BPaulsen wrote on 10/25/12 at 02:49:52:


While dont play Dutch anymore, I have met at least 5 major plans against higher rated players and the only trouble I found was to play for a win in a few of the lines, unless I missrember there are several lines that are very drawish. But I have not  looked at these positions for many many years it so it is very likely that white improvments has been found.

About Re1 I never found any good antiote to it so I drifted over to c6 variantion and later completly abbonnded the Dutch and gets better position than I ever had in the Dutch.

Hi Leningrad players. Sunday i was crushed in the 7... Qe8 8.Re1! variation by a much better player than me, anyway it's not everyday that i could have resigned with a clear conscience after 16 moves .... The game went 1.Nf3 g6 2.c4 f5 3.d4 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.g3 0-0 6.Bg2 d6 7.0-0 Qe8 8.Re1! Na6?! 9.e4! fxe4 10.Nxe4 NxN 11.RxN Bf5 12.Rh4! c6? 13.Qb3! Qd7 14.Bh6 BxB 15.RxB Rf7 16.Ng5+- Rg7 17.c5+ 1-0 (28). I know the main move is 8... Qf7 but was not at all prepared against 9.e4 or 9.Ng5. My silicon friend gives 8.Re1 a5? wich is incompréhensible ...

I almost forgot one thing, in Swedish Superettan in 2008 I played Leningrad with c6 and my opponnent played Re1 anyway and I replied Na6 and got the better position but the game ended up in a draw. In a other team match some year later in divsision 1 I won a funny game in c6 Leningrad in the d5 e5 line against a well know chess teacher.

Thanks to both - quite interesting.

I have also read the comments on Carlsen's game on Chessbomb and thought them a bit superfluous (e.g. comment on Qe7 coming as a surprise - I thought this is the standard set-up to avoid the exchange of the DS Bishops).

Yesterday, I played a crazy Stonewall myself, starting with: 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 Bd6 4. BxBd6 cxBd6 5. e3 f5, but wasn't particularly happy with the outcome of the opening..

chk wrote on 01/30/12 at 09:20:42:

I've seen some very superficial analysis on chessdom of Van Wely - Carlsen. I didn't understand Carlsens setup with the early b6 and cxd5. The book 'Win with the stonewall Dutch' is very critical about that idea.

I also didn't like the concept of black in the game Radjabov - Van Wely although I once won a fascinating correspondence game with that concept. I think in both cases black took up the stonewall just to surprise the opponent and to have little or no preparation so a relaxing evening.

By coincidence yesterday my opponent in the interclub was inspired by the white setup of the game Radjabov - Van Wely. However I had studied the position 2 weeks ago and had little problems to comfortably equalize see: 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 4.Nbd2 Be7 (I prefer this move today although the book 'Win with the stonewall Dutch' isn't very optimistic about it) 5.Bxf6 Bxf6 6.e4 0-0 7.Bd3 d5 8.exf5 exf5 9.0-0 Nc6 10.c3 Qd6 (Probably the most comfortable setup. Only slight disadvantage is that blacks winning chances are very slim) 11.Re1 Bd7 12.b4 Rae8 13.Qc2 g6 14.b5 Na5 (Very interesting is also Nd8) 15.Qa4 b6 16.Nb3 Nxb3 17.Qxb3 and draw proposed which I took after a 20 minutes of reflection. The trick after axb3 is of course a5 with no problems at all for black. In the final position black can exchange both pair of rooks but the weak d-pawn makes it very difficult to make real progression.

And today Carlsen played Stonewall Dutch! He played e6 first, perhaps to avoid some of the many anti dutch systems.

tp2205 wrote on 01/28/12 at 11:51:10:

It's a bit weird. In thís respect the Leningrad seems to be inferior to the Iljin-Zjenevsky: 7...Qe8 8.Qe1 Qg6 9.e4 Nxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Rxe4 Nc6 is hardly a problem for Black.
In the Bird/Polar Bear White apparently has to play a timely h2-h3.

