I must admit that i myself have done the same mistake as CraigEvans. When i face 1 f4 i feel an urge to refute this poor opening. However i play leningrad dutch with good results as black! I have even beated many IMs and even one GM in internet blitz with it.

Quote:
- Craig Evans on 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nh3

Quote:

- Craig Evans on 1.d4 f5

A case of split personality? 

Thanks, Craig

I have played the Danish from time to time, and when my opp. takes the pawns I usually win easily, but the Move 3. Qe7 has always driven me crazy.

I know this is a bit off topic, but AmateurDragoneer said the Danish Gambit can be deadly for black if he accepts the c3 and b2 pawns.  I belive this to be true as well and there are many ways to decline the Danish.  I just wanted to know how Dragoneer would decline it.

Sorry for being off topic, I just couldn't help myself

Firstly, I said it was my opinion. I am not an all-knowing oracle, and my opinion is also that openings like the latvian are playable, where most GMs would argue. And let's not forget that some masters have called the Dragon unsound too - it's their opinion, not a fact. 

Now, onto some analysis. The first point to note here is that black, according to your "prepared player" statement, has to decline all these gambits. Already I'd say white has a psychological advantage if he can offer one of these "insane amateur gambits" (Korchnoi probably would be quite unhappy at being called an amateur) and black can't afford to accept. 

Okay, I'm unsure about your line against 2.h3 - 2...Nf6 3.g4 Nf6? I dont think this is possible. If you mean instead 3...Nc6, then I'd assess 4.d5 Ne5 5.Nf3 as at least equal - white can go q-side and the advanced k-side pawns will facilitate an attack, while in other lines the d5 pawn can be quite cramping. Maybe 5...g5 Ne4 6.Nc3 isn't so bad for white either - I'd rather be white in either of these positions. 

Secondly to your line against 2.Qd3, I dont have to go too far. After 2...d5 3.g4 g6, white shouldn't be even considering 4.gxf5 Bxf5 after his opening. Instead, 4.Nc3! seems the strongest continuation. I'm playing a gambit here, not a dull positional opening - if white plays something like g4 then switches to quiet play, he will indeed be worse. However, 4.Nc3 and then black, unless he wants to go back into the accepted gambit lines with 4...fxg4 (on which, either 5.h3 or 5.Bf4 seem to offer white more than enough compensation), or what else? 4...Nc6 or 4...Bg7 can both be met by 5.Bf4, where I prefer white's chances.
Finally, 2.g4 I did say to be playable, but not the best of these lines. Your line for black is the most commonly played, but again I like white's postion, even if the g-file hasn't been successfully opened. 

The dutch was intended as an aggressive, counter-attacking opening. But when there are such a range of clearly playable gambit lines where black does better to turn it down, and white still has his attacking chances - this I dont consider to be sound. I'm not saying that it means it's unplayable, it's just an opinion. There's no fully standardized definition of "sound" and "unsound", and it depends as much on personal preference. Try telling Johnny Hector (or maybe our very own Tony Kosten!) that the latvian is unsound, I doubt you'll get them to agree. The Hungarian master Kadas would never admit to 1.h4 being unsound. I'm not the only person to think the dutch is unsound, and you're not the only person to disagree with that statement. 

And playing one correspondence game in the line will not change the assessment - I'm certain if I did beat you in a miniature you'd still claim that the dutch was fully sound, and if I lost quickly I'd still think the dutch a rotten opening. C'est la vie!

Regards, 
Craig 

My opinion on the dutch is that it's a terrible opening, unsound, and anyone who plays it deserves more than the average quota of flattenings. (This being said, I played it OTB for the first time to defeat a bogey player in my league only two days ago, but I went in via 1...e6)
Anyway, where was I... oh yes. I appreciate pretty much every attempt to blow the dutch into oblivion.

2.g4 isn't the best of these lines, but it's playable. 2.h3, however, is a brilliant move which refutes the dutch completely! 

Okay, maybe a little extreme, but I think the 2.h3 and 2.Qd3 lines (both intending 3.g4) are good for white, especially the former as, with comparison to the 2.g4 gambit, the option of keeping the files closed with ...g3 is no longer available. 

Still, I suppose that black's position is  just about defensible - but I'd rather be on the white side of the board, and indeed if I know my opponent plays the dutch, I will play 1.d4 instead of my normal (and almost exclusive) 1.e4. Other than the occasional 1.h4 outing, which I save for IECC these days.

Hope this was somehow helpful even with my insane rambling!

Regards, 
Craig 

I know I've seen d4 f5 g4!?  a few times...but wondered if it has any practical value.  I believe that the variation d4 f5 h3 (intending g4) is called the Korchnoi Variation, so perhaps it can't be all bad?  Perhaps white can gain some sort of kingside initiative for a measly pawn?   

I know I've seen a game or two with an interesting Rxh7 tactic...

Does anyone know anything about this system?

NeX iRae