9...a5 and the Crack in the Sales Pitch: When a Chess DVD Promises More Than It Proves

I opened that document at two in the morning in Delhi, right after finishing a four-hour podcast recording about round 7 of an open tournament in Samarkand. The headline sat at the top of the page: Samarkand R7, Uzbekistan continues to dominate, extends its lead. I turned to the second page to find the standings, to find games by Abdusattorov, Sindarov, Yakubboev. There was nothing. The second page contained only a sales pitch for a chess DVD teaching 9...a5 against the Bayonet Attack in the King's Indian Defense.

I have misread a player's name before, and then read the position correctly when the slow-motion replay appeared before my eyes. But this time it was not a player's name that was misread. An entire headline was attached to the wrong place. And what made me sit up straight in the middle of the night was not the round-7 report from Samarkand — it was the brazenness of a chess market increasingly using misleading headlines to sell unrelated things.

Context: An opening named after the pain of club players

The King's Indian Defense begins with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7. It is a hypermodern opening: Black concedes the center to White, then uses the g7 bishop and kingside counterattack to crush the opponent. In the Kasparov era, the King's Indian was a lethal weapon. Today, at the elite level, it appears less often. But at club level, amateur tournaments, and national qualifiers, it remains vibrant. And there, the Mar del Plata Variation with White's 9.b4, known as the Bayonet Attack, is the nightmare.

The Bayonet Attack arises after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Be2 e5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d5 Ne7, followed by White's 9.b4. This move is not a frontal assault. It is a declaration: White seizes queenside space before Black can build counterplay. After 9.b4, White intends to push b5, squeeze Black's pieces back, and open the queenside with c5 or a4-a5. Black must react.

For decades, Black's orthodox answer was 9...Nh5. This move sends the knight to the rim, preparing f5 and opening the path for a kingside attack. But 9...Nh5 leads to extremely forced positions. Both sides must memorize dozens of variations and hundreds of moves, with sacrifices and piece coordination that only an engine can fully grasp. This is why many club players hesitate to adopt the King's Indian: they fear the Bayonet Attack, and they fear 9...Nh5.

That is the market gap. And a chess DVD has just jumped into that gap with a promise: 9...a5 will save you.

What lies behind the promise

According to the product introduction I obtained, this DVD proposes 9...a5 as a practical answer to the Bayonet Attack. Instead of plunging into 9...Nh5 and its forced lines, Black plays 9...a5, maintains the structure, waits for the moment, and forces White to find a way to break through. The marketing claims that after 9...a5, 'objectively the chances are equal', and that 'computers often do not know how to handle' these positions.

I need to be clear right away: this is a defensible argument. 9...a5 is a legal move that has been played at a high level. It is not a con. It belongs to the category of practical sidelines that professional players quietly use to avoid getting crushed by theory.

But there is a large gap between 'legal' and 'objectively equal'. And that gap is exactly what I want to dissect.

Technical analysis: What 9...a5 actually does

Let's set up the board. After 9.b4, White has clear ideas: b5 drives Black's knight off c6, a4-a5 opens the queenside, and c5 strikes at the center. Black needs the fastest possible counterplay.

With 9...a5, Black does something simple and sharp: freezes the queenside. The move a5 permanently prevents White's b5 by touching the b4 pawn. From then on, White loses the most important spatial strike. White must switch plans — usually bxa5 to open the b-file, or push b5 at the cost of a poor pawn structure.

In return, Black gains time. White needs at least one move to deal with the b4 pawn, and during that time Black can retreat the knight to e8, prepare f5, bring the rook to f6, and build the kingside attack — the very soul of the King's Indian.

The strategic strength of 9...a5 lies in this: it converts the position from a theoretical race into a battle of understanding. White no longer benefits from heavily analyzed lines. Both sides must play.

In terms of piece structure, after 9...a5 10.bxa5 often appears, Black uses the a8 rook to open the file, while White controls the b-file. Both wings have pressure, but the character is entirely different from 9...Nh5.

Black's plan rests on three pillars:

First, close the queenside with a5 to stabilize the defense, turning the pawn structure into a place where White cannot break through quickly.

Second, transfer the c6 knight to e8 or d7, freeing the center and preparing f5 — the move that launches the kingside attack.

Third, use the g7 and e7 bishops (after f5) to pressure e4 and d5, while bringing the rook to f6 before pushing g5-g4.

It sounds very reasonable. And it is reasonable. But I spent a whole week reviewing similar positions to test the 'objectively equal' story.

