ChessPub Forum - Stonewall or Leningrad?

(UTC)

ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › Daring Defences to 1. d4 › Dutch › Stonewall or Leningrad?

(Moderators: Hadron, CraigEvans, proustiskeen)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1 [2]

Topic Tools

Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies)

Stonewall or Leningrad? (Read 26852 times)

Nightlamp YaBB Newbies Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 23 Joined: 02/19/07	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #13 - 03/28/08 at 16:52:28	Post Tools	Print Post
	If one plays 1...f5 one wants to win. I believe one has winning chances with black in all three main systems : StoneWall, Classical and Leningrad. I guess the chance of running into someone's preparation is bigger in the classical, while the other systems offer much more variations. I advise you to start with the classical or stonewall and, after a while, to have a look at the Leningrad. To have three of such openings in one's repertoire makes it fun playing against 1.d4.


	IP Logged

thibdb13 God Member Offline Tal was the best Posts: 974 Location: Mechelen Joined: 01/25/07 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #12 - 03/28/08 at 16:36:37	Post Tools	Print Post
	In many books about the dutch defense it is recommended to the black player to understand the Stonewall before deciding for a particular system. Stonewall-like positions may occur in the Leningrad and in the Ilyin)-Zhenevsky and so having a look at the Stonewall is certainly no waste of time. My recommendation is then: play first some games with the Stonewall and after this decide whether this system suits you or not, and if not try to make an objective analysis of the reasons you have to choose the Leningrad or the Ilyin-Zhenevsky. My own experience is that the Stonewall is quite easy to play and understand but it is very difficult to win a game with black in this system. The Leningrad is more complicated but offers more chances of counterplay and it can be very handy against a weaker player. I have never been able to trust the Ilyin-Zhenevsky against white king's side fianchetto but but against systems with e3 in place of g3, it is quite an efficient weapon.

	Yusupov once said that “The problem with the Dutch Defence is that later in many positions the best move would be ...f5-f7” but he is surely wrong.
	IP Logged

Markovich God Member Offline Posts: 6099 Location: Columbus, Ohio Joined: 09/17/04	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #11 - 03/28/08 at 15:40:12	Post Tools	Print Post
	These two systems are so dissimilar that it's a little difficult to imagine anyone's choice between them being finely balanced. For me personally, the rigidity of the Stonewall is downright repulsive, and it would take a great deal of reading books, going over games and so forth to convince me to play it or to enable me to do so well. Even though I think the Leningrad objectively is pretty dicey, I'm attracted to it for its fluidity and hmm, how to put this? -- ambiguity. There is so much going on in those positions with Black's knight on a5, for example, and that's only one of Black's ways of playing the Leningrad. Also, based on my experience with it, I think I can find fairly good moves in Leningrad-type positions. I am sure on the other hand that there are many who find themselves quite unsettled in Leningrad positions and are attracted to the fixed structures of the Stonewall. But it's hard for me to imagine the chess mind that would flip a coin to decide which of these two systems to prepare and to play.

	The Great Oz has spoken!
	IP Logged

alumbrado God Member Offline Esse quam videri bonus malebo Posts: 1418 Location: London Joined: 02/17/03 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #10 - 03/28/08 at 15:20:15	Post Tools	Print Post
	Play both! Seriously, that way you have options depending on your mood, and a fall-back if you find yourself feeling that one or other needs some homework at any given time. And you only need to learn the 'anti-Dutch' lines once ... If you really want to choose just one, though, I'd vote for the Stonewall.

	If sometimes we fly too close to the sun, at least this shows we are spreading our wings.
	IP Logged

Bogojump Full Member Offline Chesspub Posts: 121 Location: Europe Joined: 03/26/08	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #9 - 03/28/08 at 12:23:36	Post Tools	Print Post
	Go for the Leningrad. Its more dynamic and white will never be able to escape a fight. Maybe he then must rely on some anti-dutch system. You are developing you chess skill more by playing the Leningrad .

