Article: 3844 of rec.games.chess.analysis Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.analysis Path: info!dregis From: dregis@exeter.ac.uk (D.Regis) Subject: Re: The Dutch and the Leningrad Dutch Message-ID: Organization: University of Exeter, UK. References: <325B1154.29EB@netnitco.net> <325DA1C2.71D8@netnitco.net> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 10:57:30 GMT In article <325DA1C2.71D8@netnitco.net> Randy Pals writes: >> >My advice would be - don't. The Dutch is playable, but it is difficult >> >to play correctly and way too complex (IMHO) for a beginner. >D.Regis wrote: >> >> How do you feel about the Stonewall set-up? I've been wading my way >> through a collection of games from minor/intermediate tournaments (ELO >> 1000-1400, 1400-1600 - class "D"/"C"?) and I was struck by the number >> of Stonewalls played as Black and White. The rigid centre seems to >> simplify things enough for players at that level. > In article <325DA1C2.71D8@netnitco.net> Randy Pals writes: >The operative clause in the last sentence is "seems to", but my experience >has convinced me that it isn't really so. Don't get me wrong - I think >the Stonewall Dutch is completely playable, but there is frequently a lot >more going on that opening than many people think. Move order makes a >great deal of difference. Thank you for your interesting comments, which I'm sure are absolutely right, but did you wonder why these folk persist with the system? In practice, the Stonewall Dutch seems to do all right, although at this level games are usually decided for reasons that have nothing to do with the opening. In these examples of the Stonewall Dutch most White players either adopted a stereotyped set-up, e.g.: d4 c4 Nc3 Nf3 Bg5 e3 Bd3 O-O d4 c4 Nc3 Nf3 g3 Bg2 O-O d4 c4 Nc3 Nf3 e3 Be2 O-O b3 Bb2 or played one of the "anti-Dutch" lines without c4 and with an early e4. I might suggest that your comments on move order, although they may not be beyond a C-class player, are in practice unknown to them. Similarly, as Black against the Stonewall with 1.d4, most folk just trot out a standard move-order (e.g. ...Nf6 ...d5 ...c5 ...Nc6), instead of adopting a system specifically designed to combat it (with ...d6 or ...Bf5). The advantages of the Stonewall for players of White or Black in these classes are that it gives a familiar set-up with chances of a King's-side attack. I have seen the Stonewall succumb to White's recommended Queen's-side attack, but only in A/B classes (Major tournaments). The QGD may be a better opening, but is more passive. C/D players of Black are inclined to think it no fun, and may drift when they play it. With the Stonewall, I guess they think they know what they are supposed to be doing, and can easily take over the initiative. We have had a thread "what is the best opening for a beginner?", without it being clear how much of a beginner we were talking about. I think re. the Stonewall: - I wouldn't talk about to a player below class D, - I would suggest it to C/D players who were meeting 1.d4 in practice, and - thanks to Randy, I would be able to demonstrate some problems of move order to players of A/B level. -- May your pieces harmonise with your Pawn structure and your sacrifices be sound in all variations D _ / "()/~ Dave Regis &8^D* WWW: http://www.ex.ac.uk/~dregis/DR/chess.html || \_/| = DrDave on BICS ~\ / "...what else exists in the world but chess?" _|||__SHEU: ~/sheu.html -- NABOKOV From info!dregis Mon Oct 14 14:05:55 BST 1996