The problem is Te1 followed by e4. A very annoying gambit described in NIC YB 100 and in an old CBM. Black can hold but all the fun is for white and playing for a win is really a problem for black. I stopped playing Qe8 for that reason and concentrated on c6 I still find in a very good shape and It's possible to transpose into some Qe8 lines (without a5). Nakamura prefers to go for an immediate e5 instead. It's simpler and he says it's not as drawish as it looks.

As for the Leningrad being risky, yes of course. But so is the KID. When I considered switching back to the KID after several years of Leningrad practice, I feld unconfortable with all the centre occupied by white pawns. And White as so many systemsranging from the 4P to the Bg2 systems. At least in the dutch, all the critical stuff is in the Bg2 systems (and some anti dutch, imo).
The same with the e6 sicilians I play against e4. I feel violating chess principles at every move. So many pawn moves, developping the queen first at c7, a lot of space conceded to white...But at the moment it's considered good despite all you could argue against. May be the Dutch will one day jump in the same wagon of openings respectable despite some suspicious initial moves.

Looking at chessdom comentaries during a Naka game recently the commentator said that the Qe8 was not played that much any more due to the Re1 line. Must confess that i dont follow that much at the latest and greatest games and theory any more (I have realized that I am at a level where the games are not decided in this phase alone). What is the problem with the Re1 line? 

Kindermann recommended this line but also provided a solution for black... 

Is it a real problem?

bragesjo wrote on 01/25/12 at 14:49:35:

For me the total opposite happened. I've also played the Leningrad for a decade now and my results with black have improved dramatically. You are correct it's not easy to handle but if you follow Kindermann's book (probably the best repertoire book ever written) and study it carefully you should be fine. 
Kindermann (rightly, I think) recommends 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 d6 6.Nc3 Qe8 7.d5 a5 as main line. The official main line 7. ... Na6 allows white to expand on the Queen's side. I've tried other lines as well like 6. ... Nc6 but I think they are less good and I suffered some defeats here after a bad opening. Not so when following Kindermann. Of course I've lost following Kindermann as well, but this was not due to the opening. I think black position is good and solid here so not risky from a positional point of view. More often than not the backward pawn on e7 and the "hole" on e6 are non-issues.

I think it was Damljanovic, but I am not sure. I saw the game and Black won.

I can also add that if black realy wants to archive the e5 break in the Leningrad mainline 8 .. c6 is the move. After the best move 9 d5 black can play e5. However it leeds to a dull positon where black is potenially slightly worse (weak pawn at d6).

I think the problem between Dutch and King's Indian is that with ...f5 in the Dutch before ...e5, any ...e5 is difficult to achieve and to form the pawn structure in the King's Indian with d6/e5/f4/g5 that is conducive to a starting kingside attack, in part due to the en-passant dxe6 since White usually advances d5, and/or the Black d-pawn would be en prise. Additionally the backward e-pawn might be under pressure already by the White rooks. 

In the King's Indian, ...e5 is already present, and ...f5 is much easier to achieve. White cannot liquidate the centre and prevent the kingside play as easily as against the Dutch. The d- and e-files are usually blocked, so there is no backward d-pawn, and exchanging pawns on f5 would not accomplish as much as against the Dutch. And then of course in the King's Indian if Black's position indicates that a kingside attack is not necessary or according to the particular position, then Black can simply forgo ...f5 and play with another plan, unlike the Dutch.

Just a guess from playing the King's Indian for about 7 years, not sure if the reasons are correct or not, but just what I have experienced.

I used to play (Leningrad) Dutch defence for a over a decade and my conclusions is that blacks position is not that easy to handle. The opening is risky from a positionall point of view but if white makes a single suboptimal move black can get good attacking chanses, sometimes against whites kingside and sometimes even strong queenside play. The funny thing is that my chess started to improve when I swithed opening to Nimzo Indian.

saubhikr wrote on 01/25/12 at 02:41:32:


Attributed to Yusupov by Kindermann in his book on the Leningrad Dutch.

I still find the Dutch quite risky, and am not so sure that playing it at a high level helps in long term. Morozevich played the Chigorin and Albin a lot a few years ago, but they are still considered risky.