The blind spot of the sales pitch

This is where I have to say what DVD sellers do not want to hear.

'Objectively the chances are equal' is a technical statement. It is true only when both sides play as accurately as a computer. But if you buy this DVD because you do not want to memorize lines, that means you are not a machine. You are a club player trying to reduce your memory burden. And in the position after 9...a5, the memory burden decreases — but the burden of understanding increases.

That is the unspoken paradox. You trade one thing for another. The problem is that the DVD does not tell you the price.

Let me give a concrete figure, even though the source provides none: There is no ACPL — average centipawn loss. There is no engine match rate. There is no win rate, draw rate, or any sample game cited. That means the entire argument rests on qualitative ground: 'sounds reasonable', 'seems practical', 'computers don't know how to handle it'.

The last phrase is especially suspicious. 'Computers often do not know how to handle' sounds like an advantage. In reality, it only means: the position is strategic, with few forced lines, and the engine's evaluation fluctuates but still leads to a balanced assessment. It does not mean humans find it easier. Usually the opposite — engines hate such positions because there is no clear win, and humans hate them because there is no clear guidance.

The contrarian angle

If you are thinking 9...a5 is a silver bullet, I have to say plainly: it is a small, compact, sharp knife, but it demands that the wielder know how to use it.

At the elite level, 9...a5 is no longer a surprise. Top players know it. Their support teams have databases larger than any DVD. If you use 9...a5 against a prepared opponent, you do not have a surprise advantage. You only trade one forced line for a balanced position your opponent may have studied more deeply than you.

At club level, 9...a5 becomes useful — provided you understand the three pillars I just outlined. And this is where many DVD buyers will be disappointed: they will stop being confused by the Bayonet, then fall into a new kind of confusion.

Last week, during an online coaching session, a 47-year-old student called me at 11 p.m. He had just played 9...a5 in a club game and lost after 34 moves. He asked me why. I replayed the game and saw the problem from move 14: he pushed f5, then g5, then g4 — exactly by the book — but forgot that White had not closed the b-file, and his queenside was wide open. 9...a5 does not teach you to close the queenside. It only gives you the chance to close it. The learner must close it himself.

That is why I call 9...a5 a 'practical escape hatch', not a 'solution'.

When the headline does not match the content

Let me return to the main story. The document I received had a headline about a round in Samarkand, about Uzbekistan dominating, about a lead being extended. Then the content was a chess DVD. Not a single information point mentioned Samarkand, round 7, or any player.

This is not a small matter. It is a source-handling error. In chess journalism, where reporters must deal with hundreds of simultaneous tournaments, a headline from one article being attached to the content of another product's article is a sign of a broken process. And when the process breaks, readers must check for themselves.

I checked. I traced every source. What I found only confirmed: the Samarkand headline belongs to another article, while the DVD content is an advertisement or an independent product. This conflation is not deliberate fraud. It is laziness in the editing stage. But the consequences are the same: the reader is given something that does not match the label.

People call me a provocateur because they are not ready for a shock to their masculine confidence in the boardroom. But here I am not provoking. I am only stating a fact: a product sold on a false headline is a product selling confusion, not clarity.

The missing clarity of numbers

I want to emphasize this once more because it matters more than any praise or criticism.

When a player considers an opening, they need data: White's win rate, Black's win rate, the draw rate; engine evaluations at different depths; frequency of appearance at Elo levels from 1500 to 2700; and at least a few sample games at grandmaster level.

The DVD provides none of this. Not a single number. Only assertions. In any other field, a financial product making claims without data would be rejected by regulators. In chess, no regulator exists. So the buyer is the checker.

What might be true

I do not want to be misunderstood as dismissing the product. 9...a5 can be useful. Three specific scenarios:

One, you are a King's Indian player rated between 1600 and 2100, facing opponents of the same level, and you need a stable option to avoid being crushed in 9...Nh5 lines. In this case, 9...a5 can give you a position you understand better than forced theory.

Two, you are a coach teaching juniors about queenside structure, and you want to illustrate the idea of closing the queenside before opening the kingside. 9...a5 is an excellent example.

Three, you are building a backup opening repertoire, and you need an extra surprise weapon used once or twice a season. 9...a5 fits.

In all three cases, you do not need the DVD to learn. You need a database, an engine, and a coach who asks questions. The DVD can be a starting point. Not a destination.

Mistakes are not frightening

Buying a DVD is not automatically a mistake. A mistake is not frightening; crouching down at two in the morning to pick up the tape again is what makes a forecaster.

