ChessPub Forum - Challenging the Dutch Defences

(UTC)

ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › Daring Defences to 1. d4 › Dutch › Challenging the Dutch Defences

(Moderators: CraigEvans, proustiskeen, Hadron)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1

Topic Tools

Normal Topic

Challenging the Dutch Defences (Read 6820 times)

Chess_Addict Full Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 163 Location: Italia!!!!!!!!! Joined: 01/17/08 Gender:	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #7 - 06/09/08 at 13:35:53	Post Tools	Print Post
	some time ago i read somewere on this forum someone suggesting to play an early b4 + k-side fianchetto without or before playing c4 against leningrad and stonewall. i haven't had a chance of playing against stonewall but results against leningrad seem good (only 3 serious games up to now). in addition there is some nice analisys in the chesspub about it (only vs leningrad i guess).


	IP Logged

Stigma God Member Offline There is a crack in everything. Posts: 3277 Joined: 11/07/06 Gender:	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #6 - 04/28/08 at 08:12:18	Post Tools	Print Post
	Antillian wrote on 04/27/08 at 16:29:20: I did not realise that Kramnik delayed d4 against the Dutch. Thanks for pointing that out. I don't have the book to hand, so to assure myself I wasn't telling lies here I found the contents page on niggemann.com: Quote: Part 4. Dutch Defence 1.Sf3 f5 2.c4 Sf6 3.g3 173 17 3... d6; 3... b6 179 18 3... e6 4.Lg2 various; 4... d5 186 19 3... e6 4.Lg2 Le7 5.0-0 d5 200 20 5.0-0 0-0 6.d4 Se4; 6... d6 7.Sc3 various 211 21 5.0-0 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.Sc3 a5 218 22 5.0-0 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.Sc3 De8 228 23 3... g6 4.Lg2 Lg7 5.Sc3 0-0 6.d4 c6 232 24 4.Lg2 Lg7 5.Sc3 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.0-0 Sc6 246 25 4.Lg2 Lg7 5.Sc3 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.0-0 c6; 7... Sa6 251 26 4.Lg2 Lg7 5.Sc3 0-0 6.d4 d6 7.0-0 De8 The only major lines where the delayed d2-d4 has significance are in Chapter 18. After 4...d5 I think the repertoire went 5.0-0 Bd6 6.d3, followed by Nc3 and e4. After 5.0-0 c6!? again I think White goes 6.d3 since the d3-e4 setup is dangerous with the black bishop on e7 as well. These lines score heavily for White on my database, though a few Stonewall experts (Moskalenko, Karlsson) are apparently willing to enter them as Black. Nigel Davies recommended the same setup against the Stonewall in his "Dynamic Reti" book, and it's a common opinion that Black should objectively only try to enter the Stonewall if White has played an early d4. In Chapter 19 I am fairly certain that White's very next move is 6.d4, now that a Bd6 Stonewall is no longer on the agenda. Interestingly, Khalifman justified his decision to avoid the Modern Stonewall with a quote from Kramnik himself, who once wrote an article on it where he concluded that Black has no major theoretical problems. This article can be found in the book "Positional Play" by Dvoretsky and Yusupov, though it's probably somewhat outdated by now.

	Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
	IP Logged

Antillian God Member Offline Brilliance without dazzle! Posts: 1757 Joined: 01/05/03 Gender:	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #5 - 04/27/08 at 16:29:20	Post Tools	Print Post
	Stigma wrote on 04/25/08 at 22:07:30: The only source I can think of is Cox' "Starting Out: 1.d4!" The main lines he gives (g3/Bg2/c4 against all kinds of Dutch) look critical and I am trying them out myself, but that being a Starting Out-book you may need to study them more deeply with a database, engine or brain. PS. There is one slight problem with the "Kramnik repertoire" for a 1.d4-player: Khalifman uses the 1.Nf3 move order to avoid the Modern Stonewall with 6...Bd6. If Black tries to reach that White, having delayed d2-d4, will instead play for a d3-e4 break! Against the Stonewall El Khalif suggests d4 only after Black commits to the Classical ...Be7, which is not considered a great attempt to equalize anyway. So if you play 1.d4 you need to plug that hole with Cox' book, or Chesspublishing.com, or something else. I did not realise that Kramnik delayed d4 against the Dutch. Thanks for pointing that out. Maybe i will have a look at Cox's book. That may be the way to go, take Cox as an intro and build on it with Chesspublishing and other sources. Interesting that I have been reliant on Palliser's repertoire for some time, but more and more I find my repertoire is actually getting closer to the one recommended by Cox.

