Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Playing the Stonewall Dutch (Read 18680 times)
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #57 - 01/20/21 at 23:29:27
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/19/21 at 20:59:50:
Paul Cumbers wrote on 01/19/21 at 20:01:37:
.....transposes to the game Peralta-Alonso Rosell, analysed by Glenn Flear in the Jan 2018 update .....

As GM Taimanov already pointed out 40 years ago in the Classical Dutch with a pawn on d6 the eternal question is: after x...Nc6, what will be the answer to y.d5 ?
The same after 8.O-O (iso 8.Nc3) Nc6.

d4-d5 is answered by ...Ne5, threatening ...Nxc4 with a hit on White's queen, e.g.
[1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 Bxd2+ 6.Qxd2 O–O 7.Bg2 d6]

(a) 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.d5 Ne5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 11.Rc1 e4 12.O–O exd5 13.cxd5 a6 14.Rfd1 (14.f3) 14...Qd6 15.e3 with only a slight edge for White;

(b) 8.O–O Nc6 9.d5 Ne5 10.Nd4 Nxc4 11.Qc2 Ne5!? (a possible improvement on the 11...exd5 of Postny-Kuljasevic, Plovdiv 2012) 12.Nxe6 Bxe6 13.dxe6 c6 and now 14.Qxf5 invites a juicy piece sacrifice: 14...Nfg4 15.Qc2 Rxf2! 16.Rxf2 Nxf2 unclear.

Quote:
Also 8.O-O Nc6 9.Nc3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 followed by exchange of queens looks rather dull.

You may well be right. I am struggling to find a good response to 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 that fits in with a Stonewall repertoire (i.e. without reverting to 4...d6).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10715
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #56 - 01/19/21 at 20:59:50
Post Tools
1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 Bxd2+
is from a positional point of view desirable, beceause in the Iljin-Zjenevsky White's queen's bishop is the most dangerous piece. However White tends to get a substantial lead in development.

6.Qxd2 O-O 7.Nf3 d6 8.Nc3

Paul Cumbers wrote on 01/19/21 at 20:01:37:
.....transposes to the game Peralta-Alonso Rosell, analysed by Glenn Flear in the Jan 2018 update .....

As GM Taimanov already pointed out 40 years ago in the Classical Dutch with a pawn on d6 the eternal question is: after x...Nc6, what will be the answer to y.d5 ?
The same after 8.O-O (iso 8.Nc3) Nc6.

Also 8.O-O Nc6 9.Nc3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 followed by exchange of queens looks rather dull.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #55 - 01/19/21 at 20:48:28
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/19/21 at 18:23:22:
GM Moskalenko in The Diamond Dutch gives a few examples with 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.O-O O-O 6.b4, recommending Nc6. Are there transpo issues? If White plays (from your move order) 4.b4 Bg7 5.Bb2 O-O ?

In the book of Adrien Demuth https://thinkerspublishing.com/product/adrien-demuth-the-modernized-dutch-defens...we can see several setups are discussed with b4:
1. d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6
a)4.b4
b)4.c4 Bg7 5.b4
c)4.Bg2 Bg7 5.b4
d)4.Bg2 Bg7 5.c4 0-0 6.b4
e)4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 7.b4
f)4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.b4

Each of them has its own characteristics.
So Adrien did a really nice job by covering so many of them.
It also shows how terribly complicated these move-orders are.
Still it doesn't give an answer to my move-order as e.g. after 1.c4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.b4 Bg7 5.Bb2 0-0 6.Bg2 white keeps waiting with d4 till black has played d6. We can see the benefits of this e.g. after 6...Nc6 7.b5 Na5 8.d3. So transpositions aren't so easy to obtain and the resulting positions look promising for white. I also couldn't find any games in the chesspub-archives with it.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #54 - 01/19/21 at 20:01:37
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 01/18/21 at 13:27:10:
Back when I played the Dutch, something like 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 is just what I was hoping for. 4...Bb4+ is much closer to equality than black gets in the Stonewall or Iljin-Zhenevsky.

