King's Indian Defence: When Opening Theory Becomes a Treadmill With No Exit

In the King's Indian Defence, Classical System, the move 9.b4 — the Bayonet Attack — has been White's fashionable weapon for two decades. It grabs queenside space while disrupting Black's standard kingside plans. Every player handling the Black pieces knows that facing it is a brutal memory test, where a single wrong move can lead to swift defeat. Recently, a DVD-format opening product has unveiled an alternative: 9...a5 instead of the orthodox 9...Nh5. Its significance reaches far beyond a mere theoretical suggestion. It mirrors the entire knowledge economy of engine-era chess, where opening theory has become a treadmill with no exit. The Mar del Plata game runs on the logic of opposite-wing attacks: White pushes queenside pawns with c5 and b4, while Black counterattacks on the kingside with f5 and g5. This structure creates a closed centre, where strategic intuition is said to matter more than calculating variations. But that conclusion belongs to an era before neural-network engines appeared. The move 9...Nh5 is the orthodox path, analysed to exhaustion across generations. After it, the lines become forced, and computer analysis regains a decisive role. That is precisely why the DVD chooses 9...a5 — a quieter strategic branch where there are very few concrete lines. In essence, this is the revival of a branch that has not been fully mined, not a new discovery. I have spent years tracking the Mar del Plata line. What drew my attention was not the move 9...a5 itself, but how it was marketed. The product claims that computers often do not know how to handle the resulting complex strategic positions. This is the weakest point in the entire argument, and simultaneously the load-bearing pillar of the whole advertising campaign. Structurally, the product targets two different buyer groups. The first consists of players who like to think for themselves instead of memorising. The second consists of busy people looking for a low-theory approach. These two profiles are not the same: one is an independent thinker, the other is short on time. The promotional article conflates them into one, and that is the first crack. Technically, 9...a5 is not a theoretical refutation. It is a repertoire substitution, trading criticality for practicality. White gains a freer position, while Black gains a stable, low-risk game. This trade suits players unwilling to spend hundreds of hours on a single branch. But it does not mean 9...Nh5 has been refuted. The entire product package provides not a single illustrative game, no database frequency, no engine evaluation, and names no player who has used this path. For a technical product, this is a significant evidentiary gap. The claim that computers do not understand these positions is a framing from the pre-AlphaZero era. Modern neural-network engines evaluate the manoeuvring positions of the King's Indian Defence far more reliably than the 2010s generation did. The claim is right in spirit — engines can misevaluate long-horizon strategic concessions — but outdated as a universal assertion. The paradox lies here: the weakest evidence is carrying the strongest marketing claim. This is the classic signature of promotional technical writing. When the author himself concedes that after the orthodox 9...Nh5, the lines become forced and computer analysis matters again, he inadvertently undercuts his own product. The DVD's value depends on avoiding the main road — a self-limiting value, not a universal improvement. It took me three months to learn that a beautiful chart is no match for a correct process. An opening product can present attractive positions, but without illustrative games and verifiable data, the buyer gets belief instead of evidence. Data is a mirror; but only those who dare face themselves see the truth. On a broader plane, the existence of such theoretical-escape products is a market signal. It shows the Bayonet Attack is scoring well for White at the level where the product's buyers compete. Without demand, there would be no answer. The move 9...a5 itself retains surprise value because it still rarely appears in club players' databases. But this is a depreciating asset: the more people use the DVD, the faster the surprise value erodes. Once this branch becomes popular, opponents and their seconds will prepare a response. An opening branch, after all, cannot be excluded — anyone can copy and re-analyse it. The core issue lies in how buyers correctly understand 9...a5. If they expect a winning weapon against White, they will be disappointed, because the author himself concedes that objectively the chances are equal. If they seek a durable defensive option with low memory demands, they may find what they need — provided they are strategically confident enough. After 2026, I no longer believe in predictions. I only believe in early-warning systems. For those weighing this approach, the first question is not whether 9...a5 is strong, but whether you are buying a weapon or buying an escape from the preparation treadmill. The answer will determine the product's real value in your opening cabinet.