	"Breakthrough results come about by a series of good decisions, diligently executed and accumulated one on top of another." Jim Collins --- Good to Great
	IP Logged

rossia Senior Member Offline Saw: "Game Over!" Posts: 335 Location: Irkutsk Joined: 09/17/07	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #4 - 04/26/08 at 11:50:58	Post Tools	Print Post
	Take a look at these recent games: Carlsen,Magnus (2693) - Radjabov,Teimour (2747) [A80] Porto Vecchio m of the Hopes Porto Vecchio (5), 18.05.2007 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 4.Bxf6 exf6 5.e3 c6 6.Qf3 Be6 7.Bd3 g6 8.h3 Nd7 9.g4 fxg4 10.hxg4 Bf7 11.Nge2 Qb6 12.0-0-0 0-0-0 13.Nf4 Bb4 14.Nce2 Qa5 15.Kb1 Bd6 16.c3 b5 17.e4 dxe4 18.Bxe4 Qxa2+ 19.Kc1 Kc7 20.Bxc6 Qa1+ 21.Kc2 Bb3+ 22.Kd2 Qxb2+ 23.Ke1 Bxd1 24.Kxd1 Qb3+ 25.Kd2 Qa2+ 26.Kd1 Qb3+ 27.Kd2 Qa2+ 28.Ke3 Rhe8+ 29.Be4 f5 30.gxf5 gxf5 31.Ra1 Qxa1 32.Nd5+ Kb8 33.Qxf5 Qa5 34.Kf3 Rf8 0-1 Manolache,Marius (2504) - Bartel,Mateusz (2596) [A80] EU-ch 8th Dresden (10), 13.04.2007 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bf4 a6 4.e3 Nf6 5.a3 e6 6.Nf3 Bd7 7.Be2 c5 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Ne5 Be7 10.Bh5+ g6 11.Bf3 0-0 12.Ne2 c4 13.h3 Ne8 14.Kh1 Bf6 15.Nxc6 Bxc6 16.b3 Nd6 17.a4 Qd7 18.Be5 Be7 19.Nf4 b5 20.Rg1 Nf7 21.g4 Nxe5 22.dxe5 cxb3 23.axb5 bxc2 24.Qxc2 axb5 25.Rxa8 Bxa8 26.gxf5 Rxf5 27.Ra1 Bb7 28.Ra7 g5 29.Rxb7 Qxb7 30.Qxf5 exf5 31.Bxd5+ Qxd5+ 32.Nxd5 Bc5 33.h4 b4 34.hxg5 Kf7 35.Nf4 b3 36.Nd3 Ba3 37.Kg2 b2 38.Nxb2 Bxb2 39.Kg3 Ke6 40.Kh4 Bxe5 41.Kh5 Bg7 42.f3 Ke5 43.Kh4 Bf8 44.Kh5 Bc5 45.e4 f4 46.Kg4 Be7 47.Kh5 Kd4 48.Kg4 Ke3 49.e5 Bd8 50.e6 Be7 0-1 Shishkin,Vadim (2543) - Malaniuk,Vladimir P (2522) [A80] Polanica Zdroj op-A Polanica Zdroj (5), 21.08.2007 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 4.f3 c5 5.e4 Nc6 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Bb5 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Qa5 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Qd2 Ba6 11.Nh3 Rd8 12.Rd1 h6 13.Bf4 e6 14.Kf2 cxd4 15.cxd4 Bb4 16.Qe3 Bc4 17.Be5 0-0 18.Nf4 Qxa2 19.Rc1 c5 20.Rhd1 cxd4 21.Bxd4 Rfe8 22.Qe5 Bf8 23.Nh5 Rd5 24.Qg3 e5 25.Nf6+ Kh8 26.Nxe8 exd4 27.Kg1 Qa5 28.f4 Qc5 29.Kh1 Rd8 30.Re1 Qc8 31.Qg6 Bb5 32.Nxg7 Bxg7 33.Re7 Rg8 34.Rxa7 Qd8 0-1 Well, we, the Leningrad players aren't afaraid!!!


