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
never
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.
Pages: [1] 
Playing the Stonewall Dutch (Read 26633 times)
