Glenn Snow wrote on 03/26/09 at 00:46:52:


Indeed that is the move given in ECO, which thinks it should lead to a slight advantage for White.

OK, the problem with the English move-order vs. the Stonewall is supposed to be the d3+Nbd2+Qc2 => e4 set-up:

e.g.: 1. c4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 d5 5. O-O c6 6. d3 Bd6 7. Nbd2 Nbd7 8. Qc2 O-O 9. e4 fxe4 10. dxe4 dxe4 11. Nxe4 NxNe4 12. QxNe4 e5 gives problems to Black;

instead, how about: 1. c4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 d5 5. O-O c6 6. d3 Bd6 7. Nbd2 Nbd7 8. Qc2 O-O 9. e4 dxe4 10. dxe4 f4!? (threatens also ...e5)

[Note: Black better not neglect the move ...Nbd7, since on 7. Nbd2 O-O 8. Qc2 e5 9. e4 dxe4 10. dxe4 f4? 11. gxf4 exf4? 12. e5!]

seems interesting

chk wrote on 03/04/09 at 09:04:25:



Thank you chk, for your effort and prooving some of my statements right.

The Bf4-problem only occurs if you use the d5/e6/c6 move order excusively to get to the stonewall. In the position after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3/Nf3 e6 White will play one of the following moves in 98% of your games:

4.e4 if 3.Nc3 - the Marshall-gambit - good knowledge necessary
4.cxd - no problem after 4....cxd and later Bf5, solving all usual QGD problems with the bishop

4.e3 Bd6 5.Bd3/Nf3 f5! - no 5.g4 available, the above mentioned good Stonewall version

4.Nf3/Nc3 f5? 5.Bf4! - in this position, f5 is not a good choice. 
Because the waiting move 4.Bd6 is now met by 5.e4, Black has no other choice but playing Semi-Slav-Mainlines (4....Sf6) or the
"Noteboom variation" which I recommended above. 

It is a lot of work, but worth it, because it is really difficult to play for white - and in the range < ELO 2000 you will rarely find a white specialist in this line. Theoretically, there is no advantage for White - even Schandorff in his new QG-book offers no clear way to a White advantage (like he does in most other variations). And while searching for it, he completely ignores the mainlines in the Noteboom - he will know why!

Delay f5 by playing 1….d5 or, if the French is OK for you, the even better 1…e6 (avoids Trompowsky) and you don´t have to deal with the Staunton or some Anti-Dutch-variations.

I don't know, but i wouldnt mind as a black player if white playes staunton gambit, it gives black a very comfortable position if he knows his theory.

OK, I'm a bit late again in posting in this thread, but I was actually putting some efforts to learn the Stonewall and have also tested Derdudea's propositions in a few (~15) internet blitz games (didn't have time to look at Dragan Glas' 4. f3 and tafl's early Ne4 suggestions though). So to sum it up:

a) If one uses the Dutch move-order (1. ... f5):
- Cons: Anti-Dutch lines: Staunton Gambit (2. e4), Kortchnoj Gambit et al (2. h3 + g4 or 2. g4), 2. Bg5 & 3. Nc3 (or vice versa), 2. Qd3 +e4, 2. Bf4 and maybe the Lisitsyn Gambit (1. Nf3 & 2. e4) depending on your repertoire;
- Pros: Keeps the useful option to alternate between various Dutch systems, like the Classical, Stonewall, the hybrid Leningrad Stonewall, Leningrad or Anglo-Dutch (e.g. I hear the Stonewall may fare badly vs. the English).