	IP Logged

rossia Senior Member Offline Saw: "Game Over!" Posts: 335 Location: Irkutsk Joined: 09/17/07	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #3 - 04/26/08 at 11:18:45	Post Tools	Print Post
	Well here is one of my games in 2.Nc3 line: Batista_Bomb (2551) - rossia (2307) [A80] Friendly Game, 1m + 0s Main Playing Hall, 19.04.2008 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 g6 4.f3 fxe4 5.fxe4 d6 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 Qe8 9.h3 Nbd7 10.Be3 e5 11.d5 c5 12.Qd2 a6 13.Bh6 b5 14.Ng5 Nb6 [14...Bxh6!] 15.Ne6 Bxe6 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.dxe6 Qxe6 18.Rad1 Rad8 Batista_Bomb abandonne (Lag: Av=0.51s, max=2.1s) 0-1 Who is more interested, here is an ECO line: ECO [A80], 2000. 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 [3...Ne4 4.Nxe4 fxe4 5.f3! d5 6.e3 Bf5 7.fxe4 Bxe4 8.Ne2 h6 9.Bf4 Nc6 10.Nc3 Bg6 11.Bd3± Polugaevsky - Franco, La Habana (ol) 1966 - 2/58; 3...e6 4.g4!? (4.e4 fxe4 - A 83) 4...Be7 5.gxf5 exf5 6.Bg2 Ne4 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 8.Qd3 Nxc3 9.Qxc3 d6 10.Nh3=+ Hort - Holacsek, Khavirov 1971 - 13/97] 4.f3 [4.e3 e6 5.Nf3 (5.g4 fxg4 6.Nge2 Nc6 7.h3 gxh3 8.Nf4 Qe7 9.Rxh3 Qf7 10.Be2 Bd7 11.e4 dxe4 12.d5 exd5 13.Bxf6 (Lputian - Yedidia, USA 1995 - 64/72) 13...Qxf6 14.Ncxd5 Qd6 unclear, Lputian) 5...Be7 6.Ne2!? (6.Bd3 0–0 7.0–0 Ne4 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.Ne5 Nd7 10.Nxd7 Bxd7 11.Ne2 Nd6= Smyslov - Guimard, La Habana 1962) 6...0–0 7.Nf4 Ne4 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.a3 (… c4) (9.c3!? … h4, ¥d3) 9...c5! (9...c6 10.c4=+) 10.h4!? Zhang Zhong (10.c4?! g5!! unclear, Volkov - Zhang Zhong, Elista (ol) 1998 - 73/100) ] 4...e6 [4...Nc6 5.Qd2! e6 (5...g6 6.0–0–0 Bg7 7.Bh6 0–0 8.Nh3² I. Sokolov - Illescas, Wijk aan Zee 1997 - 68/74) 6.0–0–0 (6.e4 dxe4 7.0–0–0 Bb4 8.a3 Ba5 9.Bc4 0–0 10.Nge2 exf3 11.gxf3 Kh8 12.Qe1 Qe8 13.Qg3 with compensation, Bronstein - Slepukhov, USSR 1948) 6...Be7 7.e4 dxe4 (7...0–0?! 8.e5 Nd7 9.h4± A. Kuzmin - Van Mil, Benasque 1997 - 70/(79)) 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 fxe4 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Ne2 (11.Qe3+=) 11...0–0 12.Ng3+= A. Kuzmin] 5.e4 Be7 6.exf5 [6.e5 Nfd7 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 8.Nb5 Nb6 9.c3 a6 10.Na3 Nc6 … ¥d7, 0–0–0 T. Rakic(10...0–0 11.Bd3+= T. Rakic - Lombardy, Maribor 1978 - 26/104) ] 6...exf5 7.Qd2 0–0 8.0–0–0 c6 9.Bd3 Nh5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Re1 Qd6= Sakaev - Malaniuk, Elista (ol) 1998 - 73/(99)


