< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 7 ·
|Feb-22-07|| ||Tacticstudent: I love playing the Dutch because it's an opening that don't require much studing, so I can focus on tactics.|
|Feb-27-07|| ||JustAFish: Any thoughts on the Soundness and playability of the Staunton gambit. I play 1. d4 a lot, and must encounter the Dutch from time to time. I'd love to trip up a specialist with a tactical open game he or she wasn't expecting, but I'm worried that my time invested in the Staunton might be a long road to loserville.|
|Feb-27-07|| ||DutchDunce: From what I remember from the opening books, there's nothing wrong with the Staunton, assuming best play on both sides. Unlike most lines of the Dutch, it won't get you an advantage as White, but I don't remember ever seeing a refutation.|
I'm no specialist, but I *hate* facing the Staunton as Black. If you don't know the tactical traps, it is very difficult to see them on the board, at least for a low-level, tactics-challenged player like me. In fact, it's one of the reasons I have cut down on my Dutch play, despite the shame I thus bring to my login name.
|Feb-28-07|| ||JustAFish: Thanks!
You've just doomed me to a dozen hours of Staunton Gambit study. :-)
|Mar-01-07|| ||DaMelch: DutchDunce,
There is no reason to give up the Dutch defense just because you dislike the staunton gambit. You can play e6 for the stonewall or d6 for the leningrad or classical depending on which flavor you would like to. The only problem with that is e6 could transpose into the french (which I play anyway) and d6 could transpose into the pirc/modern
|Mar-01-07|| ||whatthefat: <JustAFish>
When I played the Dutch as Black, I was usually happy to see the Staunton gambit. There is a reasonable amount of theory for Black to know, but as long as you remember it, the pawn comes fairly cheap.
|Mar-01-07|| ||drukenknight: staunton is perfectly sound, you just have to play well. daMelch mentions e6 vs d6, one thing you have to watch out for is playing the moves "by rote" in order to form the classic stonewall pattern. Usually d5 is the norm for the QP, but when white plays Bc4 usually you have to play ...d6 else there are some bad traps. There's a spanish guy named Metzeros who has a few games with the Bc4 theme, if not in this data base you can find it in the jave chess site...|
ANother classic one is one with PEtrosian as white plays the early Bg5 vs some no name guy in one of the Olympiads. I think Schiller shows it one of his books, a good one to study.
|Apr-16-07|| ||PizzatheHut: For whatever reason, I seem to have problems playing against the stonewall pawn structure. For example, as white I have very poor results against the Dutch stonewall and as black I have poor results against the Stonewall Attack. Can anyone recommend a good website or perhaps some games to help with this? I would appreciate anything.|
|Apr-17-07|| ||gus inn: <PizzatheHut> If you KNOW your opponent is going 1.-f5 !? you could consider 1.d3!? with the idea to respond 2.e4 to 1-f5.It will normally be Froms gambit reversed - and usually not the taste for "dutch" people.
Another try is 2.g4 !? which is perfectly playable.Many dutch players hate this , probably because they are under the impression that they are the one to attack.Good luck !|
|Apr-27-07|| ||ongyj: And of course, for anyone(especially newbies) that hates playing into typical Dutch lines just play immediately 2.Bg5 and that ends all the misery:) Just remember that 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5 h6 3.Bh4 g5 4.e3 saves the Bishop [Previously I recommended 4.e4, which loses to 4...Bg7]|
|Apr-28-07|| ||MaxxLange: Look at Kramnik's games against the Stonewall Dutch. He destroys Black on the light squares.|
|Apr-28-07|| ||MaxxLange: 2. Nc3 is also supposed to be a good n00b anti-Dutch system|
|Apr-28-07|| ||MaxxLange: Kramnik in his early years played Stonewall Dutch with ...Bd6 as Black, also, I think|
|Jul-06-07|| ||Strelz: Anybody have any comments on some setups that I have thought about against the Dutch
I have used 2.Qd3 where I think 2..d5 is supposed to be the main defense. My opponents always seem to play 2..e6 3.e4 fxe4 4.Qxe4 Nf6 5.Qh4 Be7 6.Bg5 h6 7.Bxf6 Bxf6 8.Qe4, which I think to be good for White. Although in a blitz tournament a strong player(IM) played 2..Nc6 against that, I then moved 3.Qxf5, although I am pretty sure now that 3.d5 is better.
My other idea was 2.g4 with the idea of 3.h3 Any ideas about that?|
|Jul-07-07|| ||yavuz1990: I think 2.Qd3 e6 is the best answer. Because after 2... e6 3.e4 fxe4 4.Qxe4 Nf6 5.Qh4 Be7 6.Bg5 black doesn't have to play h6. I would play 6... e6! 7.Bxf6 Bxf6 8.Qe4 Bd7 which is somewhat better for blacks...|
click for larger view
If white moves 9.Qxb7 Bc6 10.Qb4 Nd7 11.Nc3 Rb8 and takes a pawn(d4 or b2), creates an equal position.