4...Bb4+ is interesting (cf. the Keres Defence and the Bogo-Indian). I notice Vallejo Pons switched to this move in a 2019 game after two outings with 4...d5 in 2016. Now 5.Bd2 Bxd2+ 6.Qxd2 O-O 7.Bg2 d6 8.Nc3 transposes to the game Peralta-Alonso Rosell, analysed by Glenn Flear in the Jan 2018 update (https://www.chesspublishing.com/content/11/jan18.htm). Best might be 8...Nc6 9.Rd1 (more challenging than 9.O-O e5!) 9...Ne4 10.Nxe4 fxe4 11.Ng5 d5 which Glenn gives as "probably OK" for Black.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10715
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #53 - 01/19/21 at 18:24:24
Post Tools
GM Moskalenko in The Diamond Dutch gives a few examples with 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.O-O O-O 6.b4, recommending Nc6. Are there transpo issues? If White plays (from your move order) 4.b4 Bg7 5.Bb2 O-O ?

brabo wrote on 01/19/21 at 12:19:49:
I am thinking to play g6 before Nf6 to avoid that concept but then I still need to check if this doesn't open any other box of problems. Ah those move-orders are never ending stories.

Make sure you're ready for early h2-h4-h5 lines.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10715
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #52 - 01/19/21 at 18:23:22
Post Tools
GM Moskalenko in The Diamond Dutch gives a few examples with 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.O-O O-O 6.b4, recommending Nc6. Are there transpo issues? If White plays (from your move order) 4.b4 Bg7 5.Bb2 O-O ?
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #51 - 01/19/21 at 12:19:49
Post Tools
While we are now discussing this g3 stuff without Bg2, I just remember that last year I bumped against something similar in the Leningrad which annoyed me enormously.
1.c4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.b4. However here I do notice a number of very strong players regularly choosing for this setup. Unfortunately I don't find any coverage of this line in my books about the Leningrad so I hope the Romanian grandmaster Mihail Marin in his forecasted book https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/1/363/leningrad_dutch_by_mihail_marin/ will do.

I am thinking to play g6 before Nf6 to avoid that concept but then I still need to check if this doesn't open any other box of problems. Ah those move-orders are never ending stories.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10715
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #50 - 01/18/21 at 16:25:26
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 15:16:47:
1) The little move e3 makes the difference here. Once that is played Bf4/Bg5 is out and we have a completely different game.

Yep. previously I thought White could demonstrate an edge after 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e3 d5 5.f3 because White controls square e4. I should have added that as far as I know GM Moskalenko's improvement hasn't been tried yet in practice on any level, despite Black's abysmal results in 43 games after 2014 with this structure.
I completely subscribe what you write regarding move orders. AfaIc move order issues begin at move 1; I have quit the idea that the Classical Dutch can be played as a one cure for all (note to myself: don't forget to take a look at 1.g3).
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #49 - 01/18/21 at 15:16:47
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/18/21 at 15:03:56:
Back to topic: according to GM Moskalenko in The Diamond Dutch the Stonewall may equalize after 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e3 d5. If possible compare his notes (starting with "The Dutch Queens'Gambit: 4...d5 - a classification that made me chuckle)) to game 44 in his book to IM Bronznik's notes to game 40 in Beating the Guerrilla's, starting with 8...Nbd7.

1) The little move e3 makes the difference here. Once that is played Bf4/Bg5 is out and we have a completely different game.
2) I also notice that many openingbooks are ignoring largely move-orders. They just pick interesting looking games to reach a certain critical position but don't care much how the critical position is reached or at least don't delve into the details about it.
3)Last as Paul mentioned it is a computer-sequence which made him worry about the quality of the content given in Sedlak's book. Well unfortunately this is a pattern which I notice in many books or even published analysis. I guess it is partly linked to the engines becoming stronger very rapidly but also many strong players (even grandmasters) and no computergeeks.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #48 - 01/18/21 at 15:04:07
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 01/18/21 at 13:27:10:
Back when I played the Dutch, something like 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 is just what I was hoping for. 4...Bb4+ is much closer to equality than black gets in the Stonewall or Iljin-Zhenevsky.

I never studied this so I am not going to make any statements about the evaluation. I do play Bb4 against some Dutch setups but then white has normally played already the knight at c3. Anyway I think we do have to agree that the move-order plays a big role here in this discussion. Therefore it could even make sense to investigate a move-order with Bf4 before c4.

an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 01/18/21 at 13:27:10:
When filtering a database by Elo then older games can be missed because the Elo is not filled in. ChessBase sometimes fills in an "historical" Elo, but not always.

