|__|=
| |__| |__|pd|__|__|=
| |__|pl|pl|__|__|__|=
| |__|__|__|__|__|__|=
pl|pl|pl|__|__|pl|pl|pl|=
rl|nl|bl|ql|kl|bl|nl|rl|=|The Kingston Defence is an uncommon chess opening. It is characterised by the opening moves:

:1. , followed by:2.d4 f5

giving the position at right. (It can also be reached after the transposition of moves 1.d4 f5 2.e4 e6 — a form of Staunton Gambit Declined.) Its ECO classification is C01.

The first record of the defence being played is Schiffers-Chigorin, 1880. The first record of a win by Black is the 1892 victory of Elson over Emanuel Lasker. The line fell into disuse until 1989, when the publication of a monograph by Gavin Wilson suggested a repertoire of responses for Black to the principal third moves available to White, namely 3.exf5, 3.e5, 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2 and 3.Bd3.

In 1998, Clyde Nakamura, working independently, devised the Franco-Hiva Gambit variation of the Kingston Defence—1.e4 e6 2.d4 f5 3.exf5 Nf6?! 4.fxe6 Bd6?! — in which Black sacrifices two pawns in exchange for a lead in development. This is an intriguing bypass to the problem set by the Exchange Variation of the Kingston Defence—1.e4 e6 2.d4 f5 3.exf5 exf5 — which undoubtedly poses the most serious threat to the viability of Black's defence.

Modern origins

The Kingston Defence emerged out of dissatisfaction with many of Black's positions positions that resulted from Owen's Defence, as played in the 1970s. For example, after 1.e4 b6 2.d4 e6 3.c4 Bb7 4.Bd3, Black would often try 4..f5?! to tempt White into an all-out kingside assault with 5.exf5 and 6.Qh5+, while Black tried to mop up material starting with 5..Bxg2. (See, for example, Browne–Miles, Tilburg 1979.)

One alternative being tried at the time by English players such as Mike Basman was another form of general-purpose fianchetto defence based on ...a6 and ...b5, or ...h6 and ...g5, or both. Another line of reasoning proposed that Black was committing his queenside bishop too early to b7 in Owen's Defence. The idea behind 2...f5?! in the Kingston Defence, besides the immediate challenge to the White centre, is that it avoids committing the queenside bishop to a square where it might get blocked.

General considerations

The Kingston Defence shares a weakness with the French Defence — in the form of the constrained queen's bishop -- and a strength with the Dutch Defence — namely the early thrust of the f-pawn, which often supports a knight on e4. (These French and Dutch similarities led to the first, uncomfortable name for the defence: Frutch.) White's decision at move three tends to define the nature of the game that follows. If White pushes the e-pawn to e5, the following pawn formation often results:Chess diagram|=
tleft|
=
| | | | | | | |=
| | |pd| | |pd|pd|=
pd| | | |pd| | | |=
|pd| | |pl|pd| | |=
| | |pl| | | | |=
| | | | | | | |=
pl|pl| | | |pl|pl|pl|=
| | | | | | | |=|A typical sequence in the Advance Variation would be: (in algebraic chess notation) 1.e4 e6 2.d4 f5 3.e5 Ne7 4.Nf3 c5 5.c3 (if 5.dxc5 Ng6) Nbc6.

Black has more space on the queenside (see chess terminology), and will fianchetto his queen bishop to bear down on White's kingside and deter a pawn thrust to d5. Black's rook will contest the c-file. With the centre almost blocked, Black may decide to put his King on e7 or f7, creating the opportunity for a kingside pawn storm which might catch out a White who is unfamiliar with the defence.

If, on the other hand, White decides to exchange on f5, the game frequently arrives at this pawn formation:Chess diagram|=
tleft|
=
| | | | | | | |=
pd|pd|pd| | | |pd|pd|=
| | | | | | | |=
| | |pd| |pd| | |=
| | |pl| | | | |=
| | | | | | | |=
pl|pl|pl| | |pl|pl|pl|=
| | | | | | | |=|A critical line in the Exchange Variation is 1.e4 e6 2.d4 f5 3.exf5 exf5 4.Bd3 Nc6?!, after which 5. Nf3 preserves some positional advantage, whereas 5. Bxf5 leads to the very sharp 5... Qf6, causing a rapid clearance of central pawns.

Black has played his pawn to d5 in order to prevent White from placing his king bishop on c4, which would make Black's kingside castling either impossible or unwise. So White has created holes on e5 and e6, which a knight on g5 can exploit to dangerous effect. Black's principal counterplay exists in moving his king knight to e4, which can be supported by manoeuvring the queen knight to f6 and, if permitted, launching a pawn storm with ...g5. If ever White nudges the knight on e4 away by playing f3, it is usually best to retreat the knight to d6.

Black can quickly castle kingside, but White has a simple plan in playing c4 and Qb3 to put pressure on the a2-g8 diagonal and exploit Black's slow development on the queenside.

In summary, the selection of the Kingston Defence today can still cause White a surprise at both top and less exalted levels. Rather than seek an immediate, perhaps sacrificial refutation, White's best general strategy is to accumulate small advantages (such as trying to exploit the holes on e5 and e6 with White's knights), while watching out for potential Black pawn rollers on either wing.

Further reading

* [http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170201306091&ih=007&category=2554&ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1#ebayphotohosting David Robert Lonsdale. "French Defence: The Kingston Defence"]
*

References

* [http://www.ficgs.com/wikichess_3670.html Kingston Defence on FICGS wikichess]
* [http://www.chessville.com/UCO/CN/FrancoHivaGambit1.htm Franco-Hiva variation of the Kingston Defence]
* [http://gavinwilson.wordpress.com/2008/03/16/the-kingston-defence-revisited/ A few notes on the origins of the defence from Gavin Wilson's blog]