ErictheRed wrote on 07/28/13 at 17:49:43:


Yes of course, f7-f5 has some downsides. One that perhaps isn't obvious is lack of king safety in heavy-piece endgames. In addition, white may get the bishop pair. Black has an extra center pawn if white tries standard plan dxc5, and e4 control. Trading dark squared bishops results in dark square advantage for black. Development is about equal. This is basically what you have to balance.

ErictheRed wrote on 07/27/13 at 17:27:49:


Evaluation is partly subjective, but I disgree about this variation being +=, black has equality  after 5..c5! and it is not too much to learn. As comparison, the sister variation in the Nimzo-Indian with 4. Qc2 c5 5. dxc5 gives white more than the normal plus, mainly due to less control of e4. Computers agree with this.

Computer evaluations are sometimes wrong, but top players evaluation are more often wrong, especially in unusual variations. Top players are also "victims" of fashion etc.

In general after d4 and Nf3, black may play the Stonewall or the Dutch Indian with confidence and without any theoretical trouble more than in for example the Nimzo, due to the e4 control. It is other moves like Nh3 and f3 that challenge the setup.

ErictheRed wrote on 07/27/13 at 02:04:26:



The extra moves f5 and Nf3 should favor black I think. Control of e4 is crucial. And in the Nimzo with c5 and dxc5 white wants to play f3. After 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bb4 5.Qb3 c5 6. dxc5 black plays Na6-xc5 with control over e4 and an extra center pawn.

Recent top level games are encouraging for black Stonewallers:

1. As given by Flear in the latest update in this chess publishing section, the much lower rated Pelletier(black) outplayed Mamedyarov in the varation 1.d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 c6 6. b3 Bd6 7. O-O Qe7 8. Bb2 O-O 9. Qc1 b5!?


2. Shabalov equalized and held his own against 100 ELO stronger player:



3. 280 points lower rated player held comfortably and even pressed in the end:



4. Carlsen played badly in the opening (8... b6?, come on!) but still held his own rather easily against Van Wely:


5. Jakovenko beat Bareev in rapid, but the opening was equal for black 


 

I think that if 1...f5 is played, both 2.Bg5 and 2.Nc3 are just as troublesome for Black as 2.g3 etc, and I find the ideas there somewhat more accessible to me.  I am happy to play 2.e4 against 1...d6, so that leaves 1...e6 -- a bit of a problem from a repertoire standpoint.

Does 2.Nf3 f5 3.h3 have any real punch?

Markovich wrote on 07/24/13 at 22:55:48:

Funny that you ask this as 2 days ago I played exactly this against a slightly lower rated player. See http://home.scarlet.be/~ping6819/pgnweb/open2013/open2013.htm and look for my game against Groffen H. Not really the type of game that I want to play again so I will certainly search for something different next time (The crude Qh4-Rf6 plan looks more attractive).

brabo wrote on 07/24/13 at 20:41:13:


Have you tried the ancient plan of ...Kh8, ...Rg8 and ...g5 against these sorts of players? I used to know someone who made a lot of hay doing that.

Avrukh's repertoire is indeed not very impressive against the Dutch Stonewall for which you can't blame him as clearly the other openings are much more important in tournament play.
Some remarks on the 8...Bd7 line.
1) 9.b3 is a serious alternative which likely will transpose to one of the old mainlines of the dutch stonewall. White will normally reroute the knight of c3 to d3 via a4-b2 or d1-b2. I played this position years ago many times with black and I am sure that black is just playing for maximum a draw.
2) 9.Qb3 is also interesting, destabilizing a normal development for black.
3) 9.Rb1 Be8 10.Ng5 and black must be very careful not to be tied up.

I personally gave up 8... Bd7 as there are too many annoying variations.

I am no topplayer so can't tell you why topplayers don't play this. However based on more than 15 years experience with the stonewall as FM, the main issue that I see is that it is very tough to outplay a slightly weaker opponent, whom is not willing to take any serious risks to win. So I often have to concede draws where likely other openings would permit me to complicate and create winning chances. I can imagine that topplayers prefer to preserve more counterchances with different openings than the stonewall.