< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Apr-21-07|| ||egilarne: GM Stefan Kindermann in his excellent book on the Leningrad variation, 2005, says that GM Magnus Carlsen, at that time 13 years old, more or less refuted 1 Nf3 f5?! by playing 2 d3! intending e4:
Carlsen vs Dolmatov, 2004|
|Apr-21-07|| ||Poisonpawns: <grijs> In trying to avoid the anti-dutch systems ,one can create so much extra work for oneself!|
|Apr-21-07|| ||grijs: True <Poisonpawns>, but you need a defense against 1. e4 anyway. So, you can play the The French or the Pirc against 1. e4 and the Dutch against 1.d4, 1.c4 etc...|
|Apr-29-07|| ||WTHarvey: Here are some traps and zaps in A87 miniatures: http://www.wtharvey.com/a87.html|
|Jul-06-07|| ||whiteshark: Is the Leningrad Dutch now the St.Petersburg Dutch?|
|Jul-06-07|| ||ganstaman: <whiteshark: Is the Leningrad Dutch now the St.Petersburg Dutch?>|
I've read that before -- where?
|Jul-06-07|| ||whiteshark: <ganstaman>: on a chessninja page ??|
|Jul-07-07|| ||ganstaman: <whiteshark> Ah, yes, that could be it.|
|Jul-07-07|| ||Tomlinsky: Korchnoi on playing the Leningrad Dutch when he was a junior: "I used to play the Leningrad System... then after one or two years I realised that NOBODY understands what happens in that system including myself. So I gave up this system and came to play only the modest d6 in the Dutch."|
|Jul-19-07|| ||nummerzwei: Does anybody here have some experience with 5...d6 6.d5 in this variantionas white?
It appears to me that this line leads to quite "dry" play, which reminds me mostly of the English opening.
But it is called a good variation by Keene, who has also played it.
I would like to learn more about this line, because I havenīt found a real system against the Dutch.|
If someone plays it against me,I will answer it with c4 followed by g3 and son, but as I said before, I donīt know that much about the plans and theoretical variations of the main lines.
Is there a good books about g3 against the Dutch that covers the all the normal setups by black (Leningrad, Stonewall,Classical)?
Thanks in advance, No2
|Oct-21-07|| ||Open Defence: Opening of the Day...|
|Mar-24-08|| ||BirdBrain: I was reading the posts on the 2. h3 lines, and I am not a master or anything, but I have analyzed this line and found an interesting idea for Black. Of course the problem is so many players want to force their pet lines, and do not explore the intracacies of any opening. I believe to be good at the Dutch, you have to understand it. I play the Bird as well, and I used to lose consistently to my personal computer, but I came back and tried new ideas and got more solid each time with the pawn structures. A lot of lines evaluate d4 f5 h3 Nf6, but I do not believe that is near as good as playing d5! on move 2. For instance:|
d4 f5 h3 d5 g4 fxg hxg Bxg Qd3 Nf6 Rxh7 does not work the same, as the king can flee via d7. If you don't like this, then don't play d5 - simply develop Nf6 g4 fxg hxg Nxg4 Qd3 g6, which is another line that prevents the Quick Queen checkmate...However, I believe the 2...d5 line offers Black more chances to dance toe to toe tactically with White, with ideas such as Qd6 and a possible 0-0-0.
|Apr-12-10|| ||xombie: The Dutch is a nuisance. Many of us QP and English players like to stifle and build quietly. But the Dutch is like a hyperactive child that you can't quieten. But it might be better to live with the activity because white seems to have decent chances of getting a good game later on. Trying to learn more about this system and broaden my knowledge of positions.|
|Apr-12-10|| ||parisattack: <xombie: The Dutch is a nuisance. Many of us QP and English players like to stifle and build quietly. But the Dutch is like a hyperactive child that you can't quieten. But it might be better to live with the activity because white seems to have decent chances of getting a good game later on. Trying to learn more about this system and broaden my knowledge of positions.>|
I think most of the top QP players literally drooled when their opponent played a Dutch - at that level of play its probably structurally unsound. But for us mortals it can indeed be a nuisance (and conversely, fun to play as Black). 2. Bg5 is a try if the main lines (especially the Leningrad) give you heartburn.
|Apr-13-10|| ||HeMateMe: this ugly critter gives me problems, excuse my technical language. After black gets a big pawn center, you have to be Houdini to activate the light Bishop on g2. Also, it is difficult to activate one's dark square bishop, if it is on b2, and blocked in.|
While I'm advancing my queenside pawns to free up my game, black put a big Knight on e4. Sometimes, I have to play f3 to drive off the Knight, creating a permanent weakness. I look at the GM games here to see how they play against the Dutch, but it remains a headache.
|Apr-13-10|| ||parisattack: Try Petrosian-Korchnoi 1946. Petro also has to play f3 but uses it as a lever for e4, destroying Korchnoi's Stonewall. I've seen the same motif against the Leningrad.|
Keene analyzes this game in Petrosian vs the Elite, Game #1.
|Apr-13-10|| ||Poisonpawns: <Parisattack Try Pertosian-Korchnoi 1946>
Here is a nice video-analysis of the game. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eq_...|
|Apr-13-10|| ||parisattack: ,Poisonpawns: <Parisattack Try Pertosian-Korchnoi 1946> Here is a nice video-analysis of the game. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eq_...;|
|Apr-13-10|| ||xombie: Ah, thanks Paris. That seems interesting. I think at amateur levels, one doesn't get to encounter it often enough, which might explain it. But it still boils down to positional understanding.|
|Apr-13-10|| ||HeMateMe: <Paris> Most instructive! (Petrosian v. Korchnoi 1946) The stonewall gets demolished, black's light square bishop never gets activated.|
|Apr-13-10|| ||parisattack: <HeMateMe: <Paris> Most instructive! (Petrosian v. Korchnoi 1946) The stonewall gets demolished, black's light square bishop never gets activated.>|
I found it amazing how quickly black's 'stone' wall collapsed. Petrosian definately had the 'touch' for such things...
|Apr-14-10|| ||FHBradley: In Petrosian vs Korchnoi, 1946 black allows his DSB to be traded for free, which is generally not a good idea. If white insists on the exchange, he should be made pay for it, as in H Olafsson vs S Agdestein, 1987.
I think people say the real test case for the Stonewall is the knight manoeuvre g1-h3-f4-d3, as in
P Nikolic vs Short, 1987 or
Anand vs P Nikolic, 2000|
|Nov-27-11|| ||Penguincw: Opening of the Day
Dutch, Leningrad, Main Variation (A87)
1.d4 f5 2. c4 ♘f6 3.g3 g6 4.♗g2 ♗g7 5.♘f3
click for larger view
|Jun-07-12|| ||Troller: And again today :)
Seems like Nakamura is the only top player still employing this; Kramnik was fond of it in his youth, though.
|Jan-04-13|| ||xeneizexxx: I believe that the black dark square bishop is more important than the rook in the leningrad, at least it confuses your opponent and gives you more winning chances. See: R Fontaine vs M Vachier-Lagrave, 2007|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·