	"You must lead your opponent into a deep, dark forest, where 2 + 2 = 5 and where the path back out is only broad enough for one of you." (((Mikhail Tal)))
	IP Logged

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10780 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #8 - 12/28/06 at 03:13:32	Post Tools	Print Post
	Müller,O - Knoche,L [A92] Oberliga NRW 8586 Germany (2.2), 1985 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0–0 6.0–0 Ne4 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 d5 10.Ng4 Nc6 11.Nxf6+ Qxf6 12.Be3 Ne7 13.Qb3 c6 14.f3 exf3 15.Rxf3 Qg6 16.Rxf8+ Kxf8 17.Bf4 Qe8 18.e4 Qd8 19.Rf1 Ke8 20.Be5 dxe4 21.Bxe4 Nf5 22.Kh1 Qg5 23.Bxf5 exf5 24.Re1 Qd2 25.Re3 Kf7 26.c5+ Kg6 27.Qg8 Qxe3 28.Qe8+ Kg5 29.Bf4+ Qxf4 30.Qe7+ Kg4 31.Qh4+ Kf3 32.Qxf4+ Ke2 33.Kg1 Bd7 34.Qc7 Bc8 35.Qxg7 Kd3 36.Qxh7 Kxd4 37.Qe7 Kc4 38.h4 b6 39.h5 bxc5 1–0 This game shows another big problem: what's Black going to do with his queen's bishop? Bagirov,V (2505) - Gulko,B (2565) [A92] URSch-46 Tbilisi, 1978 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 Ne4 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 d5 10.Ng4 Be7 11.b3 c5 12.Bb2 Nc6 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.Ne5 Qd6 15.Nxc6 bxc6 16.Qc2 Bb7 17.Rad1 Qe7 18.e3 a5 19.Rc1 Ba3 20.Rb1 a4 21.Bxa3 Qxa3 22.b4 Ba6 23.b5 cxb5 24.cxb5 Rac8 25.Qd2 Bb7 26.Bh3 Rfe8 27.Rfc1 Kf7 ½–½ It is amusing to see, that Bagirov was not able to prove anything with 11.b3 two times. Dydyshko,V - Juferov,S [A92] BLRch Minsk, 1976 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0–0 6.0–0 Ne4 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 d5 10.Ng4 Be7 11.Bf4 c6 12.Qc2 Nd7 13.f3 exf3 14.Bxf3 Qe8 15.Rae1 Qg6 16.Qxg6 hxg6 17.Rc1 Kh7 18.Kg2 a5 19.h4 a4 20.e4 dxe4 21.Bxe4 Nf6 22.Bf3 Nxg4 23.Bxg4 c5 24.dxc5 Bxc5 25.Rcd1 b6 26.Bf3 Ra7 27.Rfe1 Re8 28.Kh2 Bb4 29.Re2 Bb7 30.Bg4 Ba6 31.Re4 Rf7 32.b3 a3 33.Kg1 Bc5+ 34.Be3 Bb7 35.Re5 Bf3 36.Rf1 Bd6 37.Rxe6 Rxe6 38.Bxe6 Rf6 39.Bd5 Bxd5 40.cxd5 Bxg3 41.Rxf6 gxf6 42.Bxb6 Bd6 43.Kg2 Kg7 44.Kf3 Kf7 45.Bd8 f5 46.Bg5 Ke8 47.Ke3 Be5 48.Bf4 Bf6 49.Bg3 Kd7 50.b4 Be7 51.b5 Bc5+ 52.Ke2 Ke8 53.Bf2 Bd6 54.Kd3 Bh2 55.Bc5 Bg3 56.Bxa3 Bxh4 57.Bc5 1–0 As 11...c5 is not satisfactory either, maybe 11...Nc6!? 12.Rc1 Bd6!? It looks illogical to exchange the good vs the bad bishop. But after 13.Bxd6 cxd6 Black has a good centre control and can think of ...e5, eg 14.Ne3 (14.b3 dxc4 15.Rxc4 e5 16.d5 Nd4 17.Ne3 b6) Qg5 15.b3 Bd7 16.Qd2 Rae8. This might be a way to make use of the unstable Ng4.