b) If one uses the QGD/Slav move-order (I have tried only 1. d4 d5 2. ... e6 & 3. ... f5 or 3. ... c6 & 4. or 5. ... f5 / unfortunately 1. ... e6 does not fit my Black repertoire):
- Cons:
i) Anti-lines: the BDG or DDG (despite all the hype it was the 1st time I've had to face this, but I had read an interesting artcile by TopNotch , sacing a pawn back, and duly crushed one opponent), cannot exclude White’s persistency for the Qd3 / Nc3 & e4 set-ups, or early-Bg5;
ii) It is difficult to avoid the complicated 4. g4 or 5. g4-lines;
iii) You may get move-ordered out of the Stonewall ‘modern’ Bd6 set-up => if you are in search of chess truth, this is enough reason to ultimately choose the 'Dutch move-order' , however, in practice I see that not many White players follow this plan (in my case it was 0 out of ~15 games; I am an intermediate player and it was only blitz - still enough to get a taste);
iv) One has to play the Anglo-Dutch+Leningrad vs. the English move-order? (I've seen some alternatives, e.g. Moskalenko's dxc4 approach, but consider this an outstanding on which I'll get back when I'll find more info - I have an 'English spy' ).
- Pros: May lead to a favourable Stonewall:
i) White will use less frequently the (solid) g3/Bg2 set-up => you may get the chance for more K-side attacks;
ii) Most of the times the nasty Nh3 set-up won’t be available due to Nf3 being played;
iii) Many times Nc3 will have been played (considered inferior to Nbd2);
From my experiments I think Derdudea was right about i)-iii) / those kind of 'improved' positions resulted in 3 out of 4 games.

So this is my input (100% backing Derdudea here) and you can all choose depending on your short-term and long-term goals (I decided to use both move-orders, but start with the QGD move-order to reduce White's alternatives in the short-run and use the Be7 Stonewall if forced to).

Consider me an absolute beginner on this area of chess openings - so all feedback is welcome.. and sorry for the long post - it's a rather many-faceted topic

The book 'Win with the Stonewall Dutch' (http://sverreschesscorner.blogspot.com/2008/07/win-with-stonewall-dutch.html) is due to be released in the next couple of months and should be a very useful complement to Aagaard's Stonewall book. 

There are also some interesting comments in the given link that cover the Dutch; near the end of the webpage Sverre discusses some move-order issues for Black and how to best resolve them.

There actually is a couple of alternatives but they all have some drawbacks. One possibility is 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Ne4!?which I occasionally play in blitz. It has been played by some strong players but only as a surprise weapon.

After 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 f5 you allow White to develop with Bf4 and only then e3. Maybe 4.Nf3 is best, hoping for 4...c6 (preparing ...Bd6) 5.Bf4 Bd6 when 6.Bxd6 and 6.e3 both are strong.

Markovich wrote on 01/16/09 at 15:22:34:


Thank you for spending time on my repertoire, your ideas may help me to find some weaknesses.

First of all, my posted repertoire idea is only a framework that should give club-level players (rating 1500-2000) who have the same problem I had -  finding a repertoire against 1.d4, 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 – a plan how to start from a simple one-for-all system – the Dutch-Stonewall .  The virtue of this plan is simplicity and flexibility. 
Step two is, as I said, working in more ambitious (=complicated!) lines by establishing  the Slav-Stonewall move order  by d5,e6,c6 - in the order of your choice.  While doing this, simplicity is gradually reduced for flexibility.

My basic plan establishing any kind of opening repertoire is:
1. Choosing openings fitting your style.  I like playing a positional style in closed positions, but always with an aggressive idea, if possible against the opponent’s king.

2. Search for variations that pose big positional and/or tactical problems for your opponent and provoke early mistakes. Those variations surely pose the same problems for me, too, but luring my opponent on such a dangerous ground is based one the assumption that I will know the variation better and get a plus out of the opening. That means spending time on it.

The Marshall Gambit and the Noteboom are variations perfectly fitting this plan.

The Marshall is a (nearly) necessary part of this repertoire so you better start loving it (in my case, it helps playing it with White, too) It  leads to sharp play and both sides have a lot of chances to go wrong or choose weaker variations to avoid the tactical complications. Recent theory shows no clear path to a secure White a significant advantage. In OTB play on club-level the better prepared player almost certainly will get a plus out of the opening. Put a lot of work in it and make sure you are the better prepared player.
If you want to reduce the amount of games the Marshall will be played against you, I recommend the move order 1...d5 2....c6, (accepting Slav Exchange as a new possibility) because in the typical Slav move order the Nf3 is usually played before Nc3 while Nc3 is more common when 2....e6 is played. Nevertheless, if the Marshall is White´s main weapon against the semi-slav,  he will get there....unless you play 3....e6 or c6 only after White has played Nf3  and go for a different Slav or QGD – line after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6/e6 3.Nc3. 

