Okay, and if they do play 3. d4!?, it doesn't look terrible to me...there are quite a few variations in the Dutch involving Nc6...What is the toughest line for Black to handle from 3. d4!?...I read about 3...e6 and Black seems to be able to shift into a potential IZ setup, or a Queen's Fianchetto, or maybe even a Semi-Leningrad if White allows...but the early ...c6 setups are stifled.  I don't see that as a big problem for Black, so why is 3. d4!? supposed to be such a monster then?  And if they don't play 3. d4, but play 3. e4 like we spoke about earlier, then Black simply plays ...e5 and hits back at the center. 
So to me, Black must be flexible, but it seems he can survive, and can still commit to 1...f5 against 1. Nf3 even seeing that 2. d3 is an option.   
I will read some more on previous analysis posted on this site...

I may not be an expert at opening variations, but in the 1. Nf3 f5 2. d3 variation, why can't Black simply play into a reversed King's Gambit-style pawn structure...

1. Nf3 f5 2. d3 Nc6 3. e4 (I have read about 3. d4 already on here) e5 and seek to have more central control?

Yes and it recommended the 150-Attack. In this move order I don't think it that frightening as Black has not played ...c6 yet. Still after 1.Nf3 d6 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 Black has quite a lot to study.

Quote:



Your argument would be sounder if you simply said that after 2.e4 and transposition to a Pirc, you have avoided several important White systems, notably the Austrian.  I don't see any reason why a 1.Nf3 player might not be willing to play a Pirc, though you might be right.

Ametanoitos wrote on 09/22/08 at 11:02:50:


Having played Dutch as my main reply against 1.d4 / 1.c4 for quite some time, I can honestly say that 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 does not worry me at all. On the contrary I prefer playing this sort of lines over main lines.
I do not agree that 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3! Nf6?! assesment (dubious move) Many Dutch specialists propose this line for Black and for my part, I also find it quite easy to handle.
On the other hand, I believe 1.Nf3 f5 is dangerous so I always meet 1.Nf3 with 1...d6 then follow with 2...f5. You can argue that White player might follow with 2.e4 then I shall be ready to play a Pirc but I do not think that a classical 1.Nf3 player will be ready to play against Pirc either, so the odds that I will need to play Pirc is quite slim. Before the game I always check what my opponent play, as any other player would do I think. If a regular 1.e4 player plays 1.Nf3 against me though I will certainly play 1....f5 because he might be using this move to transpose to a Pirc and I wouldn't allow him do that. And because he is a regular 1.e4 player,  with my Dutch opening experience I believe I can handle the Black side of a Dutch even if it is considered to be bit dangerous.

tafl wrote on 10/24/08 at 10:00:54:

White also has the option of 3.e4!?, a dangerous gambit.  But my problem with 2.Nc3 and 2.Bg5, both of which are good moves, is that White still has to prepare to play against Dutches that could arise from 1...e6 and 1...d6 (or plan to play versus the French and the Pirc).  I guess that just state's White's side of what has already been stated.

I have toyed with the idea of including the White side of the French in my 1.d4 repertoire, however.

I agree with you, this variation is hard to meet with Black i prefer 
1.d4 f5 2.Nc3! d5

I don't think black has to fear 
1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3. Bg5 d5 4.Bxf6 exf6

White already gave up his bishop pair, normally white continues to play e3, and still needs some time to play c4, because Nc3 is in the way,
it's perfectly playable for black. I tried to play this as white, when black just castles queenside, he can just play a good pawnstorm on kingside,
I even like black chances in this variation better.
I think carlsen also lost a game in this variation as white.