The only problem with this product is that it is not transparent about the level of understanding required. The marketing says 'very few concrete lines' and 'equal chances', but does not say: 'you will need six more months of studying queenside structure to play it decently'. If it said that, the product would still sell, and buyers would be more satisfied.

In sports journalism, honesty about limits is what separates an analyst from a salesman. I have misread player names for years, and I have learned that admitting limits before being exposed is the only way to preserve credibility.

Who actually benefits

If the product sells well, who benefits?

The DVD seller benefits first. The publisher benefits second. Chess forums benefit from having another topic to debate. And perhaps the buyer benefits, if they are patient enough to learn.

But if you ask me who does not benefit, the answer is: the club players who buy the DVD hoping for an easy escape. They will spend a small sum, study for a week, play 9...a5 in two games, lose both, and give up. Then they will wrongly conclude that the opening is bad. The opening is not bad. Their approach is bad.

The bigger picture

There is a notable trend in chess education in recent years: more and more products are sold under the label 'practical repertoire'. They target busy older adults, club players with no time to memorize lines, people who want to understand rather than remember.

The trend itself is good. But it creates a temptation: to turn an ordinary opening into an attractive product, the seller must exaggerate its ease. They turn an option requiring understanding into an option that sounds like child's play. And the buyer ultimately pays with disappointment.

Like this DVD. 9...a5 is not child's play. It is a grown-up move.

My prediction

Let me make a concrete prediction: within the next 12 to 18 months, 9...a5 will appear more often in club games and open tournaments, especially at Elo levels 1500 to 2200. Usage frequency will rise slowly because players need time to learn the structure. Black's short-term win rate will not rise much, because the surprise advantage is offset by a lack of understanding.

After that, around 2027, professional White players will begin targeting 9...a5 with specific plans, possibly shifting to the Fianchetto or Sämisch, avoiding the Bayonet entirely when facing King's Indian players who tend to use a5. By then, the surprise value of 9...a5 will decline, and it will return to its proper place: a useful backup option, not a silver bullet.

If that happens, the DVD will age. But those who have learned it will still have a tool. That is the difference between buying a product and learning an opening.

About the sellers

I have spent 44 years observing the industry. I once commentated on chess for VTC for 32 years, once sat in press rooms where women were considered not to understand pressing. I know the smell of exaggerated sales pitches.

Player agents are the biggest hidden cost in the football transfer market. In chess, DVD sellers are the biggest hidden cost in the knowledge market. They do not produce knowledge. They package existing knowledge and add a layer of advertising that makes it sound new. It is legal work. But it demands a doubly alert consumer.

A few technical notes for learners

If you still want to try 9...a5, here is my advice:

Check the database first. See how many games at 2400+ level have played 9...a5, and what the results were. If you find fewer than 20 games in 10 years, understand that you are entering underexplored territory.

Run the engine at various depths. See whether the evaluation fluctuates. If the evaluation jumps from +0.3 to -0.4 and back to +0.2, that is a sign of a strategic position, not an easy one.

Test it in at least 10 training games before using it in a tournament. Never bring a new opening into a tournament without testing it under real playing conditions.

Learn the three pillars: close the queenside, transfer the knight, open the kingside. Without these three pillars, you will play 9...a5 as a random move.

About timeliness

There is something regrettable about this document: if the Samarkand headline were real, it could be a much better story than the DVD product. Uzbekistan in recent years has emerged as a formidable chess power — with outstanding young talents challenging traditional strongholds. An article about Uzbekistan dominating an open tournament in Samarkand would have high news value.

But we do not have that article. We have a DVD. And we have a headline placed in the wrong spot, devaluing both pieces of content.

A final word

Silent applause can kill emotion, but it cannot kill tactics. And the tactics of 9...a5 stand firm — not as a silver bullet, but as a tool that requires a user who knows the job.

Ten years in the middle of controversy, the fire lit by a 2026 question still burns. That year I asked a coach why he let Chhetri drop deep while nobody pushed forward. People laughed at me. The next game, India lost because of exactly that mistake. I do not say this to boast. I say it to illustrate a principle: when a product promises more than it proves, the person asking the right question will never be the fool.

So what is the right question here? Not 'is 9...a5 good'. The right question is: 'Are you willing to pay with six months of study to turn a legal move into a real weapon?'

If the answer is yes, buy the DVD, but do not stop there. If the answer is no, keep your money, and learn the Bayonet Attack from White's side. Who knows, you might like it better.