The Noteboom – variation of the Semi-Slav – 1.d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3.Sf3 c6 4.Nc3 dxc is at your choice – you can go to the Semi-Slav mainlines or the Slav-Stonewall instead. White´s development is the most natural you can think of – but he is already on his way to a very critical position. OK – Black´s play is not much easier, it is highly complicated for both sides and again the better prepared player will likely get a plus out the opening. Therefore, this move order is not very popular in master games. But the unsuspecting “club-player” I play against OTB has a good chance to have never heard about it. Except Chesspub.com there is very little coverage on this variation (a CC-players dream!). And even if your opponent really wanted to play the Noteboom, the sharp mainline with 5.a4 has an excellent 55% - score for black. What could Black want more?

Sure enough, nobody should be afraid of the Staunton (the Marshall is definitely harder to face) in the Dutch Stonewall move order.  It´s just a matter economic choice. Playing the French against 1.e4, I play 1.d4 e6 and then 2...f5, because it simply makes no sense to give White the Staunton and some Anti-Dutch options like 2.Nc3 oder 2.Bg5. 

Avrukh´s chapter on  the Slav Stonewall wents via 3.Nf3, so his repertoire is irrelevant for variations with an early Nc3. Most positions in the Slav Stonewall with an early Nc3 make it harder for White to exchange the dark-squared bishop via Ba3 and therefore seem to acceptable for black.
After 3.Nf3 c6 4.e3 which you actually thought of, I would head for the Slav Stonewall since there is very little chance that my opponent is Avrukh or can memorize his whole book. Sure enough you could play 4...Nf6 and go for meran-style lines, but that is too much work for me.  
Avrukh deals with these positions after 4...Nf6 (recommending 5.b3) in Chapter 18 and comes to the  conclusion, that this line leads to complex struggle favouring white a bit at the moment but with enough room for black improvements and some interesting games in the future. So there is no reason not play this with Black. 

After 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 c6 4.e3 Black has  two decent choices without going over to the mainlines. Number one: Play 4….Bd6 and then f5 to go for the stonewall again. The other option is. 4…Nf6 5.Nf3 a6 with a completely healthy (scoring approx. 50% for black) Chebanenko Slav sideline that is often played by Bacrot and Dreev (in one or two games even by Kasparov and Topalov).

derdudea:

"Then work on the Slav-lines after 1.d4 e6 2.d4 d5 3. Nf3 (Nc3) c6. You will love to see your opponent play 4.Nc3 (Nf3) because this allows the dangerous Noteboom-variation, leading to a critical position very quickly in which Black´s play is much easier and the better prepared player will likely get a big plus out the opening."

Black does get plenty of winning chances in the Noteboom, but he had better be way prepared.  Also whether Black's play is easier is highly debatable.    

Also you start out claiming that a major virtue of this repertoire is its simplicity and that Black can get a stonewall almost every time.  Then you say, well, actually you have to play Black's side of the Noteboom and the Marshall Gambit -- no less!  Each of those lines is highly theoretical and has strong White proponents -- not to mention being nothing like a Stonewall.  The way I handle the White pieces, you will seldom see a Stonewall as Black if that is your move order, since I would much rather confront you on an open chessboard.

It amazes me that anyone would be afraid of the Staunton Gambit but not of Marshall's Gambit versus the Triangle.  The theoretical status of the latter is much higher, if my understanding is correct.  Frankly if I wanted to play a Stonewall I would not be coy about it, but I would just play 1...f5 and study up on Black's side of 2.e4, 2.Nc3 and so forth.

Finally you might want to take a look at Avrukh's 1.d4 book.  His approach is 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 c6 4.e3, and he makes a fairly convincing arguement for White's advantage after 4...f5.

I said "finally," but here is something more: what do you propose to do after 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 c6 4.e3?

You´re right, the first thing you have to after after changing the move order from the Dutch move order to the Slav-Stonewall is to be prepared for the Marshall-Gambit, 4.e4. I mentioned it, maybe that should have been earlier in my post.

Searching for a new repertoire I recently found the Stonewall - and much more. And here is how it happened:

When I started over with playing chess after almost 15 years, I knew for sure I would resume playing the French against 1.e4. But what to do against 1.d4? Through the fog of the past years I remembered to have tried almost every opening in my first chess career – and never found the right one. I often used the Dutch Stonewall that days, because I liked closed positions and you don´t have to remember many precise moves. My first blitz games after the break revealed the same problem – I couldn’t find a main weapon against 1.d4. So I started to play 1…e6 – hoping White would choose 2.e4. When he did not, I tried 2….b6, the English defence, thinking: “If I don´t know what to play I should make sure to choose a rare defence so White will at least not know what to do either.”  A brilliant strategy!

