Hi.

Uberdecker wrote on 02/21/20 at 22:51:59:
It doesn't look like there is much established theory still.

Uberdecker wrote on 02/21/20 at 22:51:59:

1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 Nc6 3.e4 has been played many times. What to do after 3...e5? though
4.d4 fxe4 is a Vienna main line with black playing white.
4.Nc3 has been played a lot but 4...Bb4 or 4...Nf6 seem comfortable for black.
maybe:
4.Be2!?
could be an option but I don't see any obvious advantage.
4...Be7!?
5.exf5 d5 6.d4 e4 7.Ne5 Nxe5 8.dxe5 Bxf5 and now it looks like taking down black's centre will be hard.
(5.exf5 d6 6.c4 was a more interesting, with more play)
5.0-0 Nf6 6.exf5
6.c4 fxe4 (or even 6...f4!?) Does not look like it ought to be much.
6...d5 7.d4 exd4 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Bxf5
Should be OK for black. If 10.g4 Bg6.

Uberdecker wrote on 02/21/20 at 22:51:59:

Not what I can see and it's an interesting idea. Maybe 3.c4!? directly can be more precise though, or is there some clever equaliser here not present after 3.a3?

Uberdecker wrote on 02/21/20 at 22:51:59:

Both 4.c4 and 4.g3 have been played a fair amount of times. After 4. c4 Nf6 many players go 5.g3 though.

I would think
1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 Nc6 3.d4 e6 4.Bg5 Nf6 is ok for black. It can turn into something resembling a Bird if white takes on f6 but one that looks interesting for the Bird player. Not so much for the bishop mover.

Uberdecker wrote on 02/21/20 at 22:51:59:

Easily 4...Nf6. If 5.d5 you can go 5...exd5 6.cxd5 Bb4+ and having active knights, instead of moving a bunch of pawns like white, is probably going to be enough for an acceptable game.

Have a nice day.

I don't. My main interest is in the line 4. c4 and whether Black can achieve a playable game there without including ...Bb4+

Dear chess-friends,

Please don't leave me hanging ! I will try to contribute something meaningful soon.
Thanks !

Does anyone know if there have been any further developments in these lines ?
Has 3. d4 been established as the main move in this position or have there since been games with 3. e4 ? Has 3. a3 been tried ?
After 3. d4 e6 has White tended to play 4. g3 intending 5. Bg2, 6. 0-0 and 7. c4, the immediate 4. c4, Markovich's suggestion of 4. Bg5 (presumably met by 4...Be7 rather than 4...Nf6) or  4. d5 ?
After 4. c4 what has Black's response been ? 4...Bb4+, TalJechin's 4...Qe7 or something else ?
Any insight as to why BPaulsen ultimately rejected 2. d3 Nc6 3. d4 in favour of recommending the main lines of the Dutch for White in his book ?
Thanks.

Thanks for all that info.  Yeah, my inclination would be to play 3...e5 unless White directly prevented it.

The line 1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 Nc6 3.d4 e6 4.d5 exd5 5.Qxd5 should be compared to the line 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.d5 exd5 4.Qxd5. 

Here one of the mainlines runs 4...d6 5.Ng5?! (also 5.Bg5 and 5.g3 have been played) 5...Qe7 6.Nxh7 when Jussupow has preferred 6...Rxh7!? 7.Qxg8 Rh4 8.Qb3 Nc6! over the better known 6...c6 7.Qb3 Rxh7 8.Qxg8 Rh4 9.Qb3 Na6 of Miles-Vaisser, Elista 1998 (a short but entertaining draw).

Yes after 1.Nf3 f5 2.d3 Nc6 3.d4 e6 4.c4 Nf6 instead of 4...Qe7 is probably more sensible but you have to give high marks to TalJechin for creativity and it seems playable.  I don't remember his original analysis but would think one idea is to play for ...d6 and ...e5.

Well, it seems that it's still White that needs to come up with an improvement on Roiz-Wojtaszek, Warsaw 2005. See the thread http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1221744682. ;

MNb's suggestion is sensible but if it offers White an advantage it's a small one, and probably other lines offer more against the Dutch.