	IP Logged

Bonsai God Member Offline Posts: 622 Joined: 03/13/04 Gender:	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #2 - 04/25/08 at 22:43:06	Post Tools	Print Post
	Of course against 1.Nf3 f5 there's 2.d3, explanations for why it's now considered so good are in some SOS volumes and also in Kindermann's Leningrad book. That wasn't really known at the time of Khalifman's Kramnink series (but maybe the new edition of volume 3 will be out soonish?). I also think that some of Khalifman's anti-Dutch recommendations are not the most hard-hitting lines, but most key dutch systems are pretty solid, after all. In fact possibly Cox's repetoire is quite good, even if one of course cannot prove an advantage everywhere. As an example: Cox's recommendation versus Kindermann's recommendation in the Leningrad is great, if only it weren't for the fact that one can easily improve on Kindermann (for those that have the books, why would you play 12...Nxc3 and not just get on with development with e.g. Bd7?). Not sure whether there is much else. Palliser has a nice chapter on 2.Nc3 in his 1.d4 book, but that's what you are trying to stop playing.


	IP Logged

Stigma God Member Offline There is a crack in everything. Posts: 3277 Joined: 11/07/06 Gender:	Re: Challenging the Dutch Defences Reply #1 - 04/25/08 at 22:07:30	Post Tools	Print Post
	The only source I can think of is Cox' "Starting Out: 1.d4!" The main lines he gives (g3/Bg2/c4 against all kinds of Dutch) look critical and I am trying them out myself, but that being a Starting Out-book you may need to study them more deeply with a database, engine or brain. PS. There is one slight problem with the "Kramnik repertoire" for a 1.d4-player: Khalifman uses the 1.Nf3 move order to avoid the Modern Stonewall with 6...Bd6. If Black tries to reach that White, having delayed d2-d4, will instead play for a d3-e4 break! Against the Stonewall El Khalif suggests d4 only after Black commits to the Classical ...Be7, which is not considered a great attempt to equalize anyway. So if you play 1.d4 you need to plug that hole with Cox' book, or Chesspublishing.com, or something else.

	Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
	IP Logged

Antillian God Member Offline Brilliance without dazzle! Posts: 1757 Joined: 01/05/03 Gender:	Challenging the Dutch Defences 04/25/08 at 20:32:39	Post Tools	Print Post
	For a while I have used 2. Nc3 against the Dutch Defences. While this was a useful way of avoiding learning theory and getting Dutch defence players out of the kind of game they like to play, I am starting to feel like it simply does not pose enough of a challenge to the Dutch Defence. I am not attracted by any of the other anti-dutch treatments so I am ready to play the mainlines. I will probably buy Opening for White according to Kramnik 1.Nf3, Volume 3 (Repertoire Books) (Repertoire Books) (Paperback) as an aid to building a repertoire. Can anyone suggest any other source for building a critical White repertoire against all of the Dutch defenses?

	"Breakthrough results come about by a series of good decisions, diligently executed and accumulated one on top of another." Jim Collins --- Good to Great
	IP Logged

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1

Topic Tools

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Bookmarks:

del.icio.us

Digg

Google

Google+

reddit

StumbleUpon

Yahoo

« Board Index ‹ Board Top

Top

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge