MNb wrote on 05/14/09 at 05:53:26:
I won't dispute your general comments - I am just curious why you rate 5.Bd2 higher than 5.Nbd2.
a) 5.Bd2 Bxd2+ 6.Nbxd2 0-0 7.e4 fxe4 8.Nxe4 Nc6 9.Be2 Qe7 10.0-0 e5 and Black has achieved his/her main goal ...
b) 5.Nbd2 0-0 6.e3 b6 and I feel the bishop on b4 worse than on e7, but me knowing zilch about the MNb5 might be wrong.
Of course this demands flexibility if the Stonewall is Black's main defence. It isn't mine.
Another question: what about 1.Nf3 e6 (or d6) intending 2...f5 ? Now 2.d3 is not very attractive anymore, is it?
In a) is there anything to the idea of 0-0-0 for white at some point, instead of the quieter Be2/0-0? Even perhaps just 11.d5 followed up by c5 before black can get ...d6 in? *shrug* That'd make for an interesting discussion, but the fact 4...b6 equalizes quickly almost makes it pointless.
I only rated it higher because it was more common, I didn't give much thought to 5.Nbd2, honestly. Maybe it's worth looking into as well, it could be fertile ground. It just seems white does well enough after 5.Bd2 statistically that I didn't see a reason to look for more. I should know better than relying on statistics...
1. Nf3 e6 2.c4 f5 and black will have to deal with annoying d3/e4 anti-Stonewall plans after 3.g3. On the upside, at least he'll have avoided the set-up earlier that can't be avoided via the Semi-Slav move order, and 1...f5 is easy enough to side-step by itself. The huge upside to the Semi-Slav move order is that white has committed himself to d4, if I remember correctly. However, as we've seen, black has to either deal with that set-up that scores really well for white, or be denied the Stonewall altogether because of 5.Bg5!?
Last time I checked the Stonewall doesn't fare so hot against English structures, but admittedly I have no access to theory on that area. If anyone has anything of relevance, I'd be happy to see it.