When my first tournament began, that cowardly White players played 2.Nf3 or 2.g3. By looking up some books I had already recognized, that now the English Defence is not the perfect fit. What to do now? Same like back in 94! Play the Stonewall, because I would get an acceptable position (at least against the 1500 – 1900 rated players- german rating - I usually play) without remembering too much moves.

So while putting much work in my White repertoire because I started playing CC, too, I used the Stonewall Dutch as the starting point for my black repertoire and happily found out, that it is not only an extremely “low-budget” kind of opening, because you can reach these kind of positions no matter what White does, but a perfect starting point for a more ambitious repertoire. This is what you have to do:

Get Aagard´s excellent book “Stonewall II” and play through it to get a feeling for the opening, and you have almost a full repertoire against 1.d4, c4 and Nf3. And then go on from this point!

Delay f5 by playing 1….d5 or, if the French is OK for you, the even better 1…e6 (avoids Trompowsky) and you don´t have to deal with the Staunton or some Anti-Dutch-variations. The g3-lines, which are White´s first choice when the Stonewall is reached via 1….f5, will be reached not often if you use this “Slav-Stonewall”, only  if White chooses the Catalan after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c6 4.Bg2 (or Nf3) f5 or 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 with g3 following. Most of the time, White will have no fianchetto and a knight on f3 (no Nh3-variations!), maybe one on c3, too. These are not the most dangerous ways to attack the Stonewall and Black seems to get a chance to attack one the kingside more often than in Stonewall Dutch with g3.

So with this first step, you have an opening against 1. d4 which leads almost every time to the same structure and is suitable for 1.c4 and 1.Nf3, too. There is at least no quicker way to get a complete repertoire against the closed games.

But this “Slav-Stonewall” is only the first step, because you may want to include other variations. I can´t think of a more flexible move order to gradually work other variations into your repertoire without loosing the possibility to go back to your secure Stonewall every time you want.

You can start with that in the Catalan and English g3 – setups by replacing f5 by an early dxc, giving you double-edged game with good chances for both sides. If don´t like it – stick to the Stonewall.

Then work on the Slav-lines after 1.d4 e6 2.d4 d5 3. Nf3 (Nc3) c6. You will love to see your opponent play 4.Nc3 (Nf3) because this allows the dangerous Noteboom-variation, leading to a critical position very quickly in which Black´s play is much easier and the better prepared player will likely get a big plus out the opening. Therefore, this move order is not very popular in master games. But the unsuspecting “club-player” has a good chance to have never heard about it. Except Chesspub.com there is very little coverage on this variation (a CC-players dream!).

Playing e6 before c6 has the pleasant advantage, that the Slav-Exchange 3.cxd cxd is avoided. Cxd exd in the third or fourth move gives black an easy play. He can now place his white-squared bishop on f5 and solve all his usual problems. But as a drawback of this move order, you have to deal more often with 4.e4, the Marshall-Gambit in the 3.Nc3 move order (if you play 2…c6, it is more likely White will play Nf3 first). It´s definitely not bad for Black, but requires good preparation.

Well- informed white players will avoid the Noteboom by playing 4.e3. Now you can 
1. Play 4…Bd6 and then 5….f5 to get an easy exit to the Stonewall without allowing the complicated 4…f5 5.g4
2. Go for the Meran-Mainlines by 4….Nf6 – a lot of work to do….
3. Play Chebanenko – Style 4…a6 – a ninteresting system where you will find few theoretical coverage despite it seems to played quite often these days by strong grandmasters.
4. Other fourth moves for White can be handled the same way – look for a variation you like, if you don´t find one, go for the Stonewall.

If you play the 1….e6 move order and look for a sharp, less known System for 5 - minute-games or tournament games you desperately want to win, look for the sharper lines of the English Defence after 2.c4 b6, a great surprise weapon that offers a different kind of play than the other mentioned variations. 

So by starting your new 1.d4 black repertoire based on the Stonewall you may end with a highly flexible repertoire without any Stonewall! Just like you want it.