fjd wrote on 02/21/18 at 10:51:20:


Most of the other stuff is quite decent, so players not liking main line positions in the Dutch will give them a try. 

If your opponent plays the London, Torre or Tromp, a main line Dutch with c4 and g3 is perhaps unlikely. 

In my experience when I played Leningrad Dutch several years ago most games where none g3 lines regardless of rating. If they knew theory well then they played g3 systems. If they started with 1 c4 move order they usually played a Bg2 and d3 based setup with a later e4. 

About 1 d4 e6 I have met 2 e4 more often than I expected. I have even met it in correspondence chess. The reason is  probebly that white 1 d4 players fears Dutch more than French or that the play some anti Dutch system that are ruled out in this move order.

There was some book that joked "When I prepare for tournament I play Leningrad. When playing the games I play vs anti Dutch".

I use the Dutch only against 1.c4, 1.Nf3 etc., so I don't have to worry about these sidelines.

Of course, then you might face systems with d3 looking for an early e4. But I don't worry too much about this stuff. By delaying ...e6, I have the opportunity to play ...e5 in one move.  

ErictheRed wrote on 02/21/18 at 19:41:42:

Against players in that range (and below), starting with 1...d6 gives me all the psychological edge I need. I know many of them were itching to throw the Staunton, 2.Nc3, etc. at the Dutch.

From an objective, theoretical perspective, however, allowing all the Anti-Dutch lines is likely a better choice than being forced into the Pirc/Modern complex. But in practice I've had some problems against 2.e4 and 2.Nc3. I especially remember a thematic blitz tournament where 1.d4 f5 was mandatory: As I recall it I won all my White games, where I played into main lines, but lost all my Black games to the Staunton!

I like Williams' and McDonald's choices against the Anti-Dutch lines in their respective Dutch repertoire books. But with one exception: They both recommend 2.Bg5 h6?!? which is hard to trust, and anyway I've long been partial to 2.Bg5 g6 as given by Kindermann (and later by Malaniuk). To be honest, when I play 1.d4 f5 it's often because I'm expecting and hoping for 2.Bg5 (but don't tell my opponents that!).

I play 1.d4 f5 occasionally, but I mostly reach the Dutch from 1.d4 d6 or 1.Nf3 d6. I'm happy to report that's very likely to lead to a "real" Leningrad Dutch, and especially to the main lines. That many of my opponents are likely out of book soon and annoyed that they didn't get the chance to play an Anti-Dutch is just an added bonus!

Of course 1.d4 d6 requires being willing to play the Pirc, Modern, Philidor or Czech Pirc. There's no such thing as a free lunch...

I've dabbled in 1.d4 e6 as well, and White players seem less likely to go 2.e4 there than against 1.d4 d6. You still want to prepare the French instead of bluffing, of course.

I got 8x Bg5, 6x Nc3 and 5x e4 in the 76 games. 
If you wonder what about the rest then a lot of c4,Nf3 games take independent tracks with Bf4, Bg5,...

I checked my Dutch standard games against opponents in that range. In only 28 out of 76 my opponent chose for 2.g3 so expect very often other stuff. In some cases however later we still transposed to g3 lines.