	The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged. GC Lichtenberg
	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #7 - 12/27/06 at 10:40:58	Post Tools	Print Post
	MNb wrote on 12/27/06 at 03:32:54: My 2SRD opinion: I suspect ...Ne4 in all variations, where White has not played b3 or Re1 and sometimes even then. It looks like White can prove a nice edge after 6...Ne4 with 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 (obviously not good, if there is a pawn on d6) d5 (according to Williams "Black is also OK after 9...c5!?", but is he? Williams is often quite optimistic) 10.Ng4 (10.Bf4!? and 11.f3) Be7 11.Bf4 c5 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Rc1. If I am not mistaken, it was IM Cox who pointed this out. This variation shows the problem of those ...Ne4 lines: White gets a substantial lead in development. Osnos,V - Frolov,A [A92] Leningrad Leningrad, 1984 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 Ne4 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 d5 10.Ng4 Nc6 11.Nxf6+ Qxf6 12.Be3 Na5 13.b3 Bd7 14.Qd2 b6 15.f3 Qe7 16.Bg5 Qe8 17.cxd5 exd5 18.fxe4 Rxf1+ 19.Rxf1 h6 20.Bxh6 Qh5 21.e5 c6 22.Bg5 Bh3 23.Bxh3 Qxh3 24.Be7 Re8 25.Qg5 Qd7 26.Bf6 Nb7 27.Rf4 Nd8 28.Bxd8 Qxd8 29.Qg6 Qd7 30.Rh4 Re7 31.Qh7+ Kf8 32.Qh8+ 1-0 the natural 12...Ne7 looks like an improvement but white does have the bishop pair, so maybe black should save his darkfielder before playing Nc6, e.g: Bagirov,V (2493) - Haub,T (2388) [A92] Crailsheim op Crailsheim (7), 24.05.1999 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.c4 0-0 6.0-0 Ne4 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 d5 10.Ng4 Be7 11.b3 Nc6 12.Bb2 h5 13.Ne3 Bg5 14.Qd2 Ne7 15.f3 Nf5 16.f4 Be7 17.a4 Rf6 18.Ba3 Bxa3 19.Rxa3 a5 20.Ra2 Rg6 21.Nxf5 ½-½


	IP Logged

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10780 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #6 - 12/27/06 at 03:32:54	Post Tools	Print Post
	My 2SRD opinion: I suspect ...Ne4 in all variations, where White has not played b3 or Re1 and sometimes even then. It looks like White can prove a nice edge after 6...Ne4 with 7.Nbd2 Bf6 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Ne5 (obviously not good, if there is a pawn on d6) d5 (according to Williams "Black is also OK after 9...c5!?", but is he? Williams is often quite optimistic) 10.Ng4 (10.Bf4!? and 11.f3) Be7 11.Bf4 c5 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Rc1. If I am not mistaken, it was IM Cox who pointed this out. This variation shows the problem of those ...Ne4 lines: White gets a substantial lead in development. I am not impressed by 7.d5 Bf6 8.Nfd2 because of Nxd2 and 9...e5. I am not a connaisseur, but doesn't Black get a good version of the KID? White can try to avoid the Alekhine Variation with 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.c4 o-o 6.Nc3, so 5...Ne4 is accurate. This also means, that Black has to add ...Bb4(+) variations to his repertoire: 4.c4 Bb4+ when I think 5.Nbd2 o-o 6.Ngf3 b6 7.o-o (7.Ne5 Ne4!) Bb7 8.a3 Bxd2+ (Be7 9.d5!? or 9.b4) 9.Bxd2 critical. All in all I am not convinced yet, that this repertoire is a viable option. That's a pity, as I also do like the flexibility of Alekhine's idea.

	The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged. GC Lichtenberg
	IP Logged

Knut S. Junior Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 58 Joined: 01/27/06 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #5 - 12/26/06 at 16:06:11	Post Tools	Print Post
	Interesting post, TalJechin. I have played both the Stonewall and the IZ classical, and I am currently favouring the latter. But may be the Aljechin/Alekhine (?) variation is a good middle way. In Kingpin magazine no 37, Jonathan Rogers has a nice, analytical review of Williams' book. He argues that it is difficult for Black to play ...d6 and ...e5 against correct White play in the dutch. He points out that Williams argues that Black may want to transpose from the Classical to a Stonewall on certain occasions. However, Rogers thinks that "...switching to Stonewall systems on occasions might be a matter of necessity, and not merely a matter of luxury." He goes on to say: "...those who are attracted to the Classical systems and would only want to play a standard Stonewall where necessary may wish to give more thought to omitting 6. ...d6 in favour of Alekhine's 6...Ne4. [After 1. d4 f5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 e6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. 0-0 0-0 6. c4]. Here, he can often transpose to a Stonewall without loss of tempo (because he would play ...d5 at once) and he also retains the possibility of exchanging knights and playing a Classical type system with ...d6 and ...e5 after all, depending on White's response. And if he chooses the latter, then he would at least have avoided the potential headaches which arise where White is able to capture his knight on e4 (...) Perhaps it is 6....Ne4, rather that 6....d6 7. Nc3 Ne4 which we should be discussing more?" He then goes on to say that 7. d5 Bf6 8. Nfd2 is the critical test of the Alekhine. Obviously, he focuses on the early Ne4 in the Classical (which Williams recommends), whereas I guess many Classical players prefer to play Qe8 - g6/h5 etc first. Anyway, your post has certainly inspired me to take a closer look at the Aljechin 6. ...Ne4 variation. (Btw, I guess with you user name, you are obliged to try out all variations named after Aljechin?!)