|Aug-03-07|| ||Ziad: Hello everyone... i just signed in this website, i wish you accept me as one of your friends...by the way i am Dutch lover..thnx|
|Aug-03-07|| ||technical draw: <Hi, Ziad> Welcome. Now what's this thing about you being a Dutch lover?|
(Don't take anything I say seriously!)
|Aug-03-07|| ||Poisonpawns: Check out my game collection:Top Players who used to play the Dutch Defense.I have Games from Topalov,Kramnik,Bareev et al when they were younger playing the dutch defense all in one place if you are a fan of Dutch defense.|
|Aug-04-07|| ||ongyj: <Strelz> 2.Qd3 isn't exactly new(since it's around in the database), but its perfectly playable. There's no immediate forced lines resulting in absolute advantage for Black. Perhaps there may be some value to note that the line <yavuz1990> recommended isn't necessarily in White's best interest. Black doesn't have to play h6, but neither does White have to play 7.Bxf6.|
By "human feel" I think White is better with Nc3 and 0-0-0, but that's not all White can do. With assurance from the good old freebie Fritz5.32, 7.Bd3!? might be a nastier sting against Black, aiming for Bg6+ which I think would surely upset most of the human opponents playing Black.[At least, I would be, if I'm Black:(]
My personal current verdict is that 2.Qd3 is the kind of sidelines that I would like, and would try out in practical games in future(along with 2.Bg5) against the Dutch defence. Thanks for bringing it up, <Strelz> ^Ô^
|Aug-04-07|| ||realbrob: Since it's played by strong GMs there must be something wrong in my idea but... According to chess basic principles, isn't 1..f5 not so good? It doesn't open up any diagonals for the Black Q and bishops, and it somewhat weakens the Black K.|
|Aug-04-07|| ||engmaster: Its a great opening especially if you are going for a win, due to the imbalances created with f5. Many of the world champions, Alekhine & Botvinnik in particular were practitioners. Kramnik in his youth was a devotee. He actually authored a piece on the Stonewall in one of the Dvoretsky books.|
|Aug-04-07|| ||ganstaman: <realbrob: Since it's played by strong GMs there must be something wrong in my idea but... According to chess basic principles, isn't 1..f5 not so good? It doesn't open up any diagonals for the Black Q and bishops, and it somewhat weakens the Black K.>|
1...f5 is all about preventing white from achieving that d4-e4 pawn duo. It aims at maintaining a permanent guard on that square.
Unlike other methods of doing this, the Dutch gets you an imbalanced position. At least at my level of play, I find this very important -- it keeps me from facing a draw-ish looking symmetrical position against a London or Colle System (or the downright ugly 1.d4 d5 2. Nc3).
The queen's bishop is a problem for black, but it often seems to be in many d4 openings or the French. There are various places to put it, though -- b7 to hit on the e4 square (remember, we want to own that as black), or d7 like in many Leningrad lines (allows the rooks to connect, maintains control of e6, and is sometimes important for c6).
The other bishop and the black queen will find openings, it just takes a few moves. But it's really no problem -- black isn't going on an all-out attack right away, and white can't really either, at least not successfully. And that brings us to the supposedly weakened kingside. I think it's a myth, to be honest. White does have a number of attacking plans and gambits, but they fail with best play (otherwise the Dutch would be completely dead). I find it funny that I just read this: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heism...
"A king is only unsafe if the opponent is able to forcibly attack it."
Sometimes black does get into trouble, but I think that a careful Dutch player won't. White's advantage is on the queenside anyway (maybe in the center too depending on who can push their e-pawn first and most successfully), so attacking the kingside would be a mistake. Black opens up the kingside somewhat, but also has good control of the squares there, so it's not a problem.
So I think 1...f5 is good in theory. Pieces do get developed in time, control of the center is a main focus, the king is placed in good protection. And in practice it's good too because the imbalance it creates allows black to play for a win even if white is playing for a draw.
|Aug-16-07|| ||Ziad: Hello every one, how are you <technical draw> for me Dutch is an opening and not just a normal defence, it carries two main strategic ideas and what it might said else way should be considered as inaccurate statements... First of all it cerates your own game, so you force your opponent with particular style of playing and with particular mold or shape of chess construction, so your aim from the beginning is how to dominate not how to compromise. The second idea is that there is nothing called draw in this opening, and that is why you might see that your opponent whether defend against your floating pawns structure and your advancing positioned knight and that will be the excellent soil for your domination and progress, or tries to attack you aggressively and here you might prepare some excellent home made surprises if you know thoroughly all the related aspects of this amazing opening...yes I agree it might be unsafe but it is also unsafe for the opponent as well ƒº and definitely you will have very exciting game if you are a risk lover person...I wish I could explain my opinion clearly...thank you|
|Aug-17-07|| ||contra: Ziad,
Dutch is a defense and not an opening. White opens the game and black defends hence we have: Sicilian defense, Caro-Kann defense, French defense, Dutch defense etc. from the black side.
From the white side you have: Ponziani opening, King pawn openings, Queen pawn openings, English opening, Bird's opening, Reti opening etc.
From the rest of your post I understand the message you are trying to convey, and I agree.
|Aug-17-07|| ||CapablancaFan: Wikipedia also has the Dutch as a form of defense for black. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_...|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 7 ·