At a recent tournament, a frequent opponent of mine played (as black) 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 f5
- 8
- a
- 7
- b
- 6
- c
- 5
- d
- 4
- e
- 3
- f
- 2
- g
- 1
- h
| 1. | d4 | d5 |
|---|---|---|
| 2. | c4 | c6 |
| 3. | Nf3 | e6 |
| 4. | Nc3 | f5 |
This early f5 seems a bit dubious to me, but it does have some merits--clamping down on e4, preparing an eventual f5-f4xe3 if appropriate, allowing a possible rook lift. The disadvantages I can see are giving up the usual idea of ...e5 in the slav, though this is often in response to white's e4, which seems difficult in this position, as well as weakening e5 and perhaps e6.
I've beginning to research how to play against it, because I will most likely encounter it soon and it is pretty annoying. Does anyone have any experience/games with this or a similar opening?
Originally posted by chesskid001The pawn formation is called the stonewall I believe. Euwe covers it in his middle game volume on the static features. The only advice I can really give is to keep an eye out for any tactics or manuevers that allow you to snap off blacks dark square bishop and try to keep your knights.
At a recent tournament, a frequent opponent of mine played (as black) 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 f5
[pgn] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 f5 [/pgn]
This early f5 seems a bit dubious to me, but it does have some merits--clamping down on e4, preparing an eventual f5-f4xe3 if appropriate, allowing a possible rook lift. The disadvantages I can see are d it is pretty annoying. Does anyone have any experience/games with this or a similar opening?
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 87628
Originally posted by chesskid001A couple of games on the site that reached that position, might give you an idea or two:
I've beginning to research how to play against it, because I will most likely encounter it soon and it is pretty annoying. Does anyone have any experience/games with this or a similar opening?
Game 376739
Game 451195
Game 751091
Game 3048007
Game 3452320
Game 5251524
http://www.timeforchess.com/gamesexplorer/
There are 42 examples in 1400 DB for you get ideas from.
In the 1900+ DB there are two examples.
In both games White went a piece down and won.
Game 5460758
White sac/losses(?) a piece for three pawns. Black underestimates them
and White crashes in. At the end (38 moves) White still has all 8 pawns.
Not 100% sure without a double take but unclear if it's lost if Black
decides to hold the position with Rd8 instead of a5 which looks like
a winning attempt.
On more familiar ground with Game 3048007
An exciting tussle with a sac attack that was not quite on, always
get the feeling it needed a Black mistake to let White in.
Here Black to play.
27...Rh8 just screams at you. White needs a mate, all I see are a few
checks then Black attacks and it's all over. Black missed it, then a few moves
missed a Queen fork.
There is your plan, sac a minor piece for a few pawns and win.
Originally posted by chesskid001This is a Dutch Defense, Stonewall variation via a Slav move order. This particular position after four moves is more often encountered in the "Anglo-Dutch" with the 1. c4 f5 move order.
At a recent tournament, a frequent opponent of mine played (as black) 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 f5
[pgn] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 f5 [/pgn]
This early f5 seems a bit dubious to me, but it does have some merits--clamping down on e4, preparing an eventual f5-f4xe3 if appropriate, allowing a possible rook lift. The disadvantages I can see are ...[text shortened]... d it is pretty annoying. Does anyone have any experience/games with this or a similar opening?
I'm thinking that the Slav move order doesn't make any difference unless
1) You play a different system against the Dutch, such as 1. d4 and 2. Bg5, or anything where you would not normally play Nc3; or
2) There is some trick embedded in the move order here-but I don't see one.
I have played the Classical Dutch and the Leningrad Dutch but not the Stonewall, and have only rarely played d4 and c4 together, but I have some small tidbits that may help.
1) From the position after 4 moves, white has not committed either bishop or played e3, so he still has a lot of flexibility. I think Bf4 and Bg5 can be very effective systems in non-Leningrad forms of the Dutch, and I suspect they will be very good here.
2) The Stonewall Dutch is often played because Black dreams of a kingside attack, so systems with g3 and a fianchettoed bishop often work well, both as a defensive fortress and as a deployment of the light squared bishop on the exposed long diagonal; and
3) Look beyond the Slav books and see what the Stonewall Dutch books and Anti-Dutch books have to offer.
I don't think I gave enough here to call it advice, but I hope it's at least a little food for thought or a different perspective. Good luck!
Paul
This is a cunning move order into the Stonewall. Against the (Semi-)Slav, I like to play e3, Qc2 and fianchetto on the Queenside, so I usually play an early e3 to avoid 4 ... dc4 5 a4 Bf5 lines. Throwing in a quick ... f5 after e3 gets a good Stonewall position, because a Kingside fianchetto is much more effective; even after Nf3, it makes some sense - the King's Knight is often better coming out to f4 or even d3, from h3 (or at least it's nice to have the choice).