	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #4 - 12/26/06 at 11:06:27	Post Tools	Print Post
	Lately I've been trying out Alekhine's variation, as after 6...Ne4 and Bf6 black has a nice mix of the pros with the Stonewall / Leningrad and even sometimes the Iljin. Black has to be rather flexible regarding his pawn structure - but on the other hand this also gives him more pressure on white's centre. At the moment I'm not sure exactly what the downsides are compared to the Stonewall/Leningrad/Iljin but the advantages are not so hard to spot, e.g: c5+Nc6 instead of c6+Nbd7 / Be7-f6 instead of g6+Bg7 leaves the king a bit safer as the bishops are usually swapped by Bb2. / and going d7-d5 instead of d7-d6-d5 as in some lines of the Iljin with 7...Ne4 also feels good... I suppose there must be something that makes the other three variations considerably more popular, but what??


	IP Logged

Viking God Member Offline Posts: 673 Location: Norway Joined: 10/12/04 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #3 - 12/26/06 at 09:06:35	Post Tools	Print Post
	I used to play the stonewall, but delaying/omitting d4 through a 1.c4 / 1.Nf3 moveorder can be troublesome for black.


	IP Logged

ErictheRed God Member Offline USCF National Master Posts: 2534 Location: USA Joined: 10/02/05	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #2 - 12/23/06 at 18:45:06	Post Tools	Print Post
	As a 1.d4 player myself, and Classical Dutch devotee as Black, I'd recommend the Stonewall. It may not be as "sexy" as the Leningrad, but when I face the Dutch as White I think it's the hardest to achieve any advantage against. The Leningrad is sharp, but White seems to have just as much fun as Black. In the Stonewall, I always seem to end up struggling (as White) to prove that I have anything more than equality. But I play the Classical, for some reason...


	IP Logged

Knut S. Junior Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 58 Joined: 01/27/06 Gender:	Re: Stonewall or Leningrad? Reply #1 - 12/23/06 at 12:19:50	Post Tools	Print Post
	Yes, I agree with that. The centre is quite closed in the Stonewall, so Black is less likely to get run over. Importantly, it is more difficult for White to achieve the e4 break. However, play can become a bit stale and you run the risk of dying a slow death in the endgame if you're stuck with a poor pawn structure on the same colour as your bishop. I recommend looking at three alternative plans for active play: 1) If you don't mind hanging pawns, you can play b6, Bb7, c5 etc. 2) Advance the g-pawn, supported by queen and rook, Ne4, Bd7-e8-h5 and kingside-attack 3) Change the structure in the centre with dxc4 and e5 (if properly prepared!) In the Leningrad, Black is better prepared to advance the e-pawn. Indeed, the whole opening is geared towards playing e5, similarily to the King's Indian. If White plays e4, you may have support for a f4-advance and king side attack. But with a more flexible centre, White has more attacking opportunities too. If you are interested in the Dutch, I strongly recommend Neil McDonald: Starting out: the dutch defence. It also covers the third main dutch system, the classical (my favourite).


	IP Logged

sssthepro Senior Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 439 Joined: 12/16/06	Stonewall or Leningrad? 12/23/06 at 08:42:09	Post Tools	Print Post
	Which shouldbe preferred?I heard that Leningrad gives more winning chances but is risker, while Stonewall is more solid but has less winning chances if White plays correctly.


	IP Logged

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1 [2]

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