Whatever was Svidler doing on mm. 19--21. Surely he had better?!

TalJechin wrote on 10/29/09 at 12:32:01:

From a discussion here, but don't ask me to find the thread involved.

MNb wrote on 10/29/09 at 02:58:42:


Actually, "the Cox line" (both the Bellin line and 11...c5 etc) can be found in a note in NCO - but these days it seems pedantic to keep on connecting people's names with individual moves. Most books these days only credit names of top GMs if credit is given at all, and even then Fritz & Rybka etc could probably claim most of those moves anyway...

Btw, in Starting Out 1.d4, Cox prefers "7.d5! Bf6 8.Nfd2! Nxd2 9.Qxd2!" though personally, I would definitely play something less cooperative on black's 8th. - Has Cox commented 6...Ne4 in some of his other books too or is the MNb quote from an article or discussion here?

MNb wrote on 10/28/09 at 03:14:45:


Sure, Williams is no Avrukh to say the least but I like his book too.

What you call "Cox' improvement" was actually mentioned already in
Bellin's excellent "Winning With The Dutch" from 1990 as giving white an edge, citing Didishko-Yuferov 1976. (He also mentiones 7... Ne4 in IZ as a promising new move.)

It seems difficult for black after that line. Instead 7..d5 may be the only chance for close to equal game but I happily take the white side after 8. Ne5!. For example 8... c6 9. Nxe4 fxe4 10.Bf4 and we are back again  

Also one mustn't forget that the available computer SW*HW 2009 and 2003 when Williams book came out (not even mentioning 1990...) differ by something like 500 ELO.

MNb wrote on 10/27/09 at 01:52:10:


"1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 Ne4. Alas JJ Cox has shown a clear road to a white advantage."

Interesting, Williams' book kind of opinions that black is fine after:

7. Nbd2 "White's best" Bf6 8. Qc2 "Again best" d5 9. b3 "Other moves gives black easy game" c5 10. Bb2 "other moves does not promise anything either" cxd4 11. Bxd4 Nc6 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. cxd5 exd5 14. a3 a5 etc.

Rybka already gives slight advantage to black here

TN wrote on 10/26/09 at 04:56:44:


Yes, white can hardly threaten black with anything off-beat after 1. d4 e6 2. Nf3 f5

3. d5 has many good responses: 3... Nf6, 3... Bd6 and even 3... exd5 while 4. Qxd5 d6 5. Ng5!? Qe7 6. Nxh7 isn't as good as it looks...

Why not learn the sound and good main lines with 3.g3! 

Early c4 like 3.c4 is a bit imprecise while it allows various Bb4 plans.

If black gets into Dutch with 1...e6 option, does white also not have some additional anti-dutch lines which are not available otherwise. Like....

1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.d5

Just out of curiosity, does Davies mention 1.d4 e6 2.g3?  I assume he just says play the Dutch like a man...  but I'm not a Dutch player, I've played d5 variants for years, but I hate defending against the Catalan.  (Sorry if this seems a bit torturous or off the topic, but the Davies DVD does interest me).

To say that "White just gets his normal plus" goes beyond optimism.  In the Benko, a significant part of Black's compensation (which may still not be quite sufficient) stems from the fact that, with White's d-pawn having moved on to d5, Black's to-be-fianchettoed KB can readily contribute to the pressure against White's queenside.  

Kramnikaze wrote on 10/15/09 at 23:14:00:


You forgot 2...Bb4, which is an interesting sideline played by several strong GMs as a surprise weapon that contains strong similarities to a Bogo-Indian. White should keep a slight edge with 3.Bd2, but Black's position is very solid. This has been discussed in a few threads in the Forum.

I can't trust 2...b5 either after 3.cb5 a6 4.e4 ab5 5.Bb5 Qa5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Qd3 Bb7 8.Bd2 Nf6 9.f3 and Black has no compensation for the pawn. Not surprisingly, White may have something even better, such as 4.ba6 Ba6 5.g3, again with no compensation in sight for Black.

I have a question about this 1.d4 e6 2. c4 move order.
You can play alot of moves here, the Dutch way 2..f5 or English way 2..b6, ofcourse 2..c5, d5,Nf6 are also viable options.
Recently i have been experimenting with 1.d4 e6 2. c4 b5!?
Are there any known games in the corr databases ?


So far i know:

Gabriel(2555)-Sprotte(2205) 1-0, 1998 and
Lein(2336)-Shulman(2581) 0-1, 2006.

There was the question of who uses the 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 move order now.  We all know about Botvinnik, but several of today's players still use that move order.

Radjabov, Wang Yue, and Bareev have all used it fairly recently.  But the main repeat offenders are Gleizerov, Ulibin, Ilyushin and Moskalenko.

So yeah, the tricky Botvinnik move order is alive and well even at the (second) highest levels.

MNb wrote on 10/12/09 at 02:24:15:



I've been answering 1. d4 with ... e6 for years.  I have to agree with everything said above.  I'd just add one thing.  I only get 1. d4 e6, 2. e4 once every 2-3 years so it's actually perfectly feasible to play 1. ... e6
[although if you do, don't come running to me if the first three oppponents play 2 e4!]


PS: I orginally started play 1. ... e6 to offer the transposition to a French long before I started playin the Dutch - so my motivation never was to avoid Dutch Sidelines.

MNb wrote on 10/12/09 at 02:24:15:

I think Davies focuses on ...Bb4+ lines, i.e. the Keres Defence 1.d4 e6 2.c4 Bb4+ and the Bogo-Indian for the move order 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 Bb4+, instead of the Dutch. So it is a very calm, positional repertoire, though I'm not sure I trust 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Be7!?.

Of course Bowen could still be interested in the French part of the repertoire, particularly if he is a solid Stonewall player.

Bowen wrote on 10/11/09 at 13:45:38:


The decision of which move order to play is ultimately a matter of taste. A 1...e6 move order rules out the Lenningrad and the Antoshin, but still allows you to play the Stonewall, Iljin-Zhenevsky and the ...Bb4 variations. Also, you are not forced into a French Defence after 2.e4; you can also play the Franco-Benoni (which often transposes to a Sicilian) with 2...c5 or 2...b6, although these lines have inferior theoretical reputations. This isn't the place to offer a French Defence repertoire for a Dutch player, but studying a good repertoire book and following the recommendations should suffice since most 1.d4 players will not be entirely comfortable in a French Defence.

When I play the Dutch, I quite like facing White's Anti-Dutch lines as then I obtain equality straight out of the opening, but if you dislike lines such as 2.Bg5, 2.Nc3, 2.e4 and 2.g3 without c4, then the 1...e6 2.c4 (or even 2.Nf3 f5) f5 is the best move order. You will still face some Anti-Dutch lines after 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5, but if you play the Stonewall, you can use a 2...d5 move order instead and make sure you are prepared for White's sidelines such as the London, Torre and Colle.

I only play the Dutch as a surprise weapon, but I use both the 1...e6 2.c4 f5 and the 1...f5 move orders depending on the opponent, although if I want to play the ...Bb4 lines I will start with 1...e6. Also, if you like the idea of the Franco-Benoni, then 2.Nf3 c5 is another good option which could force the opponent out of their repertoire after 3.c4 cd4 (Symmetrical English) or 3.e4 cd4 4.Nd4 (Open Sicilian), and 3.c3/e3 d5 promises absolutely no advantage for White.

I can't comment on Davies' DVDs since I don't own either of them, but from what I have heard from others, they seem to be a worthwhile purchase if you like the DVD format and are within the target audience.