I am fully aware of it. On the other hand how often is a game of 100 years ago still relevant for the current state of the theory? Sure it happens sometimes but my experience tells me that I have a much bigger probability of getting interesting games to study by looking at recent games for the theory of an opening. In the end you want to work as efficient as possible. Time is limited and there are so many openings I want/ need to study.

an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 01/18/21 at 13:27:10:
Sometimes beginners do have a clue and still nobody takes notice of it. Tal used to look at everything, he said you could learn even from beginner games. Of course he could "look" at a game blindfold and at great speed. I don't look at everything, but my working database does have games by amateurs in it. Lev Alburt's Chess Life column had true beginner games, even some of those games made it into my database.

I have a few comments here.
1) Yes I do meet sometimes amateurs which have a brilliant idea and they do know it is brilliant. On the other hand I also know that 99 out of their 100 ideas are garbage. So it is a similar story as the games of the old masters. I better spend my study at games played by strong players and I am sure this is also how professionals work today.
2) The number of games available to the public in the time of Tal are an infinite fraction of what is available today. We are flooded by games today, have a look to my latest article on lichess: http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2020/12/lichess.html in which I wrote that in one month only more than 78 million standard games were played on the lichess-server. Looking at all played games today is simply impossible unless you are some kind of cyborg.

brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
... but his game never influenced the theory of the stonewall.


I guess that I should've added that I am talking about the Dutch stonewall which has its own move-order and should therefore also be treated very differently that a semi-slav. I am no semi-slav player at all.

brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
Brabo, I'm not sure if it's just rhetorical style or if you actually think this way, but you tend to write in absolutist always/never terms. In chess there are many exceptions. Basically you are correct on this one, Larsen is agreeing with you, but he also gave a caveat, which you almost Smiley never Smiley do.

People tell me that I am replying with too long answers. So I try to simplify things but then it doesn't cover of course the exceptions. Anyway we are digressing as the essence about our little quarrel is about how well-known is this concept of playing g3 without fianchetting the bishop later against the Dutch stonewall. For me it is not something I had studied ever before and I am playing religiously the opening for more than 20 years against masters. The claim that it is common knowledge for 100 years simply doesn't map with what I see in my practice of probably thousand games with this opening.

brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
As the saying goes, everything's new that is well forgotten.

I wrote several articles about this on my blog see
http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2014/02/old-wine-in-new-skins.html
http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2016/07/old-wine-in-new-skins-part-2.html
http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2020/06/old-wine-in-new-skins-part-3.html

With more than 25 years of competitive chess and study, I definitely have an edge in that domain compared to my often much younger opponents. Especially at online chess old lines are extremely efficient.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10715
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #47 - 01/18/21 at 15:03:56
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 14:16:24:
why we shouldn't expect such lines to be covered in opening-books even if they are really strong.

Another reason is directly connected to what I wrote to Paul Cumbers. - as long as White plays sound moves everything is good against the Classical Dutch. For instance only after more than 15 years I found out how nasty 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 (my favoured move order) 3.Bf4 can be. Hence any book trying to be complete would become way too big.
Back to topic: according to GM Moskalenko in The Diamond Dutch the Stonewall may equalize after 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e3 d5. If possible compare his notes (starting with "The Dutch Queens'Gambit: 4...d5" - a classification that made me chuckle)) to game 34 in his book to IM Bronznik's notes to game 40 in Beating the Guerrilla's, starting with 8...Nbd7.

Later addition: last fews weeks I rechecked my repertoire after 1.d4 e6 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3/3.Nf3 Bb4+ once again and sure enough I found some new problem lines (problems for Black, that is). 4.Nbd2 remains difficult to meet, 4.Nc3 is better than I previously thought if White aims at a quick c4-c5 and after 4.Bd2 Be7 only Alekhine's manoeuvre ...Ne4 and ...Bf6 might prevent White from making good use of the extra tempo as pawn d4 is unprotected in critical Nc3xe4 lines.
Really, sometimes I wonder why I don't play something normal like the Von Hennig-Schara Gambit.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #46 - 01/18/21 at 14:16:24
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/18/21 at 12:53:49:
brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
Anyway I don't think you can blame Sedlak

Then it's a good thing I never did so and overall that you're needlessly defensive, even if one of those games was Gamundio Antonio (2440) vs. Roa Alonso (2320). White didn't play Rc1 as in the sample line of Paul Cumbers.

Oh I was replying to Paul as he was asking us if it was covered in the book of Sedlak. I could've just said no but I thought that it is also useful to indicate why we shouldn't expect such lines to be covered in opening-books even if they are really strong.