This is my best game in the Stonewall - lots of pseudosacs and counterpseudosacs! But White's pawns over-run Black in the centre in the end.
- 8
- a
- 7
- b
- 6
- c
- 5
- d
- 4
- e
- 3
- f
- 2
- g
- 1
- h
| 1. | Ng1f3 | f5 |
|---|---|---|
| 2. | d4 | Ng8f6 |
| 3. | b3 | e6 |
| 4. | Bc1b2 | d5 |
| 5. | Nb1d2 | Bf8d6 |
| 6. | g3 | O-O |
| 7. | Bf1g2 | Nb8d7 |
| 8. | O-O | Nf6e4 |
| 9. | c4 | c6 |
| 10. | Ra1c1 | g5 |
| 11. | Nf3e5 | Qd8f6 |
| 12. | Nd2f3 | h5 |
| 13. | Ne5xd7 | Bc8xd7 |
| 14. | Nf3e5 | Bd6xe5 |
| 15. | dxe5 | Qf6e7 |
| 16. | f3 | Ne4c5 |
| 17. | cxd5 | cxd5 |
| 18. | Bb2a3 | b6 |
| 19. | Qd1d4 | Rf8c8 |
| 20. | e4 | Nc5xb3 |
| 21. | axb3 | Qe7xa3 |
| 22. | Rc1xc8 | Ra8xc8 |
| 23. | exf5 | Qa3xb3 |
| 24. | f4 | Rc8c4 |
| 25. | Bg2xd5 | Qb3xg3 |
| 26. | hxg3 | Rc4xd4 |
| 27. | Bd5xe6 | Bd7xe6 |
| 28. | fxe6 | gxf4 |
| 29. | gxf4 | Rd4d5 |
| 30. | Rf1e1 | a5 |
| 31. | f5 | a4 |
| 32. | f6 | a3 |
| 33. | e7 | Kg8f7 |
| 34. | e6 | Kf7e8 |
| 35. | Re1f1 |
I came across an interesting game by Reuben Fine that was analyzed in Larry Christiansen's "Attacking Chess" series on ICC:
- 8
- a
- 7
- b
- 6
- c
- 5
- d
- 4
- e
- 3
- f
- 2
- g
- 1
- h
| 1. | d4 | d5 |
|---|---|---|
| 2. | c4 | e6 |
| 3. | Nc3 | c6 |
| 4. | e3 | Nd7 |
| 5. | Nf3 | Bd6 |
| 6. | Bd3 | f5 |
| 7. | cxd5 | cxd5 |
| 8. | Bd2 | a6 |
| 9. | O-O | Qf6 |
| 10. | Re1 | Bb8 |
| 11. | Rc1 | Ne7 |
| 12. | e4 | fxe4 |
| 13. | Bxe4 | dxe4 |
| 14. | Nxe4 | Qf8 |
| 15. | Qb3 | h6 |
| 16. | Qxe6 | Nc5 |
| 17. | Nf6 | Qxf6 |
| 18. | Qxc8 | Kf7 |
| 19. | Qxc5 | Rd8 |
| 20. | Qb4 | Bd6 |
| 21. | Qb3 | Kf8 |
| 22. | Re6 | Qf5 |
| 23. | Rce1 | Nd5 |
| 24. | Qxb7 | Rab8 |
| 25. | Rxd6 | Rxb7 |
| 26. | Rxd8 | Kf7 |
| 27. | Ne5 | Ke7 |
| 28. | Rxd5 | Qc2 |
| 29. | Bc3 | Rc7 |
| 30. | Nf3 | Kf7 |
| 31. | Rde5 | Qa4 |
| 32. | h3 |
Originally posted by chessicleThat's a great game, thanks for posting. I've started playing the stonewall as black because i like openings where the strategy is really straightforward - with this opening i just trade any pieces that jump on to e5 and move everything else over to the kingside. It's good to see a thread about the other nuances behind it.
This is a cunning move order into the Stonewall. Against the (Semi-)Slav, I like to play e3, Qc2 and fianchetto on the Queenside, so I usually play an early e3 to avoid 4 ... dc4 5 a4 Bf5 lines. Throwing in a quick ... f5 after e3 gets a good Stonewall position, because a Kingside fianchetto is much more effective; even after Nf3, it makes some sense - t ...[text shortened]... 31. f5 a4 32. f6 a3 33. e7 Kg8f7 34. e6 Kf7e8 35. Re1f1 1-0
[/pgn]