It took me some time to find your game until I discovered that the name in my megadatabase is Gamundi instead of Gamundio.
He played only once this setup and then again from the wrong move-order as the stonewall was played before g3. So again I am not surprised that this game has never been covered in any openingbooks about the stonewall. At least I am not aware of it and I do possess/ know quite some material about the opening.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #45 - 01/18/21 at 14:05:46
Post Tools
Paul Cumbers wrote on 01/18/21 at 12:53:32:
Admittedly I showed a computer line, but I think White's idea makes a lot of sense.

2 comments here.
1) It is a computer line as I expected so it is once more a confirmation of what I have been preaching so often last couple of years. Computers are rewriting big parts of the theory. Also my latest blog-article discuss this topic in detail (translation follows one of the next days).
2) From hindsight everything makes sense but then why hasn't this become a mainline already for decades? Well no human will play g3 to not play Bg2. We realize now that it can be stronger than the known schemes thanks to the arrival of the neural networks. E=mc2 also looks so obvious today but we needed an Einstein to tell us.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1493
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #44 - 01/18/21 at 13:27:10
Post Tools
Back when I played the Dutch, something like 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 is just what I was hoping for. 4...Bb4+ is much closer to equality than black gets in the Stonewall or Iljin-Zhenevsky.


brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
When I state almost no games in the database then I only consider games played by masters (+2300).

When filtering a database by Elo then older games can be missed because the Elo is not filled in. ChessBase sometimes fills in an "historical" Elo, but not always.


brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
Even beginners sometimes play strong novelties or ideas but they have no clue how strong it is themselves and nobody takes notice of it.

Sometimes beginners do have a clue and still nobody takes notice of it. Tal used to look at everything, he said you could learn even from beginner games. Of course he could "look" at a game blindfold and at great speed. I don't look at everything, but my working database does have games by amateurs in it. Lev Alburt's Chess Life column had true beginner games, even some of those games made it into my database.


brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
I do consider Pillsbury a master ...

Showalter and Pillsbury were both masters. But Showalter is less known, I'm not sure if he would typically be assigned an historical Elo.


brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
... but his game never influenced the theory of the stonewall.

I disagree on this one. Pachman used to quote Pillsbury's games in the stonewall and anti-stonewall setups that arise from the Semi-Slav move order, which is how black usually did it back in his day. I'm pretty sure strong play from people like Pillsbury is what made black abandon this approach. Soltis gave a classic Pillsbury example where black was crushed by the queenside space advantage and an endgame sacrifice against the light-squared pawn chain. Rubinstein's Meran with ...d5xc4 was a revelation compared to the previous stonewall (whether the pawn was on f7 or f5).


brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
The very different move-order doesn't inspire to study this game as any Dutch specialist will tell you that you don't go for a stonewallsetup if white hasn't played g3 yet which happened in that game.

Do you mean almost any Dutch specialist?
Quote:
First of all, the Stonewall is not so good if White does not fianchetto his KB! It is very much against this Bishop that Black's strategy is directed. So if White is not a fianchetto man you are probably wise to have another system ready. (Not all Stonewall fans will agree.) emphasis added
.. Larsen (1974) How to Open a Chess Game page 186

Brabo, I'm not sure if it's just rhetorical style or if you actually think this way, but you tend to write in absolutist always/never terms. In chess there are many exceptions. Basically you are correct on this one, Larsen is agreeing with you, but he also gave a caveat, which you almost Smiley never Smiley do.


brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
Anyway I don't think you can blame Sedlak of not having covered setups which were never played by a grandmaster in on the board chess (at least I couldn't find any such game in my megadatabase).

Those of us who are willing to spend time looking at old games and old theory are able to pose many problems for those who prepare based on filtered 2500+ (or 2400+, or 2300+) database games. As the saying goes, everything's new that is well forgotten.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10715
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Playing the Stonewall Dutch
Reply #43 - 01/18/21 at 12:53:49
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 01/18/21 at 08:22:05:
Anyway I don't think you can blame Sedlak

Then it's a good thing I never did so and overall that you're needlessly defensive, even if one of those games was Gamundio Antonio (2440) vs. Roa Alonso (2320). White didn't play Rc1 as in the sample line of Paul Cumbers.


Paul Cumbers wrote on 01/18/21 at 12:53:32:
I think White's idea makes a lot of sense.

That's the problem with the Classical Dutch (perhaps the Leningrad too) - every combination of reasonable moves makes sense for White. Black never can comfotably lean back the first ten moves (approximately). It's only when Black manages to overcome problems in that first stage that the fun begins.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo